The line graph compares the amount of fish and three types of meat (chicken, beef and lamb) consumed by people of Europe between 1979 to 2004.
Overall, it is evident that beef and chicken were more popular among Europeans in the start and the end respectively, whereas fish was least preferred all the time. Furthermore, white chicken consumption increased over time, demand of beef, lamp and fish decreased.
With regards to chicken, each European ate around 150 grams of it each week in 1979. This figure then gradually rose in the time to almost 250 grams in 2004. Turning to beef, it was consumed in highest amount in 1979 with the value of about 220 grams, before fluctuating sharply initial 5 years to reach a peak of just below 250 grams per week in around 1983. Following this, a steady decline was seen in the remaining period by about 100 grams to about 120 grams in 2004.
On the other hand, people in Europe had 150 grams of lamb in 1974, which then reduced by almost half to rest at around 70 grams in the end of time. Changes in consumption of fish was unremarkable as it showed minor fluctuation to fall by 10 grams from about 60 grams in 1979 to around 50 grams in 2004.
- The table below gives information about the underground railway systems in six cities. Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparison where relevant. 56
- The diagram below shows how coffee is produced and prepared for sale in supermarkets and shops. 11
- The graph below shows the consumption of fish and 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.Write at least 150 words. 56
- The graph below shows the consumption of fish and 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.Write at least 150 words. 73
- The three pie charts below show the changes in annual spending by a particular UK school in 1981 1991 and 2001 Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 72
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 118, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...s in the start and the end respectively, whereas fish was least preferred all the...
^^
Line 5, column 192, Rule ID: THE_SUPERLATIVE[2]
Message: A determiner is probably missing here: 'in the highest'.
Suggestion: in the highest
... 2004. Turning to beef, it was consumed in highest amount in 1979 with the value of about ...
^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, then, whereas, 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: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 5.0 6.8 74% => OK
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 7.0 5.60731707317 125% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 56.0 33.7804878049 166% => OK
Nominalization: 3.0 3.97073170732 76% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 978.0 965.302439024 101% => OK
No of words: 217.0 196.424390244 110% => OK
Chars per words: 4.5069124424 4.92477711251 92% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.8380880478 3.73543355544 103% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.31379546898 2.65546596893 87% => OK
Unique words: 121.0 106.607317073 114% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.557603686636 0.547539520022 102% => OK
syllable_count: 271.8 283.868780488 96% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 1.53170731707 196% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.33902439024 46% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 3.0 3.36585365854 89% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.4926829268 107% => OK
Sentence length SD: 39.3449449276 43.030603864 91% => OK
Chars per sentence: 108.666666667 112.824112599 96% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.1111111111 22.9334400587 105% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.0 5.23603664747 95% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 2.0 1.69756097561 118% => 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: 5.0 4.09268292683 122% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.145225007971 0.215688989381 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.067919097701 0.103423049105 66% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.041397444637 0.0843802449381 49% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.101798279669 0.15604864568 65% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.035756188432 0.0819641961636 44% => 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: 11.9 13.2329268293 90% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 72.5 61.2550243902 118% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 10.3012195122 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.17 11.4140731707 80% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.45 8.06136585366 92% => OK
difficult_words: 36.0 40.7170731707 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.4329268293 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 10.9970731707 105% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
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.