The graph illustrates the quantity of chicken, beef, lamb, and fish consumed in a European country between 1979 and 2004.

Essay topics:

The graph illustrates the quantity of chicken, beef, lamb, and fish consumed in a European country between 1979 and 2004.

The line graph illustrates the amount of fish and meat consumed by a country in Europe from 1979 to 2004, a period of 25 years. Overall, the consumption of beef and lamb declined over the period, whereas the amount of chicken consumed increased, and the consumption of fish remained constant.

In 1979, the most popular meat in this country was beef, being eaten about 200 grams per person per week, followed consecutively by lamb and chicken. The consumption of beef remained on the top until 1989, and then began to decline gradually and finish in 2004 at just 100 per grams per week. In sharp contrast, chicken consumption increased steadily, catched up the consumption of lamb and overtook the consumption of beef in the beginning of the nineties, and was continue rising until achieving the highest consumption over the period.

Interestingly, fish was the least popular food in this country. The consumption of fish started far beneath the meats, approximately 50 per grams per week. It fluctuated slightly and ended the period a little lower than where it began.

Votes
Average: 8 (1 vote)

Comments

Sentence: In sharp contrast, chicken consumption increased steadily, catched up the consumption of lamb and overtook the consumption of beef in the beginning of the nineties, and was continue rising until achieving the highest consumption over the period.
Description: The token was is not usually followed by a verb, base: uninflected present, imperative or infinitive
Suggestion: Refer to was and continue

Sentence: In sharp contrast, chicken consumption increased steadily, catched up the consumption of lamb and overtook the consumption of beef in the beginning of the nineties, and was continue rising until achieving the highest consumption over the period.
Error: catched Suggestion: No alternate word

Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 7.0 out of 9
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 1 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 1 2
No. of Sentences: 8 10
No. of Words: 179 200
No. of Characters: 868 1000
No. of Different Words: 91 100
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 3.658 4.0
Average Word Length: 4.849 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.696 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 57 60
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 46 50
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 31 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 18 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.375 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 8.215 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.25 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.475 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.657 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.111 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 3 4