Can you tell me if this sentences are correctly?
Yesterday I bought a dog in the pet store. That dog was breeded a poodle. The dog was housebroken and was a dog of two years old.
I bought a refrigerator at the store. When I brought it to home I heared it make a weird noise and the door came off and so I very much angered and brought it back to the store at instant.
I would write these as:
"Can you tell me if these sentences are correct?"
"Yesterday I bought a dog at the pet store. It was bred a poodle [or simply "it was a poodle"]. The dog was two years old and housebroken."
"I bought a refrigerator at the store. When I brought it home, I heard it make a weird noise, and then the door came off, so I got very angry and immediately returned it to the store."
* * *
In your question, "this" needs to be "these" because the word "sentences" is plural. Also, "correctly" is an adverb... I don't think there are many adverbs that can be used with a form of the word "be". However, you could say "Can you tell me if these sentences are written correctly?", because "correctly" modifies "written" rather than "are".
In the first sentence, you have to say "at" rather than "in"... I'm not exactly sure why. The repetition of the word "dog" sounds strange, so I changed the paragraph a bit to compensate, but "That dog was bred a poodle" would still be grammatically correct. (I would say "the dog" rather than "that dog", though, because in this context "that dog" means, "that particular dog, rather than a different dog".) It would be possible to say "a dog of two years" (but not "...of two years old"), but this construction sounds formal and archaic.
In the second paragraph, the past tense of "hear" is "heard", and is pronounced "hurd", with a schwa. I prefer to insert "then" after the first "and" because it makes it clear that this is a sequence of events: it made a weird noise, and the door came off immediately afterward. The first part of the last sentence could be said a variety of ways: "I got very angry", "I became very angry", "this angered me"... also, I prefer "returned' rather than "brought it back", but both are possible. To "return" the item emphasizes that you're giving it back to them and you get your money back, whereas taking it back to the store might suggest you're taking it there to get it repaired, although, without additional context, the listener will probably assume you did "return" it.
Thanks. By the way, why is it "brought it home" rather than "brought it to home"? Shouldn't there be a "to" there?
<<By the way, why is it "brought it home" rather than "brought it to home"? Shouldn't there be a "to" there? >>
Not in my dialect of English. I would say:
It could be "brought it home", "brought it to my place", "brought it to my house", or even "brought it to my home". As to why the "to" not always used, I have no idea.
The reason is that in the phrase "bring it home", the word "home" is functioning as an adverb of place; compare "bring it here".
Although I think the truth is really the other way around... grammarians call it an "adverb" because they can't really figure out why the word behaves that way either. ;)