The Pie Charts show the average consumption of food in the world in 2008 compared to two countries China and India
The pie chart illustrates the information regarding the percentage of consumption of food in the nation in single given year in the contrast with the two given countries, China and India.
Having an in-depth view of the chat, it can be witnessed from the given information that, process the food in the world take a higher proportion which was also highly protest by China and India. Other factor has the lowest trend, would consume nuts and seeds 4% in year 2008 which was the lowest proportion, whereas India takes 11% and China takes 19%.
Feather demonstrating the key features, other consume 29% of vegetables and fruits whilst China consumed the 32% and India takes married to 5th part of that. Moving apart, animal food was prioritised by the whole word and China was the multiple of 5 that was 25% and 15% respectively while India consume fleshes 2% more than whole Nation.
Overall, it can be analysed that process the food is more consumed by the all given regions where as nuts and seeds are less prioritised by word and India while China consume less animal food.
- The graph below show the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in a Europeon country between 1979 and 2004 61
- Some people believe that natural ability is necessary to be successful at sports others believe that hard work and practice is more important discuss both sides and opinion 78
- The graph below show the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in a Europeon country between 1979 and 2004
- The chart below shows the percentage of UK households with selected consumers durable between 1996 to 2006 73
- The graph below show the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in a Europeon country between 1979 and 2004 61
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 7, column 93, Rule ID: WHERE_AS[1]
Message: Did you mean 'whereas'?
Suggestion: whereas
... more consumed by the all given regions where as nuts and seeds are less prioritised by ...
^^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, regarding, so, whereas, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 9.0 7.0 129% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 3.0 1.00243902439 299% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 10.0 6.8 147% => OK
Relative clauses : 7.0 3.15609756098 222% => Less relative clauses wanted (maybe 'which' is over used).
Pronoun: 6.0 5.60731707317 107% => OK
Preposition: 20.0 33.7804878049 59% => More preposition wanted.
Nominalization: 5.0 3.97073170732 126% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 898.0 965.302439024 93% => OK
No of words: 187.0 196.424390244 95% => OK
Chars per words: 4.80213903743 4.92477711251 98% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.69794460899 3.73543355544 99% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.42773681256 2.65546596893 91% => OK
Unique words: 105.0 106.607317073 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.561497326203 0.547539520022 103% => OK
syllable_count: 262.8 283.868780488 93% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 1.53170731707 131% => OK
Article: 1.0 4.33902439024 23% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 0.0 3.36585365854 0% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 6.0 8.94146341463 67% => Need more sentences. Double check the format of sentences, make sure there is a space between two sentences, or have enough periods. And also check the lengths of sentences, maybe they are too long.
Sentence length: 31.0 22.4926829268 138% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 15.3776533393 43.030603864 36% => The essay contains lots of sentences with the similar length. More sentence varieties wanted.
Chars per sentence: 149.666666667 112.824112599 133% => OK
Words per sentence: 31.1666666667 22.9334400587 136% => OK
Discourse Markers: 5.83333333333 5.23603664747 111% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 1.0 3.70975609756 27% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 3.0 1.13902439024 263% => Less negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 2.0 4.09268292683 49% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.241295185729 0.215688989381 112% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.12594063983 0.103423049105 122% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0691838026065 0.0843802449381 82% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.158464912728 0.15604864568 102% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0685862434687 0.0819641961636 84% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.8 13.2329268293 127% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 56.93 61.2550243902 93% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.0 10.3012195122 126% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.15 11.4140731707 98% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.64 8.06136585366 107% => OK
difficult_words: 41.0 40.7170731707 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 13.5 11.4329268293 118% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.4 10.9970731707 131% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 78.6516853933 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 7.0 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.