The graph below shows the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in a European country between 1979 and 2004.
The diagram shows the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in a European country from 1979 to 2004. In general, fish are consumed less than meat.
As can be seen from the line chart, consumption of aquarium food stay almost constant between 1979 and 2004. In fact, in 1979, people had about 60 grams of fish per week, but there was a consideration decreasing from this moment to 1981 by about 45. Then the figure almost didn't change until 1998. At the end of the period, the consumption of fish had a small fall, to around 40.
On the other hand, meat experienced a fluctuate. For example, while lamb and beef dropped significantly, there were a sharply growing in consumption of chicken. In 2004, the consumption of chicken was around 250, which was higher than the total of beef, lamb and fish and almost dupble the amount in the start of the period.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 274, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: didn't
...981 by about 45. Then the figure almost didnt change until 1998. At the end of the pe...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 37, Rule ID: A_INFINITVE[1]
Message: Probably a wrong construction: a/the + infinitive
... On the other hand, meat experienced a fluctuate. For example, while lamb and beef dropp...
^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, if, so, then, while, for example, in fact, in general, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 7.0 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 6.0 6.8 88% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 1.0 5.60731707317 18% => OK
Preposition: 32.0 33.7804878049 95% => OK
Nominalization: 6.0 3.97073170732 151% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 719.0 965.302439024 74% => OK
No of words: 156.0 196.424390244 79% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.60897435897 4.92477711251 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.53411884305 3.73543355544 95% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.49933423088 2.65546596893 94% => OK
Unique words: 96.0 106.607317073 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.615384615385 0.547539520022 112% => OK
syllable_count: 195.3 283.868780488 69% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
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: 17.0 22.4926829268 76% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 40.3897676811 43.030603864 94% => OK
Chars per sentence: 79.8888888889 112.824112599 71% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.3333333333 22.9334400587 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 8.55555555556 5.23603664747 163% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 1.69756097561 118% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.09268292683 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.370230964212 0.215688989381 172% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.148617175068 0.103423049105 144% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.196990777644 0.0843802449381 233% => The coherence between sentences is low.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.285555651238 0.15604864568 183% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.214825032197 0.0819641961636 262% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 8.9 13.2329268293 67% => 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: 9.16 11.4140731707 80% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 6.71 8.06136585366 83% => OK
difficult_words: 22.0 40.7170731707 54% => 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: 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.