You should spend about 20 minutes on this task.
The graph below shows the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in a European country between 1979 and 2004.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant.
(Write at least 150 words)
The line gragh compares the amount of fish and other kinds of meat which was consumed in a European country over a 25-year-period from 1979. Each unit is measured in grams per person per week.
Overall, the consumption of beef,lamb and fish were similar in terms of a decrease, while there was a significant increase in the figure for chicken.
In 1979, the quantity of beef was most commonly consumed, with over 200. Chicken and lamp consumed was lower, at under 150 and 150,respectively.The figure for fish was the lowest, with only over 50 eaten.
In the 1979-2004 period, there was a gradual decline of the consumption of beef to roughly 100. This trend was comparatively the same as the figure for lamp, with approximately 50 at the end of the period, albeit less pronounced.
Another interesting feature is that in the first 3 years, the amount of fish dove by around 20, before staying remain throughout the remainder of the period. By contrast, there was a dramatic climp of the figure of chicken from 1979 to 2004, it reached a peak of nearly 250, which was the greatest point in all time.
- In the future nobody will buy printed newspapers or books because they will be able to read everything they want online without paying What extent do you agree or disagree with this statement 85
- In some countries owning a home rather than renting one is very important for people Why might this be the case Do you think this a positive or negative situation 89
- Nowadays parents put too much pressure on their children to succeed What is the reason for doing this Is this a positive and negative development 61
- In the future nobody will buy printed newspapers or books because they will be able to read everything they want online without paying What extent do you agree or disagree with this statement
- The chart gives information about the proportion of students choosing different science subjects in a university in 1992 and 2000 78
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 33, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma
Suggestion: , lamb
...eek. Overall, the consumption of beef,lamb and fish were similar in terms of a dec...
^^^^^
Line 5, column 145, Rule ID: SENTENCE_WHITESPACE
Message: Add a space between sentences
Suggestion: The
...ower, at under 150 and 150,respectively.The figure for fish was the lowest, with on...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, if, so, while
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 12.0 7.0 171% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 3.0 5.60731707317 54% => OK
Preposition: 39.0 33.7804878049 115% => OK
Nominalization: 2.0 3.97073170732 50% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 916.0 965.302439024 95% => OK
No of words: 193.0 196.424390244 98% => OK
Chars per words: 4.74611398964 4.92477711251 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.72725689877 3.73543355544 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.80121664274 2.65546596893 105% => OK
Unique words: 112.0 106.607317073 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.580310880829 0.547539520022 106% => 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: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 1.07073170732 187% => OK
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 8.0 3.36585365854 238% => Less preposition wanted as sentence beginnings.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.4926829268 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 36.5604522219 43.030603864 85% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.777777778 112.824112599 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.4444444444 22.9334400587 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.22222222222 5.23603664747 42% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 3.83414634146 130% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 2.0 1.69756097561 118% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 3.0 3.70975609756 81% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 1.0 1.13902439024 88% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.09268292683 122% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.114587671191 0.215688989381 53% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0533854432738 0.103423049105 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0429545206667 0.0843802449381 51% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0690178682818 0.15604864568 44% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0292009124139 0.0819641961636 36% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.7 13.2329268293 88% => 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: 10.27 11.4140731707 90% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.87 8.06136585366 98% => OK
difficult_words: 39.0 40.7170731707 96% => 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?
---------------------
Maximum four paragraphs wanted.
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.