The graph below shows the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in a European country between 1979 and 2004. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant.

Essay topics:

The graph below shows the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in a European country between 1979 and 2004.

Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant.

Submitted by ann_01 on Tue, 08/07/2018 - 08:28

The line graph compares how many grams of fish along with 3 other types of meat were eaten per person per week in a European country, from 1979 to 2004. In general, the consumption of beef, lamb and fish had the tendency to fall while that of chicken rose above.

The amount of chicken being used throughout the course of 25 years changed drastically. First, in 1979, an individual consumed only just under 150 grams of this kind of meat per week, which was lower than that of both produces lamb and beef. However, for the next few years, the number went up steadily and eventually took the number one place of beef in 1989 with about 205 grams. From 1989 forward, the consumption of chicken continued to increase, meeting the mark of 250 grams in 2004.

On the other hand, the usage of the remaining types of meat dropped. In 1979, beef and lamb were eaten the most with 220 grams of beef per person weekly and 150 grams for lamb. Though, these two meats couldn’t keep their status and the numbers decreased drastically starting from 1989. The consumption of beef went from 200 grams to just over 100 grams in 2004. Beside that, the amount of fish being eaten also declined slightly.

Votes
Average: 7.3 (1 vote)
This essay topic by users
Post date Users Rates Link to Content
2018-08-07 ann_01 73 view
>>> More users practiced this topic >>>
Essay Categories
IELTS Writing Task I - IELTS General Training
Essays by user ann_01 :
>>> more essays by the user >>>

Comments

Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
The line graph compares how many grams o...
^^^
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...l while that of chicken rose above. The amount of chicken being used through...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...eting the mark of 250 grams in 2004. On the other hand, the usage of the rema...
^^^^^

Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, first, however, so, while, in general, kind of, on the other hand

Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments

Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 7.48453608247 67% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 4.92783505155 0% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 5.05154639175 119% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.03092783505 132% => OK
Pronoun: 6.0 32.9175257732 18% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 26.3917525773 163% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.85567010309 78% => OK

Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 984.0 937.175257732 105% => OK
No of words: 214.0 206.0 104% => OK
Chars per words: 4.59813084112 4.54256449028 101% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.82475343497 3.78020617076 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.23076888325 2.54303337028 88% => OK
Unique words: 123.0 127.690721649 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.57476635514 0.622605031667 92% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 263.7 290.88556701 91% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.2 1.41237113402 85% => OK

A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 9.13402061856 11% => OK
Article: 9.0 0.824742268041 1091% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 0.0 1.83505154639 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.463917525773 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 1.44329896907 485% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.

Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6804123711 87% => OK
Sentence length: 19.0 16.3608247423 116% => OK
Sentence length SD: 29.7718598069 44.8134815571 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 89.4545454545 76.5299724578 117% => OK
Words per sentence: 19.4545454545 16.8248392259 116% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.45454545455 4.34317383033 149% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 4.29896907216 70% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 2.54639175258 118% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 7.41237113402 40% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.49484536082 67% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 3.94845360825 177% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?

Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.117920739491 0.216113520407 55% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0476657191815 0.0766984524023 62% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0377316570789 0.0603063233224 63% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0966207254484 0.12726935374 76% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0400923711625 0.0580467560999 69% => OK

Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.0 8.37731958763 119% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 86.03 70.7449484536 122% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 3.82989690722 81% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.0 7.45979381443 80% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.4 8.71597938144 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.09 7.59969072165 93% => OK
difficult_words: 34.0 41.2886597938 82% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 8.62886597938 122% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.6 8.54432989691 112% => OK
text_standard: 10.0 8.15463917526 123% => 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.