Thanks a lot for reading, and tell me how did you fiound my English. Thanks a lot for reading, and tell me how you found my English.

Thanks a lot for reading and tell me how did you find my English. Thanks a lot for reading and tell me how did you find my English.

Understandable, but with some grammatical errors. Keep at it! :)

Thanks a lot for reading and tell me: how did you find my English.? Thanks a lot for reading and tell me: how did you find my English?

Overall I think it's able to get the point you're trying to make across. It's definitely not written by a native speaker, and there are some mistakes, but it's perfectly understandable (with one exception: where you used "chance" above).

The bound between two sisters. The bond between sisters.

The right word is "bond", not "bound" which is a verb that means "to tie up" amongst other meanings.

The bound between two sisters. The bond between two sisters.

The bound between two sisters. The bond between two sisters.

"bond" - connection "bound" - usually "limit" though sometimes "physical difference" or "jump"

I recently listened to a transmissionpodcast about the bound between two sisters. I recently listened to a podcast about the bond between two sisters.

It's unclear what you meant by "transmission", which makes sense and is grammatically correct, but it's more natural to say "podcast" or "radio show" or "watched a tv show".

I recently listened to a transmission about the bound between two sisters. I recently listened to a transmission about the bound between two sisters.

"Transmission" sounds a bit old fashioned. Did you listen to this on a radio? Or was this a podcast?

I recently listened to a transmidiscussion about the bound between two sisters. I recently listened to a discussion about the bond between two sisters.

"transmission" is very old fashioned here - it makes people think of telegrams, or an old person using a mid-century radio.

I am a boy and I only have a brother so I'm wondered how is what the bound is like between two sisters. I am a boy and I only have a brother so I wonder what the bond is like between sisters.

I am a boy and I only have a brother so I'm wondered how iswhat the bound is like between two sisters. I am a boy and I only have a brother so I wondered what the bond is like between two sisters.

I am a boy and I only have a brother so I'mve (often / sometimes / occasionally / previously) wondered how iswhat the bound between two sisters is like. I am a boy and I only have a brother so I've (often / sometimes / occasionally / previously) wondered what the bond between two sisters is like.

It's more natural to specify how often you've wondered something.

Sometimes, it seems they get along very well. Sometimes, it seems they get along very well.

But it often chappennges when they became tallget older. But it often changes when they get older.

I think you meant to say "bigger" instead of "taller", but based on your next sentence, "older" is the right word.

But it often happenoccurs when they became tallgrow older. But it often occurs when they grow older.

I wasn't 100% sure what you meant here, but I think you mean they get along better with age?

But it often happens that when they became tallolder., But it often happens that when they became older,

I guess taller was a way of talking about aging indirectly, but it's not really used that way in English. You haven't specified _what_ happens yet, so you can't use "it" yet, unless you're about to describe what happens in the same sentence. So I changed this to combine with the next sentence.

During their adolescence, teenagers are less ablelikely to be kind withto their siblings. During their adolescence, teenagers are less likely to be kind to their siblings.

Dduring their adolescence, teenagers are less able to be kind with their siblings. during their adolescence, teenagers are less able to be kind with their siblings.

With my brother (who is 19 years old and I am 16), we get on well since onefor the past year or two years, but before that, I think we were too young to understand our chance. With my brother (who is 19 years old and I am 16), we get on well for the past year or two, but before that, I think we were too young to understand our chance.

I don't understand what you're trying to say with "chance" but that's not the right word.

With my brother (who is 19 years old and I am 16), we get on well since one or twothe difference is only a few years, but before I think we were too young to understand our chadifferences. With my brother (who is 19 years old and I am 16), we get on well since the difference is only a few years, but before I think we were too young to understand our differences.

With my brother (who is 19 years old and I am 16), we get on well since one or two years ago, but before that I think we were too young to understand our chance(?). With my brother (who is 19 years old and I am 16), we get on well since one or two years ago, but before that I think we were too young to understand our (?).

Not fully sure what you intended to mean by "chance" here.

There are different stereotypes associated towith sisters. There are different stereotypes associated with sisters.

For exeample, the eolderst is often considered asto be bossy and the little sister is spoiled. For example, the oldest is often considered to be bossy and the little sister is spoiled.

It's more natural to say "oldest".

For exeample, the elder is often considered asto be bossy and the little sister is spoiled. For example, the elder is often considered to be bossy and the little sister is spoiled.

For exemple, the elder is often (considered to be / thought of as) bossy and the little sister is spoiled. For exemple, the elder is often (considered to be / thought of as) bossy and the little sister is spoiled.

But, scientists never fiound proof about thatof these stereotypes. But scientists never found proof of these stereotypes.

But, scientists never find proof about thatof these stereotypes. But, scientists never find proof of these stereotypes.

But, scientists never find proof aboutfor that stereotypes. But, scientists never find proof for that stereotypes.

And I think people created those stereotypes because they like to classify everyone in cases. And I think people created those stereotypes because they like to classify everyone in cases.

Instead of "classify everyone in cases", it would be more natural to say "they like to put everyone in neat little boxes".

And I think people created those stereotypes because they like to classput everyone in casboxes. And I think people created those stereotypes because they like to put everyone in boxes.

"put everyone in boxes" is a common English phrase for this.

And I think people created those stereotypes because they like to classategorise everyone in casboxes. And I think people created those stereotypes because they like to categorise everyone in boxes.

"cases" and "boxes" are synonyms for some of their definitions, but this type of expression always uses "boxes"