The graph below shows the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat per week in a European country between 1979 and 2004.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The line graph compares how may grams of fish and meat ( Chicken, Beef and Lamb ) utilization do European people consumed per week from 1979 to 2004.
Overall, three separated meat consumption decreased over the period of 30 years while chicken shows a fluctuating increased in the number of eating. Although lamb, beef and fish were similar in terms of a general decline, the expenditure on fish in most years was lower than the other counterparts.
From the same starting point, at just above 200, Beef used to rank the 1st place in Europeans consumption followed by Lamb with the second highest amount of consuming, at exactly 150. The expenditure on Chicken and Fish were lower, at approximately 150 and over 50 respectively. No longer after that, there was a significant fall in Lamb eaten, from precisely 150 to around 70 in 2004, whereas the figure for Fish slightly dipped to nearly 50, which was not a considerable change.
In comparison with the falling trend of three kinds of meat, a dramatic change showing that there was a rise in the number of people in a European nation preferring Chicken. Although the figure for Chicken was merely the third highest in consuming at the beginning of the period, Chicken became the most commonly used food when increasing by almost 1000 in the 2000s before falling steadily in 2004. By contrast, Beef accounted for around 100 grams eaten per week and going up moderately.
- Prison is the common way in most countries to solve the problem of crime However a more effective solution is to provide people with a better education Do you agree or disagree 92
- International travel has many advantages to both travellers and the country that they visited. Do advantages outweight the disadvantages? 78
- People have little understanding of the importance of the natural world.What are the reason for this,and how can people learn more about the natural world? 78
- In the future it seems it will be more difficult to live on the Earth Some people think more money should be spent on research other planets to live such as Mars To what extent do you agree or disagree 80
- The graph below shows the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat per week in a European country between 1979 and 2004.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. 73
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 55, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... compares how may grams of fish and meat Chicken, Beef and Lamb utilization do E...
^^
Line 1, column 79, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...of fish and meat Chicken, Beef and Lamb utilization do European people consumed ...
^^
Line 5, column 141, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...a fluctuating increased in the number of eating. Although lamb, beef and fish wer...
^^
Line 13, column 4, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[2]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: comparison,
...was not a considerable change. In comparison with the falling trend of three kinds o...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, may, second, so, third, whereas, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => OK
Pronoun: 2.0 5.60731707317 36% => OK
Preposition: 47.0 33.7804878049 139% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1194.0 965.302439024 124% => OK
No of words: 242.0 196.424390244 123% => OK
Chars per words: 4.93388429752 4.92477711251 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.94415379849 3.73543355544 106% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63584867636 2.65546596893 99% => OK
Unique words: 142.0 106.607317073 133% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.586776859504 0.547539520022 107% => OK
syllable_count: 346.5 283.868780488 122% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 7.0 3.36585365854 208% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 26.0 22.4926829268 116% => OK
Sentence length SD: 42.7502075657 43.030603864 99% => OK
Chars per sentence: 132.666666667 112.824112599 118% => OK
Words per sentence: 26.8888888889 22.9334400587 117% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.66666666667 5.23603664747 89% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 1.69756097561 236% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 4.0 1.13902439024 351% => Less 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: 0.159447820871 0.215688989381 74% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0724902576813 0.103423049105 70% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0576550742273 0.0843802449381 68% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.114701158603 0.15604864568 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0570930560993 0.0819641961636 70% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.2 13.2329268293 115% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 62.01 61.2550243902 101% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 11.1 10.3012195122 108% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.61 11.4140731707 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.38 8.06136585366 104% => OK
difficult_words: 53.0 40.7170731707 130% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.4329268293 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 12.4 10.9970731707 113% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => 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.