The pie chart below shows the main reasons why agricultural land becomes less productive. The table shows how these causes affected three regions of the world during the 1990s.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
The given tables depict the money earns from supplying Fairtrade-labelled coffee and bananas in the time frame of 1999 and 2004 in five Europe countries, namely the uk, switzerland, Denmark, belgium and Sweden. As can be seen from the tables, it is clearly evident that while the sales of coffee in all countries, which are given, had an upward trend, category of bananas for which farmers had paid an officially agreed fair price had decreased in Denmark, belgium, and increased in the uk, switzerland, Sweden.
The price that farmers had to paid for coffee label in the year 1999 in the uk was 1.5 million of euros, and had a sharply go up for 20 millions of euros in 2004. In switzerland, the number between 1999 and 2004 had increased double, from 3 to 6 million of euros. The year 2004 saw an increase in the sales of Fairtrade-labelled coffee in belgium nearly 2 times, from 1 in 1999 to 1.7 in 2004. Beside those huge increasingly numbers, Denmark just had a slightly rise, from 1999 with 1.8 millions of euros to 2 million 5 years later.
The year 1999 saw a modestly climb in the sales of Fairtrade-labelled bananas in switzerland from 15 in 1999 to 46 million in 2004. There was an increase rate of it in the uk, in 1999 with 1 million and in the year 2004 with 5.5 million. As like as the 2 countries, in belgium, the sales had a jump to 4.4 million in 2004. In the other hand, in 1999 , the money earn from supplying Fairtrade-labelled bananas in Sweden was 1.8 but it declined to 1 millions in the year 2004. Along with that, the sales in Denmark saw a hitting free fall from 2 millions of euros to 0.9.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-11-07 | Phùng Ngọc Uyên | 11 | view |
| 2019-08-21 | Jonkun | 78 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 114, Rule ID: A_RB_NN[1]
Message: You used an adverb ('sharply') instead an adjective, or a noun ('go') instead of another adjective.
...he uk was 1.5 million of euros, and had a sharply go up for 20 millions of euros in 2004. In...
^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 134, Rule ID: CD_DOZENS_OF[1]
Message: Use a singular form of the numeral here: '20 million'.
Suggestion: 20 million
...n of euros, and had a sharply go up for 20 millions of euros in 2004. In switzerland, the numb...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 452, Rule ID: A_RB_NN[1]
Message: You used an adverb ('slightly') instead an adjective, or a noun ('rise') instead of another adjective.
... increasingly numbers, Denmark just had a slightly rise, from 1999 with 1.8 millions of euros t...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 7, column 486, Rule ID: CD_DOZENS_OF[1]
Message: Use a singular form of the numeral here: '8 million'.
Suggestion: 8 million
...t had a slightly rise, from 1999 with 1.8 millions of euros to 2 million 5 years later. ...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 19, Rule ID: A_RB_NN[1]
Message: You used an adverb ('modestly') instead an adjective, or a noun ('climb') instead of another adjective.
... years later. The year 1999 saw a modestly climb in the sales of Fairtrade-labelled bana...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 13, column 351, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...ion in 2004. In the other hand, in 1999 , the money earn from supplying Fairtrade...
^^
Line 13, column 544, Rule ID: CD_DOZENS_OF[1]
Message: Use a singular form of the numeral here: '2 million'.
Suggestion: 2 million
...in Denmark saw a hitting free fall from 2 millions of euros to 0.9.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
but, while, as for
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 7.48453608247 80% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 4.92783505155 20% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 5.05154639175 158% => OK
Relative clauses : 5.0 3.03092783505 165% => OK
Pronoun: 7.0 32.9175257732 21% => OK
Preposition: 62.0 26.3917525773 235% => Less preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 0.0 3.85567010309 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1334.0 937.175257732 142% => OK
No of words: 298.0 206.0 145% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.47651006711 4.54256449028 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.15483772266 3.78020617076 110% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.81172858013 2.54303337028 111% => OK
Unique words: 126.0 127.690721649 99% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.422818791946 0.622605031667 68% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 365.4 290.88556701 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.2 1.41237113402 85% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 9.13402061856 11% => OK
Article: 8.0 0.824742268041 970% => Less articles wanted as sentence beginning.
Subordination: 2.0 1.83505154639 109% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.463917525773 431% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 10.0 1.44329896907 693% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 11.0 12.6804123711 87% => OK
Sentence length: 27.0 16.3608247423 165% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 59.5556549209 44.8134815571 133% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.272727273 76.5299724578 158% => OK
Words per sentence: 27.0909090909 16.8248392259 161% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.63636363636 4.34317383033 38% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 3.0 4.29896907216 70% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 7.0 2.54639175258 275% => Less language errors wanted.
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 7.41237113402 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.49484536082 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 3.94845360825 76% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.00307387985418 0.216113520407 1% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.00163988232613 0.0766984524023 2% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.00518576324524 0.0603063233224 9% => Sentences are similar to each other.
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.00304754670935 0.12726935374 2% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.00430988188833 0.0580467560999 7% => 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: 13.2 8.37731958763 158% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 77.91 70.7449484536 110% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 3.82989690722 81% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 7.45979381443 122% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.0 8.71597938144 103% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.41 7.59969072165 98% => OK
difficult_words: 46.0 41.2886597938 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 18.0 8.62886597938 209% => Linsear_write_formula is high.
gunning_fog: 12.8 8.54432989691 150% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 8.15463917526 159% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
It is not exactly right on the topic in the view of e-grader. Maybe there is a wrong essay topic.
Rates: 11.2359550562 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 1.0 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.