The line graph below shows the consumption of a range of foods per person in Australia between 1939 and 1999.
Summarise the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.
This line graph illustrates the amount of various types of foods consumed by per capita in Australia over from 1939 to 1999. The units are measured in kilograms per person per year.
Regarding vegetables and fruit, in 1939, they commenced at just over 140 and 80, respectively. The following two decades the former declined significantly to just under 120 compared to the latter which reached a peak in 1949, before decreasing to 1939-year figure in 1959. By 1999, fruit consumption had risen to 160; similarly, there was an increase in the vegetables consumption to 160 with some fluctuations in the final year.
In contrast, Australian consumed less amount of meat, bread and seafood. The figure for meat began at nearly 110, which reached a peak in 1979, before dipping to 80 in 1999. As for bread, there was a slight increase from 40 to 60 over the given period. However, seafood was always the least demanding type of food, which varied from about 17-20 over the 60-year period.
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 106, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...consumed by per capita in Australia over from 1939 to 1999. The units are measure...
^^
Line 3, column 359, Rule ID: POSSESIVE_APOSTROPHE[1]
Message: Possible typo: apostrophe is missing. Did you mean 'vegetables'' or 'vegetable's'?
Suggestion: vegetables'; vegetable's
...similarly, there was an increase in the vegetables consumption to 160 with some fluctuatio...
^^^^^^^^^^
Line 4, column 1, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... some fluctuations in the final year. In contrast, Australian consumed less am...
^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
however, if, regarding, similarly, so, as for, in contrast
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 4.0 7.0 57% => More to be verbs wanted.
Auxiliary verbs: 0.0 1.00243902439 0% => OK
Conjunction : 3.0 6.8 44% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 3.0 3.15609756098 95% => OK
Pronoun: 2.0 5.60731707317 36% => 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: 822.0 965.302439024 85% => OK
No of words: 168.0 196.424390244 86% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 4.89285714286 4.92477711251 99% => OK
Fourth root words length: 3.60020574368 3.73543355544 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.59575682889 2.65546596893 98% => OK
Unique words: 107.0 106.607317073 100% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.636904761905 0.547539520022 116% => OK
syllable_count: 229.5 283.868780488 81% => 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: 3.0 4.33902439024 69% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 1.07073170732 280% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 0.482926829268 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 3.36585365854 178% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 9.0 8.94146341463 101% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.4926829268 80% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 37.3832338467 43.030603864 87% => OK
Chars per sentence: 91.3333333333 112.824112599 81% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.6666666667 22.9334400587 81% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.44444444444 5.23603664747 123% => OK
Paragraphs: 3.0 3.83414634146 78% => More paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 3.0 1.69756097561 177% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 6.0 3.70975609756 162% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 0.0 1.13902439024 0% => More negative sentences wanted.
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: 0.13762179016 0.215688989381 64% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.059420405192 0.103423049105 57% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0697908565653 0.0843802449381 83% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.116078450069 0.15604864568 74% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0981658095763 0.0819641961636 120% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 10.9 13.2329268293 82% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 70.13 61.2550243902 114% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 6.51609756098 48% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 7.9 10.3012195122 77% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.08 11.4140731707 97% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.91 8.06136585366 98% => OK
difficult_words: 36.0 40.7170731707 88% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.0 11.4329268293 96% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 10.9970731707 84% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.0658536585 99% => 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.