Do these two sentences make sense?
Another reason why I would say she takes on the point of view of a naturalist is because of the many instances where she would mention the imminent dangers that were about to transpire among the mustangs, yet did nothing about it. I presume the reasoning for this is that she felt that altering the natural cycle of these horses was not the right thing to do—exactly how naturalist should feel.
If it's not right, please explain why and please explain how I should fix it.
Update:Ehhh, so many mistakes that I would never notice. I'm only eighth grade so.
More Questions From This User See All
Answers & Comments
Verified answer
Yes, that makes sense. I have two problems with it. One is that I never stretch a sentence out that much. I snap information out quickly before anybody can interrupt me. So I would replace "Another reason why I would say she takes on the point of view of a naturalist is because of the many instances where" with "Often".
The second problem I see is that you have "she would" for a verb in the first part, and then "did" in the second part. That is called an ellipsis where the subject is used twice but omitted the second time. The two verbs should agree in tense, but "would" does not agree with "did". You can fix that by simply saying "she did", or by replacing "would mention" with "mentioned".
It makes sense, but it's wordy. You could simplify it by saying, "Other examples of where she takes on the view of a naturalist are the many instances where she would mention the imminent dangers that faced the mustangs, yet did nothing about it."
makes sense to me