Search options (Page 17 of 58)

This is kind of in the same vein as using improper speaker tags such as "he laughed, he blushed, he smiled, she giggled, etc." You can't actually laugh or blush, etc. words but that doesn't stop people from using them or editors/agents/publishers, etc. from frowning upon such usage. To be sure eyes can burn from various things, but they don't burn with frustration. But if an author is going to argue for such use, then it is probably a waste of time to try to dissuade them with the technical impossibility of it. Most likely a future publisher will be the only one with that influence. My opinion for what it's worth. Take care. Vern

Maybe that's why we had a revolution. That's not politics, just a speculative written narrative, lol. Take care. Vern

In thinking about this "correct" use of grammar in writing our stories, I thought about how we use "I vs Me" when speaking conversationally in reality or often times in writing. We all pretty much would say "Johnny and I went to school" which would be correct. But we also more often than not will say "Me and Johnny took a trip" which though incorrect grammatically is more the norm than not because it just sounds better to the ear than "I and Johnny." That would also be the case with the scenario presented by Tirz.

So, let's expand this line of thinking into a hypothetical scene about Tirz's character in Plum:

***Me and Binny got into an argument because he washed my drawers with his crotch rot underwear. So, I slapped him silly when I found out and he got mad and jumped in his car. I'm flipping him the bird while he's driving away staring at me scratching my hooch because just thinking about what he done makes me itch like crazy. When he drove into a fire hydrant and it burst, filling his car with water, I'm laughing my ass off which I shouldn't have done, but it at least made me forget about my itching vagina. ***

Now, mind you, these aren't Tirz's words from her novel, but they are pretty much in character with the voice of Plum though Tirz says it a whole lot better. You might have legitimate grammatical questions from the first "Me and Binny" to the changing tenses throughout, but they all fit with the voice and character even if not quoted directly because the narrator is speaking in a conversational tone to the reader and she is a bit quirky to say the least. That's the way I see this debate about "correct" grammar. Take care. Vern

Hi, Tirz, you are telling the story in first person, but the story has already occurred or you wouldn't be able to tell it; therefore, you "flipped" Binny the bird as you are not in the process of flipping him the bird while you are telling the reader that you did so in the past. Beyond that, if it sounds strange to you, then it is probably "wrong" even if many might think it is technically "correct." I've read a great deal of Plum, but don't as a rule comment on grammar things in a review because I am not the best qualified person to do so and there is also a "voice" the narrator uses which is unique and it would be totally natural for said voice to screw things up now and again.

I would suggest that you finish the book and whatever edits you wish to make before losing any sleep over a grammar situation which appears to be a toss up between reviewers. You and/or a future editor can make that ultimate decision regarding tense and other technical things which might create a difference of opinion among current reviewers. Lord knows Plum has enough to deal with without getting embroiled in a grammar debate, lol. It might be helpful to note that I ran into a similar situation with Root Hog or Die regarding dialect; some love it, others call it a no-no. I finally decided I would keep it with some slight toning down and hopefully let some future publisher/editor decide if it should stay or go. I put that decision in the summary at the beginning but still told readers comments either way were appreciated. Take care. Vern

Of course you can leave comments in the x-line review, I do it all the time; matter of fact just finished one. Just click on the highlighted area and you get another comment box. Take care. Vern

Edited for PS: Others can also leave comments within the review which is a benefit very few use or possibly even know about.

Hello, Deth, not sure where you posted the chapter, but it's not on the home page with new listings and your portfolio shows nothing. BTW, when you do get posted, you might provide a link with your message hear. Other than that, welcome to the site. Take care. Vern

I joined the old site in 2007 and reviewed for several months before starting to post my work. Folks want to review without posting, that's their right and our benefit. If someone wants to post their writing, yet doesn't want reviews, then that is their right also, but they should state that upfront so that others don't waste their time; just a simple courtesy. People review different ways and accept reviews in different ways, some use regular, some use in-line reviews and some writers prefer one over the other while others don't care as long as you give an honest review pros and cons. People are different and should be left to their eccentricities as long as they don't adversely effect others. That's just plain decency in my humble opinion. I'm already getting nostalgic for the "good ol days" of a different sort of debate. Take care. Vern

For me, it's just a way to kill the spontaneity of the discussions. Setting out to discuss politics and religion outside of everyday discussions from which they emerge and evolve seems rather contrived, but what the hell, give it a shot. Take care. Vern

You can call them exotic, assault, machine guns, Tommy-guns, automatic, freaking fire ants if you wish and the result is the same. They are not defensive weapons. And no one that I know of is trying to prevent ordinary guns whether hand guns, rifles, shotguns, pellet guns, or whatever a sane person might possibly need or want for sport or self-defense. If nukes were as readily available as automatic weapons I suppose it would be okay for everyone to have one for self-defense. Good luck with that one. Take care. Vern

Good. Add the word "reasonable" to those restrictions and we're in agreement. Never argued for anything less. All talk of taking away Second Amendment rights is smoke screen. Take care. Vern

Of course "automatic" weapons are at issue. Semi-automatic weapons are easily made into automatic ones. The Second Amendment is a smoke screen for the NRA and manufacturers as well as other supporters of such weapons of mass destruction. The Second Amendment gives you no right as already proclaimed by the Supreme Court to own such weapons. If you take the Second Amendment to establish your right to own any weapon, then what would prevent people from owning other military type weapons, you know like say a nuclear bomb if you have no freaking restrictions. And if you accept that restriction what is the merit of allowing "automatic" weapons which are purely offensive weapons of killing and not designed for protecting oneself or property.

More guns, less crime? There may be less "crime" but not less gun killings. So, give me a break with selected statistics; we know how they work. They knew to restrict guns even in the old west where they eventually put restrictions on carrying them in certain public places. I own several guns and have no qualms with rational people owning reasonable guns. Automatic guns don't fit that category. And the rabid supporters think there is no reason to restrict people with known mental problems from purchasing an arsenal fit for an army.

There is reason and then there is lunacy in the debate over gun control. As with other rights, the right to bear arms should end when the public right to not be massacred in mass by an idiot with an automatic weapon is jeopardized. Yeah, I know I'm pissing against the wind, but it's better than normalizing mass murder which can be greatly reduced by sensible gun control without impeding anyone's so-called Second Amendment rights.  Take care. Vern

Oh damn, another political thread, lol. Take care. Vern