The graph below shows the consumption of fish and some different kinds of meat in a European country between 1979 and 2004.
Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features and make comparisons where relevant.
The line graph aims to compare how many grams of fish, lamb, beef, and chicken were consumed per week in a European country from 1979 to 2004.
Overall, there was a general decrease in the consumption of fish, beef, and lamb with the consumption of beef witnessing the most dramatic decline, while the depletion of chicken saw a dramatic increase during the years examined. In addition, the exhaustion of fish consistently had the lowest figure during the period.
About 240 grams of beef were consumed per person per week in 1979, with subsequent growth to just under 250 grams in 1984, and a final drop to approximately 105 grams in 2004. Similarly, the figure for the depletion of lamb was 150 grams per person per week in 1979, followed by a gradual decline to roughly 50 grams at the end of the period.
The utilization of chicken started at the north of 150 grams, after which it experienced a rise to around 200 grams per person per week in 1989, surpassing beef to have the highest consumption from 1989 onwards, before ending the period at its peak (about 250 grams of chicken were consumed per person per week). Conversely, the figure for the exhaustion of fish fluctuated in the range from 45 to 55 grams from 1979 to 1999, ending at 50 grams per person per week in 2004.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
conversely, similarly, so, while, in addition
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 5.0 7.0 71% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 6.8 44% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 1.0 3.15609756098 32% => OK
Pronoun: 2.0 5.60731707317 36% => OK
Preposition: 50.0 33.7804878049 148% => OK
Nominalization: 9.0 3.97073170732 227% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1057.0 965.302439024 109% => OK
No of words: 229.0 196.424390244 117% => OK
Chars per words: 4.61572052402 4.92477711251 94% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.89008302616 3.73543355544 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.47939584354 2.65546596893 93% => OK
Unique words: 108.0 106.607317073 101% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.471615720524 0.547539520022 86% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 297.0 283.868780488 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.3 1.45097560976 90% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 0.0 1.53170731707 0% => OK
Article: 5.0 4.33902439024 115% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 0.482926829268 621% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 5.0 3.36585365854 149% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 7.0 8.94146341463 78% => 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: 32.0 22.4926829268 142% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively long.
Sentence length SD: 65.060097806 43.030603864 151% => OK
Chars per sentence: 151.0 112.824112599 134% => OK
Words per sentence: 32.7142857143 22.9334400587 143% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.42857142857 5.23603664747 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 4.0 3.83414634146 104% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 1.69756097561 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 2.0 3.70975609756 54% => More positive sentences wanted.
Sentences with negative sentiment : 2.0 1.13902439024 176% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.09268292683 73% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.0815713168829 0.215688989381 38% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0554813923153 0.103423049105 54% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0460139788748 0.0843802449381 55% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0749587364787 0.15604864568 48% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0510192597657 0.0819641961636 62% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 16.7 13.2329268293 126% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 64.38 61.2550243902 105% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 6.51609756098 135% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.2 10.3012195122 118% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 10.11 11.4140731707 89% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.57 8.06136585366 94% => OK
difficult_words: 34.0 40.7170731707 84% => More difficult words wanted.
linsear_write_formula: 13.0 11.4329268293 114% => OK
gunning_fog: 14.8 10.9970731707 135% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.0658536585 117% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 67.4157303371 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 6.0 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.