The graph below shows the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in a
European country between 1979 and 2004.
The line graph illustrates how European country consumed fish and three different meat groups throughout the period from 1979 to 2004
Overall, fish wasn't really common in European country. It's clearly that the data always shows the loss of fish consumption trend with other meat groups. However, beef and lamp also had the same destiny. Except the use up of chicken still keep rising steadily.
It can be seen in 1979, beef had the most advantages of consumption with more than 200 grams per person per week. But after some fluctuations, beef actually out of the top, gave way for the development of chicken, culminating in nearly 1989. After 25 years, chicken consumption had finally reached the vertex of around 250. Continued with the decline of beef, the figures of lamp also showed the same trend from 150 in 1979 to around 70 in 2004
However, fish accounted the lowest number during the period. European country only 60 grams in 1979 and 50 grams in 2004
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-06-25 | Phuongkhoa | 84 | view |
- The percentage of tourists to England who visited 4 different attractions in Brighton 56
- The graph below shows relative price changes for fresh fruits and vegetables, sugarsand sweets, and carbonated drinks between 1978 and 2009.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant
- The graph below shows the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in aEuropean country between 1979 and 2004. 84
- The line graph below shows the percentage of tourists to England who visited fourdifferent attractions in Brighton.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and makecomparisons where relevant.Write at least 150 words. 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 15, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: wasn't
...riod from 1979 to 2004 Overall, fish wasnt really common in European country. Its ...
^^^^^
Line 3, column 56, Rule ID: IT_IS[6]
Message: Did you mean 'it's' (='it is') instead of 'its' (possessive pronoun)?
Suggestion: It's; It is
...asnt really common in European country. Its clearly that the data always shows the...
^^^
Line 3, column 72, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...on in European country. Its clearly that the data always shows the loss of fish c...
^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, finally, however, if, really, so, still
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 1.0 7.0 14% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 30.0 33.7804878049 89% => OK
Nominalization: 4.0 3.97073170732 101% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 806.0 965.302439024 83% => OK
No of words: 166.0 196.424390244 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.85542168675 4.92477711251 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.58944267634 3.73543355544 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.37227049379 2.65546596893 89% => OK
Unique words: 105.0 106.607317073 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.632530120482 0.547539520022 116% => OK
syllable_count: 217.8 283.868780488 77% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 2.0 4.33902439024 46% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 0.482926829268 207% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 2.0 3.36585365854 59% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.4926829268 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 49.9379862343 43.030603864 116% => OK
Chars per sentence: 89.5555555556 112.824112599 79% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.4444444444 22.9334400587 80% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.66666666667 5.23603664747 127% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 1.69756097561 177% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 4.0 3.70975609756 108% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
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: 0.273559860717 0.215688989381 127% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0939002694924 0.103423049105 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0829058516331 0.0843802449381 98% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.171928253373 0.15604864568 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0726099609681 0.0819641961636 89% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.7 13.2329268293 81% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 78.59 61.2550243902 128% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.8 10.3012195122 66% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.91 11.4140731707 96% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.48 8.06136585366 93% => OK
difficult_words: 31.0 40.7170731707 76% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 11.4329268293 70% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.9970731707 84% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 84.2696629213 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.5 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.