Immigration's figure/ immigration figure

[mrmvp]

I have two questions

First question.

When describing a chart, should I say immigration's figure or immigration figure ?

1.Immigration's figure/ immigration figure was accounted for 40%

Second question.

Accompany/ join's figure and "no reason stated figure increased xxxx

Should I use quotation marks or parentheses to clarify that I am talking about figures in pie chart ?

2."Accompany/ join's" figure and "no reason stated" figure increased xxx


3. (Accompany/ join's figure) and (no reason stated's figure) increased xxxx


The chart is attached.

 

[jutfrank]

When describing a chart, should I say immigration's figure or immigration figure ?

1.Immigration's figure/ immigration figure was accounted for 40%

No, that's not right. Which part of the chart(s) are you looking at?

Second question.

Accompany/ join's figure and "no reason stated figure increased xxxx

Should I use quotation marks or parentheses to clarify that I am talking about figures in pie chart ?

2."Accompany/ join's" figure and "no reason stated" figure increased xxx

3. (Accompany/ join's figure) and (no reason stated's figure) increased xxxx

No, both are very poor choices.

 

[emsr2d2]

I have two questions about the chart below. First question.

1. When describing a chart, should I say "immigration's figure" or "immigration figure"?
1. Immigration's figure/immigration figure was accounted for 40%.

Second question.

2. Should I use quotation marks or parentheses to clarify that I am talking about figures in a pie chart?
a. The Accompany/join's figure and no reason stated figure increased [by] xxxx.
b. The "Accompany/join's" figure and "no reason stated" figure increased [by] xxxx.
c. The (Accompany/join's figure) and (no reason stated's figure) increased [by] xxxx.

The chart is attached.

@mrmvp Your layout makes your whole post quite difficult to deal with. I'm not sure why your images keep showing just as attachments, rather than being part of the post. I've edited post #1 so that we can all see the chart as part of the post.
In the quote box above, I have made various changes to the layout. I hope you can see that it's much clearer.

Like jutfrank, I can't see how any of those sentences relate to the chart you provided. I can't see any segments that would explain your "40%" figure. Do you understand the difference between immigration and emigration?

 

[mrmvp]

No, that's not right. Which part of the chart(s) are you looking at?

Thank you @jutfrank and @emsr2d2


The categories below the pie chart

1- formal study.
2- definite job.
And the other four categories.

No, both are very poor choices.

Do you have better suggestions? I described the percentages of people who immigrated and emigrated to and from the UK, I mentioned the percentage the pie chart such as (I don't know if the following sentences are correct):

1- The Accompany/join's figure was accounted at 15%
2- "No reason stated" figure made up the lowest percentage at 6%
3. Looking for job was comprised of 12% in immigration' s figure.

 

[mrmvp]

Like jutfrank, I can't see how any of those sentences relate to the chart you provided. I can't see any segments that would explain your "40%"

It was an example sentence

I don't know which is correct " immigration's figure or immigration figure, when describing a chart.

figure. Do you understand the difference between immigration and emigration?

Yes.

 

[jutfrank]

I don't know which is correct " immigration's figure or immigration figure, when describing a chart.

Neither is right.

There are numerous ways that you could express the idea correctly. Here's just one:

12% of people said that looking for work was the main reason to immigrate.

I'm not sure what 'Accompany/join' is supposed to mean. I guess it refers to people going to be with family members.

 

[mrmvp]

Neither is right.

I can't thank you enough. Thank you for helping me.

Is it compulsory to mention "people" when describing immigration chart ?

Writing "people" over and over again in every category of the six mentioned in chart makes the describing chart redundant, I believe.

Is it possible to mention how the figure of "looking for job" increased or how much was accounted?

There are numerous ways that you could express the idea correctly. Here's just one:

I cant thank you enough.

What are the other ways ?

Sad to say, I wrote about 190 words. I started every sentence with one of the six categories. I wrote two paragraphs, one for immigration and the other for emigration.

12% of people said that looking for work was the main reason to immigrate.

I have read that I should not start a sentence with digits, unless I spell out the number :

Twelve percent of people said that looking for work was the main reason to immigrate.

Please correct me if I am mistaken.

I'm not sure what 'Accompany/join' is supposed to mean. I guess it refers to people going to be with family members.

Yes. People who accompany their immigrant for example.

Thank you again.

 

[jutfrank]

I can't thank you enough. Thank you for helping me.

You're welcome. Have you considered hiring a personal tutor? It seems you've got a way to go before you reach the level required for a band 7.0 in writing.

Is it compulsory to mention "people" when describing immigration chart ?

No, it isn't compulsory, but if you're talking about people, then it's likely you need to mention them, of course.

Writing "people" over and over again in every category of the six mentioned in chart makes the describing chart redundant, I believe.

Redundant, no, but repetitive, possibly. Ideally, you should use a range of phrasing.

Is it possible to mention how the figure of "looking for job" increased or how much was accounted?

No. There is no increase or decrease, since time is not a variable. This particular task is a comparison task. There is no change here. You simply have to compare the the data of the two charts.

What are the other ways ?

I'll give you just one more:

For 12% of those asked, jobseeking was the prime motivation for immigration.

I don't want to give you any more, but I'm happy to comment on your own sentences if you want to post them here.

Sad to say, I wrote about 190 words.

Why is that sad? Writing 190 words is a good thing as it fulfils one of the requirements of the task.

I started every sentence with one of the six categories.

That sounds a little repetitive if you're aiming for a band 7.0.

I wrote two paragraphs, one for immigration and the other for emigration.

That seems reasonable. What were your other ideas for paragraphing?

I have read that I should not start a sentence with digits, unless I spell out the number :

Twelve percent of people said that looking for work was the main reason to immigrate.

Please correct me if I am mistaken.

I'm happy to read sentences that start with digits, but writing the words in full is not wrong.

 

[mrmvp]

You're welcome. Have you considered hiring a personal tutor? It seems you've got a way to go before you reach the level required for a band 7.0 in writing.

I have to. I have to score 7.0 to be able to do PhD in top notch universities in English speaking countries.

No. There is no increase or decrease, since time is not a variable. This particular task is a comparison task. There is no change here. You simply have to compare the the data of the two charts.

I think words like increased decreased are possible to describe and make comparison among the categories in the chart.
I guess I can say : people who immigrated looking for jobs are higher than those who emigrated to accompanied their families.

I don't want to give you any more, but I'm happy to comment on your own sentences if you want to post them here.

Thank you. This is very kind of you.

The reason why I used parentheses is in the last last post

The two charts compare the major reasons for immigration and emigration to and from The United Kingdom in seven categories in 2007.

Overall, it is clear that the two main reasons for immigration were specified jobs and formal jobs; meanwhile, the two major reasons for emigration were specified jobs and seeking jobs. It is worthwhile to mention that the figures of those who accompany their families witnessed modest changes in both figures.

(In the immigration) figure, having a specified job had the greatest proportion at 30%, being higher than (the emigration) figure which accounted for 29%. Followed by the second largest percentage formal study 26% (in immigration figure), dropping to a mere 4%. Twelve percent of people (immigrated) to seek jobs . By contrast, the former figure made up 22% of (emigration). (In immigration), those who accompanied their family was 15%; it dropped slightly to 13%. Both people who did not mention reasons (for immigration) and those who gave other reasons (for emigration)had the lowest percentages at 6% and 4% respectively.

 

[mrmvp]

Thank you @jutfrank and @emsr2d2 for your contribution. I can't thank you enough. I really need your correction and comments.

In the task I have just posted it. I don't want to sound repetitive. I compared the major trends between immigration and emigration.

I tried to use different sentence structures to score high in task 1. I started every sentence with comparison between immigration and emigration. I feel it is not the proper way to do so. Please look at the words in parentheses.

 

[jutfrank]

I have to. I have to score 7.0 to be able to do PhD in top notch universities in English speaking countries.

How long are you allowing yourself to reach that level? If you're aiming to do that within the next year or two, I'd urge you to hire a specialised IELTS tutor who can help you progress quickly and effectively. Currently, you're way behind where you need to be.

I think words like increased decreased are possible to describe and make comparison among the categories in the chart.

I'm telling you that those words are wrong. They don't make sense, since there's no time for anything to increase. This is a straight comparison task.

I guess I can say : people who immigrated looking for jobs are higher than those who emigrated to accompanied their families.

No, that's wrong. People cannot be 'higher' than other people. It's the number (of people) that is higher.

 

[mrmvp]

How long are you allowing yourself to reach that level? If you're aiming to do that within the next year or two, I'd urge you to hire a specialised IELTS tutor who can help you progress quickly and effectively. Currently, you're way behind where you need to be.

By next year.

No, that's wrong. People cannot be 'higher' than other people. It's the number (of people) that is higher.

Another mistake I made, to accompany, not to accompanied.

I agree. My apology. I was supposed to say : The percentage of people who immigrated looking for jobs are higher than those who emigrated to accompany their families.

 

[jutfrank]

The percentage of people who immigrated looking for jobs was higher than those who emigrated to accompany their families.

That's almost an accurate sentence. Change one more thing.

Hint: Remember what I said before. People can't be 'higher', only numbers and percentages can.

 

[mrmvp]

That's almost an accurate sentence. Change one more thing.

Hint: Remember what I said before. People can't be 'higher', only numbers and percentages can.

Thank you for helping me.

Yes. The percentage/ proportion "was". I should have used "was".

In the two sentences below, was refer to the word
"Percentage, right?

I am struggling weather I use to plus infinitive or gerund, in the examples below


1-The percentage of people who immigrated, looking for jobs was higher than those who emigrated to accompany their families.

2-The percentage of people who immigrated to look for jobs was higher than those who emigrated to accompany their families.

 

[emsr2d2]

I am struggling with weather whether I to use "to plus infinitive" or a gerund no comma here in the examples below.

1. The percentage of people who immigrated no comma here looking for jobs was higher than that of those who emigrated to accompany their families.
2. The percentage of people who immigrated to look for jobs a job was higher than that of those who emigrated to accompany their families.

With my corrections, they're both grammatically possible. However, I don't like the use of the gerund in #1.

 

[jutfrank]

The percentage/ proportion "was". I should have used "was".

Yes, but that's not what I meant. Change the word those, which currently refers to people. You have to compare the numbers/percentages, not the people.

 

[mrmvp]

Yes, but that's not what I meant. Change the word those, which currently refers to people. You have to compare the numbers/percentages, not the people.

I guess "the proportion" and writing "the percentage" again is also possible, though I prefer the former. I can't think of other possible answers.

1-The percentage of people who immigrated, looking for jobs was higher than --------- who emigrated to accompany their families.