Do you like this paragraph?

Question

Hobo Habilis were somewhat like modern humans. They were short and slender and their bones were similar to modern humans. They also had very similar hands and feet. Hobo Habilis had flatter, thinner, and less heavily browed foreheads than Australopithecines, and were much more mentally and physically advanced. Their cranial capacity is 775, more than Australopithecines, yet smaller than modern humans. Their teeth were also similar to modern humans. They had larger incisors and canines than Australopithecines, and smaller molars.
Hobo Habilis’ were (as far as we know) the first to use tools. They used them for digging, scraping, and cutting meat from animals. They made them by flaking, and hitting them with other stones. Hobo Habilis’ would walk UP TO NINE MILES just to find a place where volcanic rock naturally is, because it was supposedly the best rock to use for tools.

U guys im only like 11 and this is some stupid retarded thing we have to right for our retarted teacher, and thanks for the hobo to homo thing. I wouldn't have noticed

Answer 1

It is a passable paragraph. When you say Hobo Habilis do you mean Homo Habilis? Modern man is Homo Sapiens....just wondered. In the firts para. I would not have used the cranial cap. number if I was not going to give the comparative numbers for the other two species. Stick with the same feel throughout the paragraph, either specific statisics for everything or generalities for all. Switching between the two in paragraph is poor style. I would not capitalize the 'UP TO NINE MILES'. I am sure this was for emphasis, but it is niether necessary nor proper form.
Hope this helps.

Answer 2

The first thing I see is that in genus and species, the genus is capitalized, but the species (habilis) is not. (I notice you were alerted to the spelling error.) The first sentence after the break should be rearranged to avoid the parenthesis: "As far as we know, Hobo habilis was the first to use tools." [They usually treat them as singular, not plural, when talking of the characteristics of the entire species.] Also, you seem to be attaching an apostrophe to the name a couple of times in the second segment (which I think you meant to be all one paragraph, didn't you?) for no known reason. Also, "where volcanic rock naturally is" would be better as "where volcanic rock was naturally occurring."

Answer 3

You seem to have done a good job of research and your paragraph is highly readable and informative. I would like to suggest a couple of structure changes :Change "They also had very similar hands and feet." sounds a bit like their hands were similar to their feet....Their hands and feet were also similar to those of modern humans makes the statement less ambiguous."Homo Habilis would walk up to nine miles just to find a place where volcanic rock naturally is,because it was supposedly the best rock to use for tools" is an awkward sounding sentence....try instead " Homo Habilis would walk as far as nine miles to find volcanic rock,supposedly the best material from which to make tools." Other than a couple of awkward sentences,your paragraph sounds good.

Answer 4

No I don't! even though it makes sense, you employed too much of short sentences that could have been unified into a whole.

Also, you overused the pronoun "they" just in one paragraph. Dude! You should be more flexible than that and nothing would go wrong if you occassionally refer to your subject by its proper name rather than use a pronoun. Other than these few flaws, the paragraph is great, and don't mind me when I said i didn't like it.

Answer 5

I think it's great. Taking into account the criticisms and grammatical corrections already listed. If I was your teacher, I'd be very pleased with your work.

Answer 6

I think you'd like the definition for Heliazoan. Look it up.

Answer 7

it's ok...somehow there are some grammatical inaccuracies...but generally ok

Answer 8

Yeh, it's OK.