2

For example:

Snow leopards, another mammal with a relatively large tail, are also known to [...]

Edit: changed from big cat to mammal to emphasise that it's a definition, not a noun.

  • 1
    No. That looks wrong. I don't know what you are trying to do. Are you giving a series of definitions? What came before this? – chasly from UK Oct 5 '15 at 23:01
  • 5
    Try "The snow leopard, another big cat . . ." – Robusto Oct 5 '15 at 23:04
  • Thanks. Before I write about how few large animals have proportionately large tails (compared to small animals), however cheetahs are thought to use their large tails for maneuverability. So I want to mention that snow-leopards also have relatively large tails compared to other big cats (big cats being a classification of felids including lions, tigers etc.) – Steve Heim Oct 5 '15 at 23:10
  • 2
    It sounds cleaner if introduced in the singular. Saying it as "The snow leopard, another mammal with a relatively large tail, are also known ton [...]" sounds cleaner. When I think big tail, I think of T-rex, Alligators, and Kangaroos. Compared to them the snow leopard has a long skinny tail. – EngrStudent Oct 6 '15 at 2:43
  • 1
    @EngrStudent: no that's not cleaner because you've introduced a number disagreement "The snow leopard are..." ("are" should be changed to "Is"). – mgkrebbs Oct 6 '15 at 18:51
1

I would clarify what the snow leopard is being compared to (you said, "another mammal with a relatively large tail"). The sentence by itself does not make very much sense. It would be helpful if you could include some context.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.