Food consumption in China, 1985 to 2010
grams/person/week)
The line graph illustrates changes in the level of meat, salt, and fish consumption in China from 1985 to 2010. Overall, it can be seen that meat and fish use up increased at the end of the period, most significantly for consuming fish, while the number of people who ate salt showed a remarkable decrease over the period.
At the beginning, in 1985, the number of fish consumption stood at 610 grams/person/week. However, over the following 10 years, there was a fluctuation between 1985 and 1995. Ultimately, the amount of consumed fish rose significantly in a continuous way to around 850 grams/person/week in 2010, higher than other foods. Furthermore, the consumption of meat witnessed continuous growth over the period started at 100 to 200 per week.
On the other hand, during the period 1985 to 2010, it was predicted that the level of people eating salt declined considerably begun from 490 to 200 grams per person per week. It maintained the same level as the people who consumed meat.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-01-04 | AhaanIshaan | 11 | view |
| 2023-08-06 | fuzzefer | view | |
| 2023-08-06 | fuzzefer | view | |
| 2023-08-06 | fuzzefer | 56 | view |
| 2023-05-30 | baoquyen1906 | 78 | view |
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 237, Rule ID: IN_A_X_MANNER[1]
Message: Consider replacing "in a continuous way" with adverb for "continuous"; eg, "in a hasty manner" with "hastily".
...unt of consumed fish rose significantly in a continuous way to around 850 grams/person/week in 2010...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
furthermore, however, if, so, while, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 3.0 7.0 43% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 6.8 44% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 4.0 3.15609756098 127% => 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: 833.0 965.302439024 86% => OK
No of words: 169.0 196.424390244 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.92899408284 4.92477711251 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.60555127546 3.73543355544 97% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.01635888509 2.65546596893 114% => OK
Unique words: 100.0 106.607317073 94% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.591715976331 0.547539520022 108% => OK
syllable_count: 233.1 283.868780488 82% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 1.53170731707 196% => OK
Article: 4.0 4.33902439024 92% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => 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: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.4926829268 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 46.7700491768 43.030603864 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 104.125 112.824112599 92% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.125 22.9334400587 92% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.75 5.23603664747 129% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => 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: 4.0 4.09268292683 98% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.223037367267 0.215688989381 103% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.107905310627 0.103423049105 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0836932077168 0.0843802449381 99% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.147893697151 0.15604864568 95% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0681465230813 0.0819641961636 83% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.4 13.2329268293 94% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 67.08 61.2550243902 110% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 10.3012195122 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.31 11.4140731707 99% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.57 8.06136585366 94% => OK
difficult_words: 31.0 40.7170731707 76% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 11.4329268293 101% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.9970731707 95% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.0658536585 108% => 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.