Describing line graphs

Describing Line Graphs (1)

Look at the following simple line graph:

It shows the population of Denmark from 1996 to 2007. You can see that in 1996 the
population was 5.25 million and that by the year 2007 it had grown to 5.45 million.

When you write about a line chart it is important to look first at the Chart Title. This tells
you what information the graph displays and you can use this information in your
description.

Then look at the X and Y axes. The titles of these axes sometimes give you information
you can use in your description. It is important also to look at the UNITS. On the Y-axis
in this graph the units are millions. The population of Denmark in 1996 was not 5.25, but
5.25 million people.

Line graphs describe change. When describing these graphs you must answer the
question, "What changed?". In this case we can see that the population of Denmark
increased from 1996 to 2007.

We can also ask the question, "How did the population change?". Because the line is
fairly smooth, we can say that the population increased steadily.

Lastly, we can ask the question, "How much?". In this case, "How big was the change in
population?" The population in 1996 was 5.25 million and in 2007 it was 2.45 million. So
there was an increase of 0.2 million or 200,000 people.

To write a short description of this graph ask yourself
(and answer!) the following questions:
1. What exactly does the graph show? (Use the chart title to help you answer this
question)
2. What are the axes and what are the units?
3. What changed?
4. How much did it change?

Answering these questions will help you to write a short description of this simple graph.

Here is an example:

This graph shows population change in Denmark from 1996 to 2007. Denmark's
population grew steadily from 5.25 million in 1996 to 5.45 million in 2007, an increase of
200,000 people.

Vocabulary
Other words you can use instead of increased or grew are rose and went up.

Adverbs you can use with these words are:

How? How much?
by X% (by X per
dramatically, significantly, considerably, rapidly,
cent), by X (units),
increased substantially, steadily, sharply, markedly, greatly,
from X to Y, tenfold,
slightly, exponentially, proportionally, strongly
fourfold ...
by X% (by X per
rapidly, steadily, slowly, gradually, dramatically,
grew cent), by X (units),
substantially, enormously, quickly
from X to Y
sharply, slowly, steadily, slightly, rapidly, quickly, by X% (by X per
rose dramatically, significantly, substantially, gently, cent), by X (units),
fractionally, considerably, gradually from X to Y
by X% (by X per
went up The above adverbs are not usually used with "went up". cent), by X (units),
from X to Y

Describing Line Graphs (2)

Look at the following simple line graph:

It shows the population of Hungary from 1996 to 2007. You can see that in 1996 the
population was more than 10.3 million and that by the year 2007 it had fallen to just over
10.05 million.

What change is shown by this graph? In this case we can see that the population of
Hungary decreased from 1996 to 2007.

Also in this graph the line is fairly smooth, so we can say that the population decreased
steadily.

How big was the change in population? The population in 1996 was 10.32 million and in
2007 it was 10.07 million. So there was a decrease of 0.25 million or 250,000 people.

question)
3. What changed?

Answering these questions will help you to write a short description of this simple graph.

Here is an example:
This graph shows population change in Hungary from 1996 to 2007. Hungary's
population fell steadily from 10.32 million in 1996 to 10.07 million in 2007, a decrease of
250,000 people.

Vocabulary
Other words you can use instead of fell or decreased are declined, dropped and went
down .

Adverbs you can use with these words are:

How? How much?
sharply, heavily, slightly, steadily, dramatically,
significantly, considerably, quickly, rapidly, steeply, by X% (by X per cent),
fell gradually, gently, substantially, precipitately, by X (units), from X to
fractionally, drastically, marginally, markedly, Y, tenfold, fourfold ...
progressively, continuously
by X% (by X per cent),
significantly, markedly, slightly, steadily, rapidly,
decreased by X (units), from X to
considerably, continuously, dramatically,
Y, tenfold, fourfold ...
sharply, rapidly, dramatically, steadily, slightly, by X% (by X per cent),
declined markedly, significantly, considerably, steeply, by X (units), from X to
drastically, continuously, substantially, quickly Y

dramatically, sharply, slightly, considerably, steadily,
significantly, rapidly, drastically, alarmingly,
dropped by X (units), from X to
noticeably, markedly, radically, abruptly,
Y
substantially, gradually, gently, slowly
went The above adverbs are not usually used with "went
by X (units), from X to
down down ".
Y

Describing Line Graphs (3) - Using Adverbs

The following graphs illustrate the use of
some adverbs:

• The population rose slowly. (small increase in the population over the period)
• The population rose steadily. (little or no variation in the rate of growth)
• The population rose slightly. (small increase in the population over the period)
• The population rose gently. (small increase in the population over the period)
• The population rose gradually. (small increase in the population over the period)

• From 1996 to 1998, the population increased dramatically.
• From 1996 to 1998, the population increased significantly.
• From 1996 to 1998, the population increased considerably.
• From 1996 to 1998, the population increased rapidly.
• From 1996 to 1998, the population increased substantially.
• From 1996 to 1998, the population increased markedly.
• From 1996 to 1998, the population increased greatly.
• After 1998, the population grew more slowly.

• From 1996 to 1998, the population grew from 9.9 million to 10.25 million.
• From 1996 to 1998, the population grew by 0.35 million.
• From 1996 to 1998, the population grew by 350,000.
• From 1996 to 1998, the population grew by 3.535%.

• From 1998 to 2007, the population grew by 0.05 million.
• From 1998 to 2007, the population grew by 50,000.
• From 1998 to 2007, the population grew by 0.488%

• Overall, the population went up from 9.9 million to 10.3 million.
• Overall, the population went up by 0.4 million.
• Overall, the population went up by 400,000.
• Overall, the population went up by 4.04%.

Describing Line Graphs (4) - Using Verbs and Nouns

So far, we have only used verbs to
describe these line graphs but we can also
use nouns. We change the adverbs into
adjectives.

• The population rose slowly. There was a slow rise in the population.
• The population rose steadily. There was a steady rise in the population.
• The population rose slightly. There was a slight rise in the population.
• The population rose gently. There was a gentle rise in the population.
• The population rose gradually. There was a gradual rise in the population.

• From 1996 to 1998, the population increased dramatically. From 1996 to 1998
there was a dramatic increase in the population.
• From 1996 to 1998, the population increased significantly. From 1996 to 1998
there was a significant increase in the population.

• From 1996 to 1998, the population increased considerably. From 1996 to 1998
there was a considerable increase in the population.
• From 1996 to 1998, the population increased rapidly. From 1996 to 1998 there
was a rapid increase in the population.
• From 1996 to 1998, the population increased substantially. From 1996 to 1998
there was a substantial increase in the population.
• From 1996 to 1998, the population increased markedly. From 1996 to 1998
there was a dramatic increase in the population.
• From 1996 to 1998, the population increased greatly. From 1996 to 1998 there
was a great increase in the population.
• After 1998, the population grew more slowly. After 1998, the population growth
was slower.

• From 1996 to 1998, the population rose from 9.9 million to 10.25 million. From
1996 to 1998, there was a rise in population from 9.9 million to 10.25 million.
• From 1996 to 1998, the population rose by 0.35 million. From 1996 to 1998,
there was a rise in population of 0.35 million.
• From 1996 to 1998, the population rose by 350,000. From 1996 to 1998, there
was a rise in population of 350,000.
• From 1996 to 1998, the population rose by 3.535%. From 1996 to 1998, there
was a rise in population of 3.535 per cent.

From 1998 to 2007, there was a growth in population from 10.25 million to
10.30 million.
• From 1998 to 2007, the population grew by 0.05 million. From 1998 to 2007,
there was a growth in population of 0.05 million.
• From 1998 to 2007, the population grew by 50,000. From 1998 to 2007, there
was a growth in population of 50,000.
• From 1998 to 2007, the population grew by 0.488%. From 1998 to 2007, there
was a growth in population of 0.488 per cent.

• Overall, the population went up from 9.9 million to 10.3 million. Overall, there
was a growth in population from 9.9 million to 10.3 million.
• Overall, the population went up by 0.4 million. Overall, there was an increase
in population of 0.4 million.
• Overall, the population went up by 400,000. Overall, there was a rise in
population of 400,000.
• Overall, the population went up by 4.04%. Overall, there was a growth in
population of 4.04 per cent .

Instead of "growth in population" you can also say "population growth".

Describing Line Graphs (5) - Making Comparisons

This graph shows the change in population in two countries from 1996 to 2007. In
describing this graph it is important to describe change as in any other graph, but it is also
necessary to make comparisons between the two countries.

What changes are shown by this graph? In this case we can see that the population of
Austria increased from 1996 to 2007.

Also in this graph the Austrian line is fairly smooth, so we can say that the population
increased steadily.

How big was the change in Austria's population? The population in 1996 was 7.95
million and in 2007 it was 8.3 million. So there was an increase of 0.35 million or
350,000 people.

By contrast, the population of Bulgaria decreased from 1996 to 2007.

This change did not happen at the same rate. The population declined steadily from 1996
to 2001, but from 2001 to 2002 the rate of decline was steeper. From 2002 to 2007 the
population fell at a similar rate to the 1996 - 2001 period.

How far did Bulgaria's population fall? The population in 1996 was nearly 8 million and
in 2007 it was 7.7 million. So there was an decrease of nearly 0.7 million or 700,000
people.

What similarities or differences are there between the populations of Austria and
Bulgaria?

Austria Bulgaria
Austria's population grew from 1996 to
Bulgaria's population fell from 1996 to 2007.
2007.
Austria's population growth was fairly The rate of decline in Bulgaria's population
steady over the 1996 - 2007 period. varied over the 1996 - 2007 period.
Austria's population increased by 350,000. Bulgaria's population declined by 700,000

question)
3. What changed?
5. What comparisons can you make between the two data series?

Answering these questions will help you to write a short description of this graph.

Here is an example:
This graph shows population change in Austria and Bulgaria from 1996 to 2007.
Austria's population grew steadily from 7.95 million in 1996 to 8.3 million in 2007, a
increase of 350,000 people.

By contrast, Bulgaria's population fell over the same period. The population declined
steadily from 1996 to 2001, but from 2001 to 2002 the rate of decline was steeper. From
2002 to 2007 the population fell at a similar rate to the 1996 - 2001 period.

While Austria's population grew by 350,000, Bulgaria's fell by twice that number,
700,000, a decline of nearly 10%.

Describing Bar Charts and Column Charts (1)

Bar charts and column charts are similar:
only their orientations differ. A bar chart
is orientated horizontally, whereas a
column chart is arranged vertically.
Sometimes "bar chart" refers to both
forms.
These types of charts are usually used for comparison purposes (unlike line charts, which
describe change).

Observe the following chart :

It shows the populations of various European countries in the year 2007. The populations
are only for one year, 2007, and so we cannot make any comments about change in
population: we can only compare one county with another.

When you write about a bar or column chart it is important to look first at the Chart Title.
This tells you what information the chart displays and you can use this information in
your description.

Then look at the X and Y axes. The titles of these axes sometimes give you information
you can use in your description. It is important also to look at the UNITS. On the Y-axis
in this chart the units are millions. The population of Belgium in 2007 was not 10, but 10
million people.

Bar and column charts show similarities and differences. When describing these charts
you need to make comparisons.

You also need to group together any columns which have broad similarities.

1. What exactly does the chart show? (Use the chart title to help you answer this
question)
3. What similarities are there?
4. Is it possible to put some of the columns into one or more groups?
5. What differences are there?

Answering these questions will help you to write a short description of this simple
column chart.

Here is an example:
This chart shows the populations of some European countries in 2007. The country with
the largest population is Germany, with over 80 million people whereas Estonia has the
smallest population, at little more than a million. Belgium, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic,
Denmark, Estonia and Ireland all have populations or ten million or less, while Greece
has a population of about eleven million. Apart from Germany, the largest countries are
Spain, France and Italy with populations ranging from about forty-four to sixty-three
million. Together, the four largest countries account for over eighty per cent of the
population of the countries shown.

Vocabulary
To make comparisons, you need to know the comparatives and superlatives of
common adjectives. Here are some examples:

Adjective Comparative Superlative
bad worse worst
big bigger biggest
expensive more expensive most expensive
good better best
great greater greatest
high higher highest
large larger largest
little less least
long longer longest
low lower lowest
many more most
much more most
new newer newest
old older oldest
poor poorer poorest
rich richer richest
short shorter shortest
small small smallest
strong stronger strongest
weak weaker weakest

To signal comparison and contrast within a sentence you can use the following
conjunctions:

as ....... as, not as ......... as, not so ........ as, whereas, but, while, although

To signal comparison and contrast between sentences you can use the following
words and phrases:

However, By contrast, On the other hand, In comparison


Bar charts and column charts are often
used to make multiple comparisons.

Observe the following chart :

It shows the populations of major European countries in the years 1996 and 2007. In this
case we can make two sets of comparisons. We can look at the change in population from
1996 to 2007 for each country, and we can compare the populations of the various
countries in each year.

Look at the Y axis. You can see that it starts at 30, not zero. Sometimes charts are
formatted like this in order to make the differences more obvious. To see a comparison,
see the next page.

In general, when describing a chart of this type, you should describe the most important
change first. Then you can compare individual items (in this case, countries).

The most important information on this chart is that in all countries, except Poland, the
population increased from 1996 to 2007.

Now you can compare individual countries and you can compare two things: You can
compare sizes of populations and you can compare the change in populations from 1996
to 2007. We'll concentrate on the change in population.

You can compare the largest change and the smallest change: The largest change was in
Turkey, where the population rose from about 62 to about 73 million, whereas the
smallest increase was in Germany where the population of nearly 82 million rose by half
a million. Spain also had a fairly large increase from 39.4 million to 44.5 million.

It is important to mention any exceptions to the changes you describe. In this case, the
exception is Poland where the population fell very slightly in the period described.

1. What exactly does the chart show? (Use the chart title to help you answer this
question)
3. What changes are there?
4. What similarities are there?
5. Is it possible to put some of the columns into one or more groups?
6. What exceptions are there?

Answering these questions will help you to write a short description of this simple
column chart. For example:

This chart shows the populations of major European countries in 1996 and 2007. In all
countries except Poland the population rose in this period. The largest rise was in Turkey
where the population increased from over 62 to over 73 million, whereas the smallest
increase was in Germany where the population of 82 million rose by a few thousand.
Spain also had a fairly large increase from 39.4 million to 44.5 million, and France was
not far behind with an increase of almost 4 million. In the other two countries, Italy and
the United Kingdom, population growth was more modest with increases of about 2.3
and 2.8 million respectively. In Poland, the population fell by half a million. Poland had
the smallest population in both 1996 and 2007. Although Spain and Portugal had
comparable populations in 1996, Spain's population is now nearly six and a half million
greater than Poland's.

Vocabulary
You can see that where there is a change over time, you need to use some of the
vocabulary used to describe line graphs (rose, increased, decreased, etc).

For comparing and contrasting, you need the vocabulary of comparison


It is important to look at the axes of
graphs and charts

Observe the following charts:

These two charts show EXACTLY the same information. However, it is easier to see the
differences in the first chart because the Y axis starts at 30, not zero. Sometimes charts
are formatted like this in order to make the differences more obvious.

Describing Pie Charts (1)

Pie Charts normally illustrate proportion

Pie Charts normally show proportion, which can be measured in percentages or fractions.

This chart shows the relative size of populations of countries of the European Union in
2007. So we can only make comparisons; we cannot say anything about change.

We can see that the country with the largest population was Germany with 16.6% of the
European Union's population. We can also see that the second largest population was that
of France with 12.8% of the population.

We do NOT know from this chart which country has the smallest population because the
21 smallest countries are included in one group. (If you're interested, it is Malta with less
than 0.1 per cent.)

You can see that the four largest countries (Germany, France, the United Kingdom and
Italy) together make up more than half of the European Union's population.

You CANNOT say that Poland has the smallest population: 21 other countries have
populations smaller than Poland's.

The twenty-one smallest countries of the European Union make up nearly 30% of the
population.

Describing Pie Charts (2) - Making Comparisons

If two or more similar pie charts are
displayed, you can make comparisons

This chart shows the relative size of populations of countries of the European Union in
both 1998 and 2007. In this case we can make two sets of comparisons:

1. We can make comparisons between the countries in each year.
2. We can make comparisons between the two years (i.e. examine any changes from
1998 to 2007).

In this case, we'll look at comparisons between the two years.

The first thing to notice is that there is very little change: all changes amount to less than
1%.

The second change to notice is which countries' populations grew (as a proportion of the
whole) and which countries' populations shrank.

You can see that both Germany's and Poland's populations share of the European Union's
Population fell from 1998 to 2007 ( from 17.1% to 16.6 % and from 8% to 7.7%,
respectively).

The percentage populations of the other major countries of the European Union grew in
this period. The largest growth in population share was that of Spain which increased its
share from 8.3% to 9%. Both the UK's and Italy's share of the EU population grew by
only 0.1%.

In spite of the change in Germany's population share, it remained the largest population
of the European Union.

Note that you CANNOT say that Germany's population fell or that France's population
grew. These charts only show population share, not population numbers.

The following table shows actual population numbers:

As you can see, in all these countries except Poland, the populations increased between
1998 and 2007.

Describing Tables

This table shows the percentage of women in tertiary
education in selected countries from 1998 to 2005 :

Observing trends in a table is not as easy as it is when you examine a graph, so you need
to look carefully. The most striking thing to notice is that in all countries except Japan
women made up significantly more than half of the student population in tertiary
education.

In general, the trend was for an increasing percentage of women in tertiary education.
The only exception to this was Bulgaria where the trend is in reverse: in 1998, 60.9% of
the tertiary student population was made up of women, whereas by 2005 this figure had
fallen to 52.1%.

The country with the highest percentage of women in tertiary education was Iceland and
this was also the country with the largest increase, rising from from 60% to 64.9%.

The largest percentage change was that of Bulgaria, from 60.9% to 52.1%, a 14.4% drop.

The lowest rise was in Finland, where, although the percentage fluctuated over the period
in question, the percentage rose from 53.5 to 53.6.

Using Approximation

Graphs, charts and tables often give a large number of
quite precise figures (1.54379, 53.25%, 100,001, etc.).
You don't always need to give the same level of
precision when you write your description. However, it
is important to indicate that the figures you are giving
are not exact. You can do this by using words such as
approximately, about, just over, just under, etc.

If you want to indicate an approximate
figure you can use:

about, roughly, approximately, around

Figure Approximation
100,005 about one hundred thousand
60.04% roughly sixty per cent
40.5°C approximately 40 degrees Celsius
£502.02 around five hundred pounds

To indicate that a figure is less than your
approximation you can use:

under, less than, below, almost

Qualifying
Adverb Figure Approximation
Adverb
just under a hundred thousand
just, a little,
under 99,998 a little under a hundred thousand
slightly,
slightly under a hundred thousand
slightly, a little, less than 58.4 seconds slightly less than a minute
just, a bit,
a little less than a minute

just less than a minute

a bit less than a minute
below 9.7% just below ten per cent
just, slightly,
slightly below ten per cent
marginally
marginally below ten per cent
——— almost €14.9bn almost 15 billion Euros

To indicate that a figure is more than
your approximation you can use:

over, more than, above

Qualifying
Adverb
just over one hundred thousand

a little over one hundred thousand
just, a little,
over 100,008
slightly, not much, slightly over on hundred thousand

not much over one hundred
thousand
a little more than twenty-four hours

a bit more than twenty-four hours
a little, a bit, 24 hours 6
more than
slightly, barely minutes slightly more than twenty-four
hours

barely more than twenty-four hours

just above thirty-two degrees
Fahrenheit

a little over thirty-two degrees
Fahrenheit
just, a little,
above 32.1°F
barely, marginally
barely thirty-two degrees
Fahrenheit

marginally above thirty-two
degrees Fahrenheit

Other words your can use to indicate
approximation are:

nearly, close to, approaching

nearly 99,998 nearly one hundred thousand
close to 9.8% close to ten per cent
approaching €14.7bn approaching fifteen billion Euros

To indicate precision you can use:

precisely, exactly

precisely thirty-two point one
precisely 32.1°F
degrees Fahrenheit
exactly two point five
exactly 2.5 cm
centimetres

Describing Trends

A trend is a general direction or tendency.
It is important to identify trends when
you write a description of graphical
information.

On a simple chart like this it is easy to see that the trend
was upwards (there was an upwards trend):

Similarly it is easy to see that the trend in the following
graph was downwards (there was a downwards trend):

Sometimes the trend is less obvious and you have to
read the graph carefully

In this case you can see that wood production in Italy from 1994 to 2005 went up and
down (fluctuated). But overall production declined, from nearly 9.5 thousand cubic
metres in 1995 to just over eight thousand cubic metres in 2005. The trend is downwards.
Production declined over this period. A program like Microsoft Excel can provide a
trendline to show the data series trend:

When describing a graph of this type you should state what the overall trend is (upwards,
downward or unchanging), and mention the initial and final figures. You should also
mention the lowest and highest points reached. For example, wood production in Italy
reached a peak of over eleven thousand cubic metres in 1999. The lowest amount of
wood produced in one year was seven and a half thousand cubic metres in 2002.

Projections

Not all graphs give information about the
past: some give estimated figures of
future data. For example:

This graph shows the population of the United Kingdom from the year 2005 to the year
2050 measured at five year intervals. But the only figure which we can be sure about is
the one for 2005 (59.9 million). All the other figures are in the future and they are
estimates (what we, or the population statisticians, think the population will be). These
estimates are called projections. So we can say that the UK population is projected to
rise to just under 65 million in 2035. In 2040 it is estimated to remain at just under 65
million, after which it is projected to decline.

You can see that it is important to look at the axes in order to decide whether the data in
the graph is a projection or not.

Sometimes projected data is indicated by a dotted or
dashed line, as in the following example:

Here we can see that the population of Denmark is projected to rise to 5.5 million in
2010, after which it is projected to remain stable.

Checklist for Writing about Charts, Graphs and Tables

ASK YOURSELF (AND ANSWER!) THE
FOLLOWING QUESTIONS:

1. What exactly does the chart/graph/table show?
Use the title, and possibly the axes, to answer this question.

For example:

This graph shows the price of computer memory from 1990 to 2007.
This graph illustrates the price of computer memory from 1990 to 2007.
These graphs illustrate the price of computer memory from 1990 to 2007.

2. What are the axes and what are the units (for graphs
and charts)?

You don't have to include this information in your description but asking yourself the
question helps you to avoid errors.

For example:

This X axis shows time in years and the Y axis show price per kilobyte of memory in
dollars.

3. Are there any obvious trends?
If there is an obvious trend, it is important to mention this.

For example:

You can see from this graph that the price of computer memory fell steadily over the
period in question.

4. Is there any significant information?
Look for obvious differences such as the largest, the smallest .

For example:

Sweden had the largest proportion of people using the Internet in 1999.

5. Are there any obvious exceptions to general trends?
You won't normally see a graph with a straight line; most will fluctuate in some way or
another. Once you have identified a trend, point out the exceptions.

For example:

Although the number of cinema goers increased from 1990 to 1998, there were slight falls
in 1992 and 1995.

6. What conclusions can you draw from the information
presented in the graphs / tables / charts?
Be careful not to draw conclusions which are not supported by the information in the
graphs / charts / tables.

For example:

It is clear from the information presented in these charts that Internet use is increasing
worldwide and will probably continue to do so as the price of Internet access falls.

Other language you could use:
The data suggest / show that ...

The most significant fact is that ...

In spite of this increase / decrease, .....

This could well be due to ...

This is supported by the fact that ...

An important point to note is that ...

It is quite clear form this data that ...

The chart indicates that ...

Describing line graphs

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (7)

Similar to Describing line graphs

Similar to Describing line graphs (6)

More from company mak pak saia

More from company mak pak saia (6)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Describing line graphs