Help me with English, please!

[Chlidonias]

Thanks for answers!

What is the normal way to name species (I mean common name): to use capital letter in every word (if it is not going after hyphen); to use capital letter only in the first word; or is it not necessary to use capital letter at all? In Russian we had the last option, in English I usually use second option.

there is no correct or incorrect way to do it, only individual preferences (although it is becoming more common to capitalise common names). For example, Great Spotted Woodpecker and Great spotted woodpecker and great spotted woodpecker are all perfectly correct. Capitalising the common name does, however, avoid confusion where the name could be ambiguous, e.g. little owl - is that the species called Little Owl, or is the intent merely to note that the owl is little? In some contexts it would be obvious, but in others not so much.

What is the difference in using "bad" and "weak"? Are these words full synonyms in such a case I used "badly"?

in the text about the geese, I would have used the word "poorly" rather than "badly" but that is really more my own preference (I think it sounds better). "They are bad fliers" and "They are weak fliers" and "They are poor fliers" are all synonymous, but in other contexts "bad" and "weak" do not mean the same thing (e.g. in "he was a bad boy" or "he was weak from fever" one word cannot be substituted for the other).

"There are around 60 breeds of the domestic goose and they all share one characteristic - they are all bred for the table and so are larger, heavier birds with more meat on them." "Larger, heavier", not "large, heavy"? In Russian we had to have the object to compare in this case (so this form is called comparative form of the adjective).

Larger and heavier are used as a comparison to the wild ancestor, because it was earlier noted which species the domestic birds were derived from. If there had been no previous mention of the wild species, then you would put something like "domestic geese are large, heavy birds". In your text you could either and both would be correct.

On semicolons. In Russian I would use them in the sentence about three species of geese as Hix did, but I was not sure if it is normal in English. Is it?

it would depend on the sentence. If it was just the list of species you could use commas (e.g. "Domestic geese differ from other birds in that their ancestors were comprised of several wild species: the Greylag Goose, the Swan Goose, and the White-fronted Goose") but because there was more information after each species' name it would have been a messy sentence without the semi-colons.

 

[Chlidonias]

I'll come back to the estrildid text later when I have more time.

 

[Hix]

Thanks for answers!

What is the normal way to name species (I mean common name): to use capital letter in every word (if it is not going after hyphen); to use capital letter only in the first word; or is it not necessary to use capital letter at all? In Russian we had the last option, in English I usually use second option.

I don't think there's any hard-and-fast rule, I prefer capitalising all names (except after a hyphen, like White-fronted Goose), unless I am talking about a general group, like ducks and geese.

What is the difference in using "bad" and "weak"? Are these words full synonyms in such a case I used "badly"?

'Bad' and 'weak' can mean the same thing in some situations, but not all. 'Weak' doesn't always mean 'bad'. And 'bad' only sometimes means 'weak'.

"There are around 60 breeds of the domestic goose and they all share one characteristic - they are all bred for the table and so are larger, heavier birds with more meat on them." "Larger, heavier", not "large, heavy"? In Russian we had to have the object to compare in this case (so this form is called comparative form of the adjective).

In this situation using words like larger and heavier implies that they are larger and heavier than what is normal.

On semicolons. In Russian I would use them in the sentence about three species of geese as Hix did, but I was not sure if it is normal in English. Is it?

There's probably some grammatical rule, but Hix's rule is - if you are listing multiple mini-sentences (especially with commas) after a colon, separate with a semicolon. As we did with the geese above.

However, if you were just listing things that could be separated by a comma, then that would fine. For example,

There are five species of rhinoceros: Black, White, Sumatran, Javan and Indian One-horned.



Hix

 

[Maguari]

However, if you were just listing things that could be separated by a comma, then that would fine. For example,

There are five species of rhinoceros: Black, White, Sumatran, Javan and Indian One-horned.



Hix

This is only an aside, but in your example there, I would use the 'Oxford' comma, so:

There are five species of rhinoceros: Black, White, Sumatran, Javan, and Indian One-horned.

With the extra comma after 'Javan'.

Otherwise, notwithstanding that you specified five (!), it could be construed that one species was called the 'Javan and Indian One-horned Rhino'.


This can be catastrohpic in some cases - see the internet's favourite Oxford comma example format:

With: At Silvio Berlusconi's last wild party, he was very excited to see his strippers, David Cameron, and Angela Merkel.

Without: At Silvio Berlusconi's last wild party, he was very excited to see his strippers, David Cameron and Angela Merkel.

 

[Chlidonias]

This is only an aside, but in your example there, I would use the 'Oxford' comma, so:

There are five species of rhinoceros: Black, White, Sumatran, Javan, and Indian One-horned.

With the extra comma after 'Javan'.

Otherwise, notwithstanding that you specified five (!), it could be construed that one species was called the 'Javan and Indian One-horned Rhino'.

I always prefer to have the extra comma.

 

[Chlidonias]

Amadina sp.
Class Aves - Birds
Order Passeriformes – Passerines
Family Estrildidae – Estrildid finches or Waxbills

I'm not sure why you headed up the text with "Amadina sp." because the following information is all general to the family with nothing specific to that genus. Waxbills is an easier word to use for the family name (estrildid could be difficult for laymen to pronounce), although "estrildid finches" immediately tells the reader what to expect (most people probably know what a finch is), so I would use both names in the title but only "waxbill" in the text. That is purely my preference though.

These animals are unusually attractive cheerful birdies. There are more than 30 species of estrildids, distributed in Australia, Southeast Asia, Africa, the islands of the Malay Archipelago. Colouration of feathers finches is very diverse: brown, white and fawn tones; red and black, blue and green, purple and yellow. Some birds change colour seasonally. The males in the mating season have colourful plumage, and at the rest time they are like females.

Estrildid finches are unusually attractive and cheerful birds. There are more than 30 species in the family, distributed throughout Australia, Southeast Asia, Africa, and the islands of the Malay Archipelago. Colouration of the species is very diverse: brown, white and fawn tones; red and black, blue and green, purple and yellow. Some species change colour seasonally. The males have colourful plumage during the breeding season, but the rest time they look like females.

Instead of "unusually attractive" you can also use "very attractive" or "extremely attractive". The word "birdies" is extremely informal - you would not use it in informational text. I wasn't sure which colours you wanted together and which separate so I left them as you had them (I assume, based on their groupings in the sentence, it would be "brown, white and fawn tones; red and black; blue and green; and purple and yellow"?). For the final sentence you could phrase it either "The males have colourful plumage in the breeding season" or "In the breeding season the males have colourful plumage".

Estrildid finches gather in large flocks, sometimes up to a thousand individuals. They nest in pairs; leave the nesting sites and fly away rarely, but there are also species that have nomadic style of life and prefer to move from place to place. Nest of these birds is in the shape of an ellipse or a sphere, like all ploceidae’s nests, it is literally sewn or woven/wefted. Materials for nests are leaves and vegetable fibers.

Estrildid finches gather in large flocks, sometimes up to a thousand individuals. They nest in pairs; leave the nesting sites and fly away rarely, but there are also species that have nomadic style of life and prefer to move from place to place. The nest is constructed in the shape of an ellipse or a sphere, and like those of weaverbirds it is literally sewn or woven together from leaves and vegetable fibers.

I'm not sure what you mean by this bit - "leave the nesting sites and fly away rarely" - so I have left the second sentence untouched (because I'm not sure how to interpret it). I re-wrote the last sentence a little and replaced "Ploceidae" with "weaverbirds" because there is otherwise nothing in the text to tell a reader what "Ploceidae" means.

The "singing" is quite specific and sometimes it is unpleasant: birds make a quiet chirping, whistling, buzzing, rumbling, hissing. Despite this, these lovely exotic birds instantly win the hearts of bird lovers. It is relatively easy to keep Estrildid finches in captivity.

The "singing" is quite specific and sometimes it is unpleasant: birds make a quiet chirping, whistling, buzzing, rumbling, or hissing. Despite this, these lovely exotic birds instantly win the hearts of bird lovers. It is relatively easy to keep Estrildid finches in captivity.

I'm not sure what you mean to portray with the word "specific" so I have just left that alone.

Food: seeds of various herbs, animal food (small insects) in some species’ diet has an important place.

Food: mainly seeds, but in some species insects form an important part of the diet.

Here I don't think "of various herbs" is necessary (although there is nothing wrong with it). If you wanted to keep the parts of the sentence more the way you had them, I would use a semi-colon in the middle, e.g. "seeds of various herbs; animal food (small insects) has an important place in some species’ diet"

 

[callorhinus]

I'm not sure why you headed up the text with "Amadina sp." because the following information is all general to the family with nothing specific to that genus. Waxbills is an easier word to use for the family name (estrildid could be difficult for laymen to pronounce), although "estrildid finches" immediately tells the reader what to expect (most people probably know what a finch is), so I would use both names in the title but only "waxbill" in the text. That is purely my preference though.

Sorry, Amadina sp. was just remark for me. I chose this group because our zoo was preparing to keep birds of this genus, but later they decided to search for birds of other genus too, so the text is about family.

Thanks for word "waxbill"! I didn't know that this word could be used to name any bird of the family. Common name are not so easy to use, sometimes I have problems even in Russian.

They nest in pairs; leave the nesting sites and fly away rarely, but there are also species that have nomadic style of life and prefer to move from place to place.

I'm not sure what you mean by this bit - "leave the nesting sites and fly away rarely" - so I have left the second sentence untouched (because I'm not sure how to interpret it). I re-wrote the last sentence a little and replaced "Ploceidae" with "weaverbirds" because there is otherwise nothing in the text to tell a reader what "Ploceidae" means.

I was trying to say that they tends to stay on the same place, and leave that place rarely. I was also trying not to use word "they" too often, but the result was lost of sense.

The "singing" is quite specific and sometimes it is unpleasant...

I'm not sure what you mean to portray with the word "specific" so I have just left that alone.

Better option is probably among following words: specifical, distinctive, characteristic. I have no enough experience to select the proper one.

 

[Chlidonias]

I was trying to say that they tends to stay on the same place, and leave that place rarely. I was also trying not to use word "they" too often, but the result was lost of sense.

okay, maybe something like this then:
Estrildid finches gather in large flocks, sometimes up to a thousand individuals. They nest in pairs. Most species are sedentary, but there are also species which are nomadic and prefer to move from place to place.
Instead of "sedentary" you could say "most species have home ranges..." or "most species stay in one area their whole lives..." I'm not quite sure of the best way to put that.

Better option is probably among following words: specifical, distinctive, characteristic. I have no enough experience to select the proper one.

ah, in that case I would use "distinctive".