Ielts writing task 1

[rynana]

The chart illustrates the expenditure on fish and different kinds of meat namely lamb, beef and chicken in a European region from 1979 to 2004.

It can be seen that the quantitive of lamb and beef consumption declined over a 25-year period. Whereas the amount of chicken expenditure significantly increased and there was a fluctuation in the consumption of fish at about 50 grams per person per week.

Obviously, in 1979 the proportion of beef consumed stood at more than 200 grams per person per week, was 4 times as much as the figure for fish consumed . while the expenditures on chicken and lamb were at the same rate, around 150 grams per person per week. After that, there was a slight increase in the quantitive of chicken and beef consumption in the 1984s. In contrast, a gradual decrease was witnessed between 1979 and 1989 in the expenditure on lamb and fish.

Over the next 15 years starting from 1989, fish consumption maintains stably around 50 grams per person per week. Beef and lamp expenditure dramatically declined at 100 and 60 grams per person per week, respectively. Conversely, in 2004, the amount of chicken consumed rose to nearly 200 grams per person per week.

[Luschen]

Hi Rynana, your report started off well, but towards the end your descriptions didn’t seem to match the chart. You were stating how the graphs for lamb and fish were similar between 1979 and 1989, but to me they look quite different. Plus, you say chicken and lamb started at the same point, so I expected you to show how significantly they diverged, but instead you started talking about beef. Plus, you said that fish steadily decreased from 1979 to 1989, but the decrease really took place from 1979 to 1984, after which it stabilized, at least until around 1994. Overall, your descriptions did not seem that organized. Instead of saying “in the 1980’s this is what happened to these two products, and then in the 90’s this happened to these two products” it would seem to make more sense to explain exactly how the four different products fluctuated throughout the entire period. Also, be aware that “expenditure” does not really work as a synonym for consumption here. Here are some other suggestions:

@rynana

The chart illustrates the expenditure {this is not really the right word, because the graph does not show the amount spent on these items} on fish and different kinds of meat[,] namely lamb, beef and chicken[,] in a European region {“nation” is a better synonym for country here} from 1979 to 2004.

It can be seen that the [quantity] of lamb and beef consumption declined over a 25-year period. Whereas the amount of chicken [eaten] expenditure significantly increased [while] there was a fluctuation in the consumption of fish [stayed comparatively flat] at about 50 grams per person per week.

Obviously,{this is not the best word here - “clearly” or “It is clear that in 1979 …” is better} in 1979 the proportion of beef consumed stood at more than 200 grams per person per week, [which] was 4 times as much as the figure for fish consumed . [Meanwhile,] {this was a sentence fragment before with “while” - meanwhile turns it into an independent sentence} the [usage of] chicken and lamb [began in 1979] at the same rate, [at] around 150 grams per person per week. After that, there was a [significant] increase in the [amount] of chicken and beef consumption in the [1980s and continuing for the remainder of the period shown]. In contrast, a [fairly rapid] decrease was witnessed between 1979 and [2004] in the [utilization of] lamb and fish.

[After an initial sharp decline, ]over the next [20] years starting from [1984], fish consumption [maintained] [a stable rate of] around 50 grams per person per week. Beef and lamp [usage] dramatically declined[, ending in 2004] at 100 and 60 grams per person per week, respectively. Conversely, [by] 2004, {the rise did not take place entirely in 2004, and in fact the consumption declined just a little in 2004} the amount of chicken consumed [had risen] to nearly 200 grams per person per week.