The chart below shows the percentage of their food budget the average family spent on restaurant meals in different years. The graph shows the number of meals eaten in fast food restaurants and sit down restaurants.
The given chart represents the ratio of the financial estimate on the food used for restaurant meals by the average family in various years. The line graph illustrates the number of meals eaten in fast food restaurants and sit-down restaurants. From the general perspective, it is observed that there was an increase in the budget spent on restaurant meals. In contrast, there was a decline in the budget spent on home cooking.
During the time period from 1970 to 2000, there was about 10% food budget used for restaurant meals which was hiked to about half of the food budget by the year 2000. On the other hand, the budget spent on home cooking was decreased from 90% to 50%. The line graph shows the comparison of the fast food to sit down restaurants during the same period. The number of meals per annum in sit don restaurants increased from 20 to nearly about 50. Following the same trajectory, the number of meals per annum in fast food restaurants increased slightly of about 10 during the first decade and dramatically elevated to above 50 and above 80 in the years 1990 and 2000 respectively.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...in the budget spent on home cooking. During the time period from 1970 to 2000...
^^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
first, so, in contrast, on the other hand
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 6.0 7.0 86% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 6.8 59% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 2.0 3.15609756098 63% => OK
Pronoun: 2.0 5.60731707317 36% => OK
Preposition: 43.0 33.7804878049 127% => OK
Nominalization: 0.0 3.97073170732 0% => More nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 915.0 965.302439024 95% => OK
No of words: 194.0 196.424390244 99% => OK
Chars per words: 4.71649484536 4.92477711251 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.73207559907 3.73543355544 100% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.55437726955 2.65546596893 96% => OK
Unique words: 96.0 106.607317073 90% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.494845360825 0.547539520022 90% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 267.3 283.868780488 94% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.4 1.45097560976 96% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 1.0 1.53170731707 65% => OK
Article: 6.0 4.33902439024 138% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 1.07073170732 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 3.36585365854 119% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 21.0 22.4926829268 93% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.000257201 43.030603864 112% => OK
Chars per sentence: 101.666666667 112.824112599 90% => OK
Words per sentence: 21.5555555556 22.9334400587 94% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.55555555556 5.23603664747 87% => OK
Paragraphs: 2.0 3.83414634146 52% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 1.0 1.69756097561 59% => 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: 4.0 4.09268292683 98% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.463191578472 0.215688989381 215% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.212303380355 0.103423049105 205% => Sentence topic similarity is high.
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.138050155366 0.0843802449381 164% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.403287244008 0.15604864568 258% => Maybe some contents are duplicated.
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0880359822022 0.0819641961636 107% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 11.6 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: 10.1 11.4140731707 88% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.36 8.06136585366 91% => OK
difficult_words: 33.0 40.7170731707 81% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 9.0 11.4329268293 79% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.4 10.9970731707 95% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.0658536585 81% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 61.797752809 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 5.5 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.