The chart illustrates consumption of three kinds of fast food by teenagers in Mauritius from 1985 to 2015.
The line graph illustrates three types of fast food by the youngsters in Mauritius from 1985 to 2015.
Overall, the Mauritian teenagers had turned their fast-food preference the other way around. From pizza to hamburger and fried chicken throughout the documented period.
In 1985, on average, a Mauritian teenager consumed more Pizza than the other two. This was 60 times eaten per year when compared to 10 and 5 which belong to hamburgers and fried chicken. However, as years passed, its popularity slipped at a gradually and reaches 10 per year in 2015.
On the other hand, a uniform increase can be noticed in the consumption pattern of hamburger among the Mauritian young adults, and this was at a constant rate of 10 in every five years to reach just over 70 by 2015.
Fried chicken on the other hand, the consumption pattern is seen increasing at an irregular rate. Between 1985 and 1990, the frequency of its consumption rose from 5 to 10 per year. In the next 5 years too, it doubled. A significant increase is noticed in its preference in the next 10 years (1995 to 2005), and this was from 20 to 60 per year. There was no significant increase in its popularity after that.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-09-26 | ililmaidatuz | 73 | view |
| 2023-03-11 | Giang Tran | 78 | view |
| 2023-03-03 | Anh15799 | 78 | view |
| 2023-03-03 | Anh15799 | 56 | view |
| 2023-02-19 | Giang Tran | 73 | view |
- You should spend about 20 minutes on this task The graph below shows the proportion of the population aged 65 and over between 1940 and 2040 in three different countries Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make compa 67
- Some people believe that the government should not spend money on international aid when they have their own disadvantaged people like the homeless and unemployed To what extent do you agree or disagree 78
- Pop stars earn much more than classical music performers Discuss both views and give your opinion 56
- The plan below shows the village of Pebbleton 20 years ago and now 11
- The charts show the main methods of transport of people travelling to one university in 2004 and 2009 Summarise the information be selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant 78
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 7.0 7.0 100% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 1.0 1.00243902439 100% => OK
Conjunction : 7.0 6.8 103% => OK
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 10.0 5.60731707317 178% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 39.0 33.7804878049 115% => OK
Nominalization: 5.0 3.97073170732 126% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 979.0 965.302439024 101% => OK
No of words: 209.0 196.424390244 106% => OK
Chars per words: 4.68421052632 4.92477711251 95% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.80221413058 3.73543355544 102% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.64336638019 2.65546596893 100% => OK
Unique words: 112.0 106.607317073 105% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.535885167464 0.547539520022 98% => OK
syllable_count: 279.0 283.868780488 98% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 3.0 1.53170731707 196% => OK
Article: 7.0 4.33902439024 161% => 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: 12.0 8.94146341463 134% => OK
Sentence length: 17.0 22.4926829268 76% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 41.3356854169 43.030603864 96% => OK
Chars per sentence: 81.5833333333 112.824112599 72% => OK
Words per sentence: 17.4166666667 22.9334400587 76% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.5 5.23603664747 48% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 3.83414634146 130% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 5.0 3.70975609756 135% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 7.0 4.09268292683 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.223577285823 0.215688989381 104% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0943288486202 0.103423049105 91% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.132802272379 0.0843802449381 157% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.173096039866 0.15604864568 111% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.168090955022 0.0819641961636 205% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 9.3 13.2329268293 70% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 79.6 61.2550243902 130% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 6.4 10.3012195122 62% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 9.57 11.4140731707 84% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.58 8.06136585366 94% => OK
difficult_words: 41.0 40.7170731707 101% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 6.5 11.4329268293 57% => Linsear_write_formula is low.
gunning_fog: 8.8 10.9970731707 80% => OK
text_standard: 7.0 11.0658536585 63% => The average readability is low. Need to imporve the language.
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum four paragraphs wanted.
Rates: 56.1797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.0 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.