The graph below shows the consumption of fish and 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.
The chart provides information about the number of fish and three types of meat in European country consumed weekly per person from 1979 to 2004.
As an overall trend, it is clear that the number of fish consumed was by far the lowest during the given period. Additionally, while the quantity of chicken eaten increased, the other three figures all went down.
In 1979, Europeans were more keen on eating beef than others. It was about 220 grammes which was the highest place, followed by lamb and chicken. The consumption of these was about 150 grammes, and just only above 50 grammes of fish in this year.
The number of fish spending decreased slightly to less than 50 grammes per week in 2004. Besides, there was a sharp downward trend in lamb and beef to about 125 grammes and 175 grammes respectively between 1979 and 1984. Finally, they ended up with a decline in 2004. On the other hand, generally, a dramatically growth to above 250 grammes was seen by chicken in the end of period.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-01-24 | pateldhruv1708 | 67 | view |
| 2019-12-22 | Lovepreet123 | 67 | view |
| 2019-12-15 | KIM JINUK | 56 | view |
| 2019-12-15 | KIM JINUK | 56 | view |
| 2019-11-09 | anasrafiq | 73 | view |
- The graph below shows the consumption of fish and 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. 78
- The pie graphs below show the result of a survey of children's activities. The first graph shows the cultural and leisure activities that boys participate in, whereas the second graph shows the activities in which the girls participate.Write a report 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 4, column 47, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...mber of fish spending decreased slightly to less than 50 grammes per week in 2004...
^^
Line 4, column 300, Rule ID: A_RB_NN[1]
Message: You used an adverb ('dramatically') instead an adjective, or a noun ('growth') instead of another adjective.
... in 2004. On the other hand, generally, a dramatically growth to above 250 grammes was seen by chicke...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
besides, finally, so, while, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 8.0 7.0 114% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 6.0 5.60731707317 107% => OK
Preposition: 36.0 33.7804878049 107% => 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: 821.0 965.302439024 85% => OK
No of words: 176.0 196.424390244 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.66477272727 4.92477711251 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.64232057368 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.36630503848 2.65546596893 89% => OK
Unique words: 106.0 106.607317073 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.602272727273 0.547539520022 110% => OK
syllable_count: 232.2 283.868780488 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 1.53170731707 196% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 3.36585365854 59% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 10.0 8.94146341463 112% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.4926829268 76% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 28.5201683024 43.030603864 66% => OK
Chars per sentence: 82.1 112.824112599 73% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.6 22.9334400587 77% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.6 5.23603664747 88% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 1.69756097561 118% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 7.0 3.70975609756 189% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.129023333271 0.215688989381 60% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0535614722904 0.103423049105 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0587457766219 0.0843802449381 70% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0924186317286 0.15604864568 59% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0706998578219 0.0819641961636 86% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.3 13.2329268293 70% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 79.6 61.2550243902 130% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.4 10.3012195122 62% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.45 11.4140731707 83% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.44 8.06136585366 92% => OK
difficult_words: 33.0 40.7170731707 81% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 11.4329268293 66% => OK
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.9970731707 80% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.