The line graph illustrates the percentage of four types of dissimilar materials which were recycled between the ages of 1982 and 2010 in one country.
Overall, both glass containers and paper and cardboard had some fluctuations. On the other hand, Aluminum cars experienced an upward trend and also plastics had a lowest rate among 4 types of materials account for low increase rising.
In 1982, about one third of paper and cash board trends were recycled. After that, it slightly increased and reached approximately 70%. Between 1986 and 1994, the trend faced with a fluctuation which decreased at 1990 by 66%. However, for the next 4 years, recycling materials had dramatically increased and reached about 80%. After that till 2010, the amount of recycled categories experienced a downward trend consistently.
Turning next to glass container, its category had just one variation in 1990 (40%). Before that, the trend had accounted for 50% in 1982 and experienced a drop in terms of recycling. After that, the trend had gradually risen and reached 60% in 2010. Moving onto aluminum cars in 1986, the trend had set up and increased steadily and faced 43% at last. Finally, plastics was not introduced until 1990 and the growth of this category was constant. Between 1990 and 2010, the trend raised just approximately 8% and reached 9% by the time given.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 162, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[1]
Message: Use 'the' with the superlative.
Suggestion: the
...d an upward trend and also plastics had a lowest rate among 4 types of materials ...
^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, however, so, third, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 7.0 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 15.0 6.8 221% => Less conjunction wanted
Relative clauses : 6.0 3.15609756098 190% => OK
Pronoun: 7.0 5.60731707317 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 37.0 33.7804878049 110% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 3.97073170732 50% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1142.0 965.302439024 118% => OK
No of words: 225.0 196.424390244 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.07555555556 4.92477711251 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.87298334621 3.73543355544 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70225877168 2.65546596893 102% => OK
Unique words: 128.0 106.607317073 120% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.568888888889 0.547539520022 104% => OK
syllable_count: 317.7 283.868780488 112% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.33902439024 161% => OK
Subordination: 4.0 1.07073170732 374% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 9.0 3.36585365854 267% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 14.0 8.94146341463 157% => OK
Sentence length: 16.0 22.4926829268 71% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 26.3215012598 43.030603864 61% => OK
Chars per sentence: 81.5714285714 112.824112599 72% => OK
Words per sentence: 16.0714285714 22.9334400587 70% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.71428571429 5.23603664747 71% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 3.70975609756 189% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.09268292683 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.147008112716 0.215688989381 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0562962677282 0.103423049105 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0894946904815 0.0843802449381 106% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.132811493599 0.15604864568 85% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.131750103012 0.0819641961636 161% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.5 13.2329268293 79% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 72.16 61.2550243902 118% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.2 10.3012195122 70% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.89 11.4140731707 104% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.01 8.06136585366 99% => OK
difficult_words: 51.0 40.7170731707 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.4329268293 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.4 10.9970731707 76% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.0658536585 72% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 73.0337078652 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.5 Out of 9
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.