The table illustrates how much money that Italy spent on some distinct food products in three particular years, namely 1992, 2002, and 2012, measured by millions of euros.
Generally, the expenses on beef, chicken, and potatoes increased, while the opposite was true for milk throughout the observed period. Additionally, the money spent on butter or margarine remained constant.
More specifically, the Italian budget mainly focused on beef, with an expenditure of 45 million euros in 1992. However, by 2002, it had dropped slightly by 2 million euros before rising significantly to 54 million euros in 2012. Meanwhile, despite starting at 38 and 11 million euros in 1992, the figures for chicken and potatoes experienced gradual growths of 18 and 7 million euros in 2012, respectively.
On the other hand, Italy spent the least amount of money on butter/ margarine products, with a figure of around 8 million euros during the research period. Meanwhile, the figures for coffee and milk witnessed little variations, with a difference of 2 and 1 million euros over a similar interval of time, accordingly.
- It is expected that there will be a higher proportion of older people than young people in many countries in the future Do you think it is a positive or negative development 87
- New technologies have changed the way children spend their free time Do the advantages outweigh the disadvantages 92
- The table shows the expenditure on various types of food in one European country in 1992 2002 and 2012 89
- The chart below gives information about Someland's main exports in 2005, 2015, and future projections for 2025.Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.Write at least 150 words. 78
- Nowadays some people claim that public museums and art galleries will not be needed because people can see historical objects and works by using the computer Do you agree or disagree 89
Transition Words or Phrases used:
accordingly, but, however, if, so, while, on the other hand
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: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 8.0 6.8 118% => OK
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 2.0 5.60731707317 36% => OK
Preposition: 33.0 33.7804878049 98% => OK
Nominalization: 1.0 3.97073170732 25% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 937.0 965.302439024 97% => OK
No of words: 178.0 196.424390244 91% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.26404494382 4.92477711251 107% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.65262427087 3.73543355544 98% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.85424774868 2.65546596893 107% => OK
Unique words: 111.0 106.607317073 104% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.623595505618 0.547539520022 114% => OK
syllable_count: 274.5 283.868780488 97% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.45097560976 103% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 1.0 1.07073170732 93% => OK
Conjunction: 2.0 0.482926829268 414% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 6.0 3.36585365854 178% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 8.0 8.94146341463 89% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.4926829268 98% => OK
Sentence length SD: 33.7321712168 43.030603864 78% => OK
Chars per sentence: 117.125 112.824112599 104% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.25 22.9334400587 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 7.375 5.23603664747 141% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => 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: 0.111772416071 0.215688989381 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0514092340404 0.103423049105 50% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0628826983684 0.0843802449381 75% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0731722310484 0.15604864568 47% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0795440924245 0.0819641961636 97% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.5 13.2329268293 110% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 61.2550243902 94% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 10.3012195122 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.52 11.4140731707 118% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.9 8.06136585366 110% => OK
difficult_words: 47.0 40.7170731707 115% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 11.4329268293 74% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 10.9970731707 98% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 89.8876404494 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 8.0 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.