The graph below shows relative price changes for fresh fruits and vegetables, sugars and sweets, and carbonated drinks between 1978 and 2009.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The changes in the cost of fresh fruits and veggies, sugar and sweets, and carbonated drinks from 1978-2009 have been demonstrated in the line graph above.
In general, three types of items witnessed an upward trend over the course of 31 years. While the price of fresh fruits and vegetables had the highest improvement, that of carbonated drinks was observed to rise very subtly.
In the earlier phase which in this case is 1979-1985, the price of fruits and vegetables fluctuated from 75% to a little above 100%. From this spot onward, it increased in bigger scales until 1991. In spite of that, there were 3 small phases in the graph which saw almost remaining figures: 1990-1993 at 175%, 1995-1998 at 212.5%, 1999-2002 at almost 250%. On the other hand, carbonated drinks were proven to rise very subtly from 75% to a bit over 150% over time. Although in earlier years before 1986, the rate of changes was very close to the other two groups, it could not keep up with the rest later on.
Furthermore, there are interesting insights into sugar and sweets that need to be pointed out. Its figure most of the time came very nearly to the consumer-price index. In fact, it was lower than the CPI’s except during 1979-1982 when sugar and sweets’ number surpassed the CPI’s a little.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 12, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... in the line graph above. In general, three types of items witnessed an upward...
^^
Line 5, column 564, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... was very close to the other two groups, it could not keep up with the rest later...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, while, in fact, in general, in spite of, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 7.0 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 2.0 1.00243902439 200% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 6.0 3.15609756098 190% => OK
Pronoun: 9.0 5.60731707317 161% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 47.0 33.7804878049 139% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 3.97073170732 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1071.0 965.302439024 111% => OK
No of words: 224.0 196.424390244 114% => OK
Chars per words: 4.78125 4.92477711251 97% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.86867284054 3.73543355544 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.41965521215 2.65546596893 91% => OK
Unique words: 139.0 106.607317073 130% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.620535714286 0.547539520022 113% => OK
syllable_count: 294.3 283.868780488 104% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 5.0 1.53170731707 326% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.36585365854 178% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 8.94146341463 123% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.4926829268 89% => OK
Sentence length SD: 31.1710821698 43.030603864 72% => OK
Chars per sentence: 97.3636363636 112.824112599 86% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.3636363636 22.9334400587 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.45454545455 5.23603664747 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 1.69756097561 118% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 3.70975609756 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 1.13902439024 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 4.0 4.09268292683 98% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.192626410406 0.215688989381 89% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0683712796162 0.103423049105 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0771097633445 0.0843802449381 91% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.134305526466 0.15604864568 86% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0759737555471 0.0819641961636 93% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.3 13.2329268293 85% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 76.56 61.2550243902 125% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.6 10.3012195122 74% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.44 11.4140731707 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.03 8.06136585366 87% => OK
difficult_words: 34.0 40.7170731707 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 10.9970731707 91% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.