The table below gives the information on median income per head that gained annually (in USD) in eight countries in Europe over a period of five years.
Overall, as can be seen, four countries in the European continent (Poland, Luxembourg , Belgium and Austria ) experienced a huge growth in revenues while three countries ( Greece,Italy and the UK) showed a significant decline in income growth. However, Netherlands did not see any changes for the given time period in comparison with rest of given countries.
Looking into more details, of the countries that experienced a marked improvement in annual earnings, Poland saw by far the biggest shift in yearly income starting at USD 18,000 reaching up to USD 22,000, a 22% growth in the given time period. Similarly, Luxembourg hit the chart as the second most wealthiest nation in the European region followed by Belgium reaching a comparatively higher point at 17% and 15% respectively .In 2008, whereas the figure for Luxembourg stood at USD 30,000 and has risen its income at 35,000 in 2018, Belgium’s growth in earnings per capita was USD 26,000 (2008) before it reached USD 30,000 in 2018. The lowest income among high earning nations was reported in Austria starting from USD 24,000 in 2008 increasing its wealth up to USD 27,000 in 2018.
By contrast, three countries in the table namely Greece ,Italy and the UK experienced a downward trend in revenues at 13%,12%, and 4% respectively. While Greece had to undergo the most notable negative development in terms of annual income , falling from USD 23,000 to USD 20,000 ( a 13% 0f decline) the second and third largest negative shift seen in both Italy and the UK dropping their income to 12% and 4% respectively, running the UK economy at its worst ,of the countries that hit the economy hardly . Surprisingly enough, Netherlands managed to remain the same In the process in given time.
(4 votes, average: 7.75 out of 9)
Loading...
Comments
Well done Deepika, very good Task 1 answer. Your introduction and overview are spot on. In your introduction, you paraphrase the question very well and your overview is very clear and looks at all of the categories. Your structure is also ideal. You have clear topic sentences and you link the countries very well using comparative and superlatives. This is great. However, this vocabulary is confusing: “hit the chart”. Also, sometimes your sentences are too long (this makes it confusing for the reader): “While Greece had to undergo the most notable negative development in terms of annual income , falling from USD 23,000 to USD 20,000 ( a 13% 0f decline) the second and third largest negative shift seen in both Italy and the UK dropping their income to 12% and 4% respectively, running the UK economy at its worst ,of the countries that hit the economy hardly”. Can you break this down into 2 sentences?
Thanks a million Sir Hardie! I tried to seperate that long sentence in to two.
I did it already, perhaps I could use Luxembourg highlighted in the chart as the second most wealthiest nation in the European region followed by the Belgium reaching a comparatively higher point at 17% and 15% respectively.
That sounds great! Although be careful: you should say “second wealthiest” (not “second most wealthiest”)
Got it Sir Eli! Thanks!
Nice one! Although, your punctuation is still confusing. You seem to have a space before full stops. Like here: “hardly . Surprisingly”. Have a look at the lesson on punctuation for Task 1: https://englishprotips.com/lessons/punctuation-for-task-1/
Thanks very much! I tried to clear the confusion up.
Greece had to undergo the most difficult time in terms of economy falling from USD 23,000 to USD 20,000, a 13% of decline between 2008 and 2013. The second and third largest downward shift seen in both Italy and the UK dropping their incomes to 12% and 4% respectively, particularly running the UK’s economy at its worst, of the countries that hit hardly.
Good. Here are some small changes to make it sound better. Greece had to undergo the most difficult DOWNTURN in THE economy: IT FELL from USD 23,000 to USD 20,000, a 13% of decline between 2008 and 2013. The second and third largest downward shift CAN BE SEEN in both Italy and the UK WHICH SAW A REDUCTION IN their incomes BY 12% and 4%, respectively.
I owe you one!
Simply everyone mentioned all the strong points and weak points of your writing. However, I want to add a bit more regarding the used of present perfect in your writing “Luxembourg stood at USD 30,000 and has risen its income at 35,000 in 2018”. Since, it is a comparison of the years 2008 and 2013 which means it is not continuing until the present time, I think present perfect should be used in this context.
*I think present perfect should NOT be used in this context.