The graph below shows the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in a European country between 1979 and 2004.
The following graph illustrates how much fish, and some other kinds of meat were consumed per person in a European nation from 1979 to 2004.
Overall, there was a decline in the amount of beef, lamb and fish eaten while the figure for chicken witnessed a significant increase, surpassed that of beef to become the most consumed type of meat from 1989 onwards.
The amount of beef per person in the country started at approximately 210 grams, after which it experienced a fluctuation and decreased, before ending the period at 100 grams. Opposite change can be seen in the figure for chicken, which increased significantly from just under 150 grams per person (GPP) to north of 200 GPP in 1989 and reached 250 GPP in the last year of the period.
150 grams of lamb was used by each person in the country mentioned in 1979, with a subsequent decrease to nearly 60 GPP in 2004. In the meantime, the figure for fish was at around 60 GPP followed by a slight decrease to just under 50 GPP after a few years and maintained at this level towards the end of this period.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-06-16 | unstoppable | 73 | view |
| 2024-06-16 | unstoppable | 73 | view |
| 2024-06-16 | unstoppable | 73 | view |
| 2024-06-16 | unstoppable | 67 | view |
| 2024-06-16 | unstoppable | 73 | view |
- Some people think that schools should invest more money in technology such as more computers while others think more money should be spent on teachers Discuss both sides and give your opinion 78
- The use of mobile phones is as antisocial as smoking Smoking is banned in certain places so mobile phones should be banned like smoking To what extent do you agree or disagree 73
- Nowadays the way many people interact with each other has changed because of technology In what ways has technology affected the types of relationships people make Has this become a positive or negative development 78
- The table shows daily oil production in 4 countries from 2000 to 2004 61
- The bar chart below shows the percentage of government spending on roads and transport in 4 countries in the years 1990 1995 2000 2005 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
if, so, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 7.0 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 4.0 5.60731707317 71% => OK
Preposition: 41.0 33.7804878049 121% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 3.97073170732 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 877.0 965.302439024 91% => OK
No of words: 193.0 196.424390244 98% => OK
Chars per words: 4.54404145078 4.92477711251 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.72725689877 3.73543355544 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.47912165678 2.65546596893 93% => OK
Unique words: 108.0 106.607317073 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.559585492228 0.547539520022 102% => OK
syllable_count: 248.4 283.868780488 88% => 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: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 6.0 8.94146341463 67% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 32.0 22.4926829268 142% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 32.2524762185 43.030603864 75% => OK
Chars per sentence: 146.166666667 112.824112599 130% => OK
Words per sentence: 32.1666666667 22.9334400587 140% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.16666666667 5.23603664747 41% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => 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: 4.0 4.09268292683 98% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.149031787538 0.215688989381 69% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0908812132832 0.103423049105 88% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.111911873898 0.0843802449381 133% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.119441213426 0.15604864568 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.123049187928 0.0819641961636 150% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.0 13.2329268293 121% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 64.38 61.2550243902 105% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.2 10.3012195122 118% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.64 11.4140731707 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.6 8.06136585366 94% => OK
difficult_words: 29.0 40.7170731707 71% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.4329268293 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.8 10.9970731707 135% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.0658536585 72% => 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.