the line graph below shows the consumption of four kinds of meat in a European Country from 1979 to 2004.
The line graph compares the various types of meat, namely chicken, beef, lamb and fish consumed per week in a European country between 1979 and 2004.
Overall, it can be seen that, beef and lamb followed a fairly similar patterns. Both followed a downward trend, however, chicken consumption showed an upward trend. Although chicken initially had a lower rate of consumption as compared to beef and lamb, it exceeded the rest at the end of the period. Fish, on the other hand, had almost no change in its intake.
During the start of the period, the grams of beef consumed per week stood at a little above 200, being the highest of that year, followed by lamb and chicken consumption, which was around 60 grams less than that, while that of fish remained the least, at a little above 50.
Chicken consumption followed a gradual growth throughout. However, beef consumption on the other hand, despite some fluctuations, saw a steady decline. Subsequently, after 1989, the rising rate of chicken consumption outnumbered it. Hence, it finished a period with a low consumption rate of around 100 grams per person per week, followed by lamb, which stood at a little above 50, and then fish, which remained the least consumed one. Contrary to this, chicken became most preferred form of meat by the year 2004 and accounted for a weekly consumption of over 250 grams by the end of the timeframe.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2020-04-18 | mahtab.torkamaneh@gmail.com | 56 | view |
- the line graph below shows the consumption of four kinds of meat in a European Country from 1979 to 2004 53
- the bar chart below shows the percentage of people who ate five portions of fruit and vegetables per day in the U.K from 2001 to 2008. 78
- You should spend about 20 minutes on this task.The graph shows the proportion of the population aged 65 and over between1940 and 2040 in three different countries.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and makecomparisons w 11
- the bar chart below shows the percentage of people who ate five portions of fruit and vegetables per day in the U.K from 2001 to 2008. 78
- The first chart below shows how energy is used in an average Australian household. The second chart shows the greenhouse gas emissions which result from this energy use.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make compa 73
Transition Words or Phrases used:
hence, however, so, then, 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 : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 3.15609756098 222% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 10.0 5.60731707317 178% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 38.0 33.7804878049 112% => OK
Nominalization: 8.0 3.97073170732 201% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1159.0 965.302439024 120% => OK
No of words: 239.0 196.424390244 122% => OK
Chars per words: 4.84937238494 4.92477711251 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.93187294222 3.73543355544 105% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.56982801684 2.65546596893 97% => OK
Unique words: 134.0 106.607317073 126% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.560669456067 0.547539520022 102% => OK
syllable_count: 330.3 283.868780488 116% => 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: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
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: 11.0 8.94146341463 123% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.4926829268 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 64.4190824354 43.030603864 150% => OK
Chars per sentence: 105.363636364 112.824112599 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.7272727273 22.9334400587 95% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.54545454545 5.23603664747 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 1.13902439024 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.09268292683 147% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.143581643629 0.215688989381 67% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0635542633068 0.103423049105 61% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0791325049924 0.0843802449381 94% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.113459797808 0.15604864568 73% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.109027057513 0.0819641961636 133% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.3 13.2329268293 93% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 67.08 61.2550243902 110% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 9.1 10.3012195122 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.85 11.4140731707 95% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.65 8.06136585366 95% => OK
difficult_words: 45.0 40.7170731707 111% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 7.5 11.4329268293 66% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.9970731707 95% => OK
text_standard: 8.0 11.0658536585 72% => 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.