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.
-
1No. 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 - supports Monica Oct 5 '15 at 23:01
-
5Try "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
-
2It 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
|
Show 2 more comments
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.
answered Oct 18 '15 at 23:19
