Search options (Page 9 of 32)
vern wrote:jack the knife wrote:vern wrote:Yes, I understand the rules are there for a reason, that being to make things clear. My point is that in this instance, it is obviously clear without using google to look up obscure rules the preponderance of readers and writers have no idea exist. That is going beyond what I dare say any publisher/editor would be concerned within the context of a story. But if someone is looking for that technical detail in a review then they are well beyond anything I could offer or would seek on this site.
I do wish this had come up before the clarification that cheetahs don't roar because that is precisely what I was going for. When we overlook a factual error, contradictions, plot holes, transitions, etc. in our search for technical fault, that is a case of sticking to rules to the detriment of creative writing imho. Take care. Vern
The structure of that sentence is what I thought you were going for when you started the discussion, since it was flawed. (The sentence structure, not the discussion. That's one example of what I mean. 
) I agree that an isolated sentence like the one you proposed is not likely to raise the concern of editors - though they would likely correct it - or cause readers to shake their heads in confusion. But if I had the time on this Sunday of March Madness and Tiger in the hunt at Bay Hill, I would give you more examples to show why sticking to proper construction is important for clarity.
I also am wandering in from watchin Tiger in the hunt -- but not so much any more after that last bogey -- and I agree the sentence structure would be a problem if the meaning were not clear, but when it is absolutely clear without defying logic, then the precise sentence structure becomes a non-issue, countless examples where it is not clear notwithstanding, imho. Take care. Vern
Tiger's hunt ended with the OB drive, and now he's lost his enthusiasm. But UNC is playing for the Sweet Sixteen, and I'm not going to convince you anyway, so I'm outta here.
vern wrote:Lynne Clark wrote:jack the knife wrote:The rules of sentence structure regarding antecedents are there for a reason: to avoid ambiguity in every instance, not just berry-picking examples. In the given sentence, it's fairly obvious the cheetah is the antecedent, but structurally, it isn't. Excusing this because the meaning should be clear here ignores countless other instances where the meaning is not clear and gives a pass to sloppy sentence construction. Next subject: dangling participles.
*wanders onto Google to look up antecedents...*
Yes, I understand the rules are there for a reason, that being to make things clear. My point is that in this instance, it is obviously clear without using google to look up obscure rules the preponderance of readers and writers have no idea exist. That is going beyond what I dare say any publisher/editor would be concerned within the context of a story. But if someone is looking for that technical detail in a review then they are well beyond anything I could offer or would seek on this site.
I do wish this had come up before the clarification that cheetahs don't roar because that is precisely what I was going for. When we overlook a factual error, contradictions, plot holes, transitions, etc. in our search for technical fault, that is a case of sticking to rules to the detriment of creative writing imho. Take care. Vern
The structure of that sentence is what I thought you were going for when you started the discussion, since it was flawed. (The sentence structure, not the discussion. That's one example of what I mean. ) I agree that an isolated sentence like the one you proposed is not likely to raise the concern of editors - though they would likely correct it - or cause readers to shake their heads in confusion. But if I had the time on this Sunday of March Madness and Tiger in the hunt at Bay Hill, I would give you more examples to show why sticking to proper construction is important for clarity.
vern wrote:jack the knife wrote:Ignoring whether a cheetah does or does not roar, the given sentence is problematic in its construction. "Its" refers to the cheetah, obviously, but the subject of the opening clause is "roar," so "its" could be referring to the antecedent "roar," which of course is nonsensical. Replacing "a cheetah" with "the cheetah" helps a little but doesn't resolve the issue. The solution I'd propose in my in-line: The cheetah roared, startling me as I snapped its picture. This makes "cheetah" the unambiguous antecedent of "its."
As you state, "its" obviously refers to the cheetah, so, I suppose if anyone would attribute "its" to a roar having its picture taken, then we can throw all logic and the rules governing such out the window. I did consider the "a vs the" situation, but ultimately decided it had no consequence in the grand scheme of things. Nothing wrong per se with rearranging other than "startling me" is a bit less dramatic imo. Take care. Vern
The rules of sentence structure regarding antecedents are there for a reason: to avoid ambiguity in every instance, not just berry-picking examples. In the given sentence, it's fairly obvious the cheetah is the antecedent, but structurally, it isn't. Excusing this because the meaning should be clear here ignores countless other instances where the meaning is not clear and gives a pass to sloppy sentence construction. Next subject: dangling participles.
Ignoring whether a cheetah does or does not roar, the given sentence is problematic in its construction. "Its" refers to the cheetah, obviously, but the subject of the opening clause is "roar," so "its" could be referring to the antecedent "roar," which of course is nonsensical. Replacing "a cheetah" with "the cheetah" helps a little but doesn't resolve the issue. The solution I'd propose in my in-line: The cheetah roared, startling me as I snapped its picture. This makes "cheetah" the unambiguous antecedent of "its."
Thanks, all. I'm still here, though not as frequently as before. I do check the Home page daily looking for new stories and new postings of stories I've started reviewing.
I've dismantled my latest novel from the site, due to its publication. I don't have a new one yet to start posting, but I'll be lurking in the wings to review novels on TNBW that tickle my fancy. N.B.: Whenever a member gets their book published, they should announce that in the Forum so that other members can see the result of hard work and get encouraged to continue with their dream as a part of this writing community.
William Short wrote:jack the knife wrote:. My question to you - who admits being a reader, not a writer - why do you pony up the yearly fee just to read WIPs, some of which will never be completed? Your post puzzled me, so I felt compelled to respond. Besides you, there have been a few, I guess, though I can only remember one - Porgy - who only read and reviewed and didn't post. So why do you do it, William? This inquiring mind wants to know.
To more concisely answer the direct questions you pose.
Why does an audience watch a band perform? Is the drummer baffled, wondering why the audience are not all at home in their garages playing the drums themselves?
Is the author whose novel I purchased in the bookstore on Saturday wondering why the hell do all these thousands of readers buy my book rather than write one themselves?
I am an avid reader. I’ve read everything classic, contemporary and commercial on every ‘top ten’ ‘top fifty’ and ‘top one hundred’ books you should read list, which I’ve ever read.
I don’t think that a writer should be surprised to discover that readers exist and are out there eager to consume good writing.
I think that several writers here on tNBW need to learn how to write for a reader rather than for another writer.
My bad, William. I assumed - wrongly - that you were a paying member.
Well, William, you've been a member a year longer than I. I don't know if you ever read any of my novels posted here, but I don't remember receiving a review from you. We're talking 10 years, though, so perhaps I'm wrong, and you may be right about us not knowing how much you have staked us out. My question to you - who admits being a reader, not a writer - why do you pony up the yearly fee just to read WIPs, some of which will never be completed? Your post puzzled me, so I felt compelled to respond. Besides you, there have been a few, I guess, though I can only remember one - Porgy - who only read and reviewed and didn't post. So why do you do it, William? This inquiring mind wants to know.
Jeez, did he pay his admission fee?
Liberty has constraints. Your freedom to throw your fist out stops when it meets my face. You can't dump hazardous wastes into water supplies. You can't drive without seat belts or ride a Harley without a helmet without incurring a penalty. We live in a society, where the rights of all have to be considered. You can buy weapons, but not buy machine guns. Is it such a stretch that buying other weapons of mass destruction should be banned? For the public good? The wording of the Second Amendment can be debated until the cows come home, but the precedent (SCOTUS) has been established that one does not have a Constitutional right to have military-type people-killers. That mass -shooting incidents are a price we pay for "liberty" (Bill O'Reilly) is absurd. We, as a society, have established rules and regulations in other areas of our contract with each other. Why gun ownership should have no constraints, as opposed to any other aspect of our compact as a civilization, defies logic.
JeeZ! I can't answer any of them at first blush. And Googling it wouldn't be fair. I thought I knew all of Juliette Lewis's and Goldie Hawn's films, but I guess I didn't.
Thanks, everyone. It came as a surprise. I thought the judging was long over. But it made my day, regardless of how it might fare in the subsequent rounds.
I just got notified I made the Short List for the award in the thriller category for When the Reaper Comes. Well, it's not a very short list, but still.
https://www.chantireviews.com/2018/02/0 … r-fiction/
Hey, we're not dealing with teenagers here. Talk about spoon-feeding. If newbies don't get how to review and how to respond to reviews, they don't belong here. Sorry for being blunt, but that's the way I see it. We're not here to mollycoddle neophytes, but to suggest how they might improve their writing. The model of the site has already been made clear to all those who are considering joining. So Sol, if you want to add some small print and point to this thread, make sure this post is also included.
To each his own. My contacts in FB will only know about my books from what I post there, and it has resulted in sales. I don't know of any sales resulting from my Twitter posts, but I still tweet-market occasionally.
I've got FB friends who don't do Twitter, so, yeah, I use FB for book marketing. And to participate in my publisher's active author group.
Thanks, Lynn. I'm certainly not a celebrity, with long lines of people waiting to get a signed copy of my book in a B&N in downtown Manhattan or D.C. I've done book-signings but, to tell you the truth, I've found them to be a waste of time. They are public relations events for celebrities, but do almost nothing for us wannabes, except for the few bucks made on sales at these events, emphasis on "few." So I focus on social media now for marketing. Much more bang for the buck.
Thanks, Randy, Marilyn. Now that the writing, and the editing, and the cover art decision is over, it's time for my favorite part (not!): the marketing. (Sigh)
It's only been a few hours since the book went live. Reviews don't come falling from trees. You have to go get them. Hence, my plea to TNBW peeps. Then it's on to Phase 2. Reviews are important to show that folks not only read the book but were stimulated enough by it (one way or another) to take the time to evaluate it publicly.
The Telltale Tattoo is now live on Amazon! Available during launch week for $.99. I'll leave it up on site for two more days before I dismantle it. Originally, I was going to have the tattoo as the cover, but the more I thought about it, the more I was concerned it would make potential readers think it was in the horror genre! So I chose a Vietnam landscape instead. And it was more conducive, formatting-wise, to get the title and my name in without blocking the image. As yet, no one has left a review on Amazon. A subtle hint to those who have already read the story on TNBW. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B079G57H6H
Booker has omitted at least one basic plot that's prevalent in popular novels/films: Revenge. Hero has been terribly wronged - family murdered, framed for a crime, etc. and must bring the perpetrator to justice. Variation: hero must right a wrong committed on another party or parties.
Sorry to hear about that, Bill. Follow the doctor's orders so you can get back in stride again. I agree that doling out computer time in separate sittings is a good idea - one I should follow!
Posts found: 201 to 225 of 792
