The line graph illustrates the amount of four different types of food which people in a European nation consumed from 1979 to 2004. Overall, fish was the least commonly used food in the European country throughout the period shown. Also, the expenditure on beef, lamb and fish decreased, while there was a fluctuating increase in the figure for chicken. It can be seen from the graph that in 1979, the amount of beef which was consumed was the highest, at about 220 grams per person per week. The figures for chicken and lamb were lower, at under 150 grams and exactly 150 grams respectively. However, fish accounted for the lowest number with only about 60 grams eaten (*) In the period between 1979 and 2004, the country witnessed a significant growth to around 250 grams in the consumption of chicken. By contrast, around 50 grams of lamb was eaten, compared to about 40 grams of fish in 2004. Although the consumption of beef reached a peak of about 240 grams in 1983, this fell steadily to just over 100 grams in 2004.
- 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 56
- 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 56
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 925, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...sh in 2004. Although the consumption of beef reached a peak of about 240 grams i...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, so, 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 : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 38.0 33.7804878049 112% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 3.97073170732 50% => More nominalization wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 840.0 965.302439024 87% => OK
No of words: 181.0 196.424390244 92% => OK
Chars per words: 4.6408839779 4.92477711251 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.66791821706 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.41683305069 2.65546596893 91% => OK
Unique words: 102.0 106.607317073 96% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.563535911602 0.547539520022 103% => OK
syllable_count: 231.3 283.868780488 81% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Interrogative: 0.0 0.114634146341 0% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.4926829268 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 34.9300640566 43.030603864 81% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.0 112.824112599 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.625 22.9334400587 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.5 5.23603664747 67% => OK
Paragraphs: 1.0 3.83414634146 26% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.140715985312 0.215688989381 65% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0700949209568 0.103423049105 68% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0487938382968 0.0843802449381 58% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.140715985312 0.15604864568 90% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0 0.0819641961636 0% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 13.2329268293 88% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 74.53 61.2550243902 122% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 8.3 10.3012195122 81% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.93 11.4140731707 87% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.52 8.06136585366 93% => OK
difficult_words: 32.0 40.7170731707 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 10.5 11.4329268293 92% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.9970731707 98% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Minimum two paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 56.1797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.