COVID-19 RESOURCES
LIT CAMS (200 Free Tokens)ADULT TOYSVOD MOVIES

A question of tense

MetaBob

MetaBob

Literotica Guru
Joined
Sep 13, 2018
Posts
3,087
I have a paragraph with a word that has two options for tense, both of which I trip over. I think I've sorted out why but would like advice on potential resolution:

She knelt beside me and I felt a fingertip trace its way slowly, gently caressing, four more fingertips resting nearby. It went on for a minute or two, was kinda soothing at a time I had a pretty good idea what would come next, and dreaded it.
Click to expand...

The alternative is to substitute the word "dreading" for "dreaded". I think the problem is my use of zeugma, which I usually love for its brevity, but in this case complexifies the tense of "dread". Cutting out intervening text I'm left with:

I was dreading it
vs.
I dreaded it

They both work in this sentence, but neither is entirely correct. I prefer the implication of "dreading" but am interested in other opinions.
 
Sorry, but I see other problems there, not the least of which is the number of fingers. Where is the one finger tip heading? I'd probably re-write the whole thing.
 
MetaBob said:
They both work in this sentence, but neither is entirely correct. I prefer the implication of "dreading" but am interested in other opinions.
Click to expand...

I think it writer's choice. Pick the one that works best for you.
 
MetaBob said:
I have a paragraph with a word that has two options for tense, both of which I trip over. I think I've sorted out why but would like advice on potential resolution:

It went on for a minute or two, was kinda soothing at a time I had a pretty good idea what would come next, and dreaded it.
Click to expand...

The alternative is to substitute the word "dreading" for "dreaded". I think the problem is my use of zeugma, which I usually love for its brevity, but in this case complexifies the tense of "dread". Cutting out intervening text I'm left with:

I was dreading it
vs.
I dreaded it

They both work in this sentence, but neither is entirely correct. I prefer the implication of "dreading" but am interested in other opinions.
Click to expand...

It's not clear to me what "at a time" is supposed to be doing in that sentence. Feels like you're missing a period or a word here.

Assuming that issue is fixed:

"I had a pretty good idea what would come next, and ______ it" - either "dreaded" or "was dreading" is grammatically correct. I'd go with the former as it's simpler and matches tense with "I had a pretty good idea".
 
No offense, but I think the whole passage is kind of a mess. I'd rewrite it:

She knelt beside me. I felt a fingertip gently caressing my [...]. Four more fingertips rested nearby. It went on for a minute or two, was kinda soothing. I had a pretty good idea what would come next, and I dreaded it.
 
Relax. Don't be tense. Nobody will notice while their hands are vibrating. But since you ask, I'd render the passage as:
She knelt beside me. A fingertip traced a slow path, gently caressing, teasing for a minute or two, with more fingertips resting nearby. Soothing, yes, but... I had a pretty good idea of what would come next. Should I feel dread?​
Note: 'Kinda' and 'sorta' are okay in forum posts and story speech but narration should be more formal. Dialect is a speedbump in reading flow, reducing clarity.
 
WoolyWorm said:
No offense, but I think the whole passage is kind of a mess. I'd rewrite it:

She knelt beside me. I felt a fingertip gently caressing my [...]. Four more fingertips rested nearby. It went on for a minute or two, was kinda soothing. I had a pretty good idea what would come next, and I dreaded it.
Click to expand...

Yes, except the "..., was kinda soothing." This clause is still lacking noun. Or maybe it's missing a third item on a list, e.g "It went on for a minute or two, was kinda soothing, and made me giggle like a school girl."
 
tomlitilia said:
Yes, except the "..., was kinda soothing." This clause is still lacking noun. Or maybe it's missing a third item on a list, e.g "It went on for a minute or two, was kinda soothing, and made me giggle like a school girl."
Click to expand...

I don't think the "was kinda soothing" is a separate clause, but rather the second part of a compound verb thingy with both "went on" and "was" sharing the subject "it."

But, yeah, it probably would flow better with a third item in the list.
 
I’m with NotWise. Rules are for the regulation of fools and the guidance of the wise. Were he not Hemingway, Hemingway's run-on prose would bring a C- from pompous reviewers and soi-dissant experts in colleges.

Use whatever works and don’t obsess about grammar and style guides.
 
I stopped thinking about it when you had "it" (whatever it was) dreading something. As noted before, there are multiple problems here--enough to totally rethink and rewrite rather than think about fixing one element of the passage.
 
Many thanks to all for your thoughts (I expect to use a couple of them), though I note that some of you might've missed the reference to "zeugma," in this case diazeugma, which changes what might otherwise be regarded as a "separate clause" (much less a "problem") to more of a perfectly valid "compound verb thingy." Note that there's more than one type of zeugma, with another being more of a "compound object thingy." It's actually fairly common even though few seem to know its name; an example from Douglas Adams:

"They wouldn't even lift a finger to save their own grandmothers from the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal without orders signed in triplicate, sent in, sent back, queried, lost, found, subjected to public inquiry, lost again, and finally buried in soft peat for three months and recycled as fire lighters."
Click to expand...

For questions about where that fingertip was traveling, I redacted it from my submission here as irrelevant to the subject at ... hand. For those who must know, the chapter containing it should be out next weekend even though I still haven't decided what to do about dreaded vs. dreading. I may rewrite, we'll see ... it's a short paragraph so shouldn't take too long.
 
jaF0 said:
Sorry, but I see other problems there, not the least of which is the number of fingers. Where is the one finger tip heading? I'd probably re-write the whole thing.
Click to expand...

I noticed that too. Perhaps she is an alien?
 
WoolyWorm said:
No offense, but I think the whole passage is kind of a mess. I'd rewrite it:

She knelt beside me. I felt a fingertip gently caressing my [...]. Four more fingertips rested nearby. It went on for a minute or two, was kinda soothing. I had a pretty good idea what would come next, and I dreaded it.
Click to expand...

Four more? Shouldn't it be three more?
 
MetaBob said:
Many thanks to all for your thoughts (I expect to use a couple of them), though I note that some of you might've missed the reference to "zeugma," in this case diazeugma, which changes what might otherwise be regarded as a "separate clause" (much less a "problem") to more of a perfectly valid "compound verb thingy." Note that there's more than one type of zeugma, with another being more of a "compound object thingy."
Click to expand...

I didn't comment on your sentence structure primarily because I didn't understand what the sentence was supposed to say. I think that rather than trying to justify the construction through an uncommon mechanism, you might need to rewrite it so that it can be understood.
 
Four more? Shouldn't it be three more?
Click to expand...

It can be but needn't; a thumb is also a finger. FWIW, one of the changes I'll make due to feedback here will be to remove the word "four" from my sentence, not because it's incorrect (it isn't), but because it's extraneous.

I think that rather than trying to justify the construction through an uncommon mechanism, you might need to rewrite it so that it can be understood.
Click to expand...

I actually do this sort of thing all the time in my writing and most people seem to be able to understand it; I don't feel a need to "justify" it at all. For me, the uncommon can be the norm ... I'm not writing for an audience that reads at an 8th-grade level even if some (or most) others do. My only concern with this paragraph is that I keep tripping over that one word, and *that* might require a rewrite. Shouldn't take long either way unless during the editing process as sometimes happens with me, particularly after a mental state change due to ingestion of certain beverages, which process began for me a few minutes ago, additional changes suggest themselves.
 
MetaBob said:
My only concern with this paragraph is that I keep tripping over that one word, and *that* might require a rewrite. Shouldn't take long either way unless during the editing process as sometimes happens with me, particularly after a mental state change due to ingestion of certain beverages, which process began for me a few minutes ago, additional changes suggest themselves.
Click to expand...

Either "was dreading it" or "dreaded it" is grammatically correct. All you have to do is pick the one you want to use.
 
NotWise said:
Either "was dreading it" or "dreaded it" is grammatically correct. All you have to do is pick the one you want to use.
Click to expand...

Not really. the antecedent for the verb needs to be cleaned up. It isn't "it" (which is what it would be revealed to be if the sentence was diagramed). It should be a missing "I."

Frankly, this example was a mess and unreadable and needs some basic grammar work, not some idea of fancy construction.
 
TarnishedPenny said:
Were he not Hemingway, Hemingway's run-on prose would bring a C- from pompous reviewers and soi-dissant experts in colleges.
Click to expand...

Hemingway indeed wrote some glorious long sentences, including the following:

George was coming down in the telemark position, kneeling, one leg forward and bent, the other trailing, his sticks hanging like some insect's thin legs, kicking up puffs of snow, and finally the whole kneeling, trailing figure coming around in a beautiful right curve, crouching, the legs shot forward and back, the body leaning out against the swing, the sticks accenting the curve like points of light all in a cloud of snow.​

I don't think anyone would give that a C-.

The problem with the OP's passage isn't that it uses long sentences. The problem is that the sentences are grammatically incomprehensible. If he's trying to use zeugma, whatever that is, he's doing it wrong.
 
TarnishedPenny said:
I’m with NotWise. Rules are for the regulation of fools and the guidance of the wise. Were he not Hemingway, Hemingway's run-on prose would bring a C- from pompous reviewers and soi-dissant experts in colleges.

Use whatever works and don’t obsess about grammar and style guides.
Click to expand...

Hemingway is irrelevant to this example. You set the bar--whatever works. This didn't work. And no one went after it. The OP asked for help with it. The help is to start all over and make it comprehensible to the reader without the attempted flowery stuff.
 
Hemingway is irrelevant to this example.
Click to expand...

I actually thought it a clever, informed reference. Way back in 1974 there was this show: "The Partridge Family". In one episode, Miss Partridge, Teacher, the older sister is assigned to student-teach her younger brother's English class. He knows she will grade him harshly and flips the script by turning in an obscure Hemingway story that earns him a C- from his sister, drama/sitcomity ensuing.
 
Yeah, well, there are folks who will lean on Hemingway to justify whatever they write.
 
MetaBob said:
Many thanks to all for your thoughts (I expect to use a couple of them), though I note that some of you might've missed the reference to "zeugma," in this case diazeugma, which changes what might otherwise be regarded as a "separate clause" (much less a "problem") to more of a perfectly valid "compound verb thingy." Note that there's more than one type of zeugma, with another being more of a "compound object thingy." It's actually fairly common even though few seem to know its name; an example from Douglas Adams:
Click to expand...

The Adams example reads fine. I still can't tell how yours is meant to be parsed, though.

It went on for a minute or two, was kinda soothing at a time I had a pretty good idea what would come next, and dreaded it.
Click to expand...

The only logical subject for "and dreaded it" is "I", but that doesn't match the punctuation, which implies that "It" (the finger) is still the subject here.

My best guess is that it's meant to be interpreted like this, brackets inserted to indicate nested structure:

It went on for a minute or two, and it was kinda soothing at a time when I {had a pretty good idea what would come next, and dreaded it}.
Click to expand...

In informal English, with a simpler sentence structure, you can sometimes get away with dropping an "and": "I kissed her, fondled her, stole her wallet".

Likewise, the "when" can sometimes be omitted: "There was a time I was so broken-hearted."

But here you have a nested list structure, which is already complex enough, and the second-level list does use the "and". If you drop it from the first list, then it comes out looking like one list of three items - all of which are attached to "It" - which makes no sense. Dropping the "when" as well compounds the confusion.

MetaBob said:
I'm not writing for an audience that reads at an 8th-grade level even if some (or most) others do.
Click to expand...

I have a twelfth-grade education, plus a Bachelor's degree, plus a PhD, plus several research papers published in a range of respectable journals, plus a track record editing and reviewing other people's papers and books for academic publication.

So I'm not speaking from an 8th-grade perspective when I say: your sentence is almost impossible to parse. It's going to trip readers up. Confusion does not equal sophistication.

NotWise said:
I didn't comment on your sentence structure primarily because I didn't understand what the sentence was supposed to say. I think that rather than trying to justify the construction through an uncommon mechanism, you might need to rewrite it so that it can be understood.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this. If it trips up the reader then it's a problem, even if it's grammatically correct.
 
I see nothing sophisticated about the paragraph in question or the OP's following attempts at justification. It reads as coming from someone who is not a native English speaker trying to translate from another language.
 
I looked upon the ongoing debate with a feeling of dread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
How annoying is first-person present tense?
6 7 8
Replies
192
Views
3K
holliday1960
H
joy_of_cooking
How does present tense work?
2
Replies
39
Views
706
MillieDynamite
MillieDynamite
EmilyMiller
A Question for the Oldies
6 7 8
Replies
193
Views
3K
LonRivers
LonRivers
AG31
Explicit language vs tab A into slot B
Replies
18
Views
303
AG31
AG31
GrushaVashnadze
"ambiquel"?
Replies
4
Views
166
Bamagan
Bamagan
Back
Top