The chart demonstrates the amount of fish and 3 different kinds of meat consumed in a European Country over the course of 25 years starting from 1979.
Looking at the chart, it is immediately obvious that the consumption of chicken has a gradual increase whereas the popularity of these other food has decreased over the period.
The biggest consumption in 1979 was beef, with about 220 grams eaten per person weekly, where as the lowest consumption in 1979 was fish, at around 60 grams was consumed per week by a person. Lambs and chicken were used in nearly similar amount at 150 grams. However, during the period, the consumption of beef and lamb experienced a rapid fall to approximately 110 grams and 70 grams respectively. The amount of fish consumed also decreased but very slightly, by 10 grams.
On the other hand, the amount of eaten chicken had a considerable rise. By 2004, it skyrocketed to 240 grams eaten per individual per week making chicken the most preferred kind of meat consumed by people in that country.
- 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. 78
- 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. 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 5, column 89, Rule ID: WHERE_AS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'whereas'?
Suggestion: whereas
...bout 220 grams eaten per person weekly, where as the lowest consumption in 1979 was fish...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, however, if, look, so, whereas, kind of, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 7.0 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 5.0 5.60731707317 89% => OK
Preposition: 31.0 33.7804878049 92% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 3.97073170732 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 859.0 965.302439024 89% => OK
No of words: 177.0 196.424390244 90% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.85310734463 4.92477711251 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.64748333727 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.70993339913 2.65546596893 102% => OK
Unique words: 104.0 106.607317073 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.587570621469 0.547539520022 107% => OK
syllable_count: 246.6 283.868780488 87% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 3.36585365854 178% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.4926829268 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.5295604965 43.030603864 108% => OK
Chars per sentence: 107.375 112.824112599 95% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.125 22.9334400587 96% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.625 5.23603664747 165% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => 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: 0.154161158648 0.215688989381 71% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0631044377702 0.103423049105 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.067944392979 0.0843802449381 81% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.10111542575 0.15604864568 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0684944245859 0.0819641961636 84% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 13.2329268293 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 66.07 61.2550243902 108% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.5 10.3012195122 92% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.85 11.4140731707 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.58 8.06136585366 94% => OK
difficult_words: 32.0 40.7170731707 79% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.4329268293 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.9970731707 98% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => 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.