That

[tomlitilia]

In today's self-editing, I'm on a crusade against "that." I've managed to remove around a third of the 150 instances I originally had, often by simply removing the word. Other times it's a sign the sentence is off, and I rewrite it. Sometimes I'm unsure what to do. Consider this sentence:

"She scanned her surroundings, both hoping and not that someone would see her."

If this didn't have the "and not" in there, I would just remove the word that ("...hoping someone would see her."), but I'm not sure it reads well without it in this case. What would you do?

 

[MelissaBaby]

In today's self-editing, I'm on a crusade against "that." I've managed to remove around a third of the 150 instances I originally had, often by simply removing the word. Other times it's a sign the sentence is off, and I rewrite it. Sometimes I'm unsure what to do. Consider this sentence:

"She scanned her surroundings, both hoping and not that someone would see her."

If this didn't have the "and not" in there, I would just remove the word that ("...hoping someone would see her."), but I'm not sure it reads well without it in this case. What would you do?

"She scanned her surroundings, hoping and yet not hoping she would be seen."

 

[Handley_Page]

In today's self-editing, I'm on a crusade against "that." I've managed to remove around a third of the 150 instances I originally had, often by simply removing the word. Other times it's a sign the sentence is off, and I rewrite it. Sometimes I'm unsure what to do. Consider this sentence:

"She scanned her surroundings, both hoping and not that someone would see her."

If this didn't have the "and not" in there, I would just remove the word that ("...hoping someone would see her."), but I'm not sure it reads well without it in this case. What would you do?

"She scanned her surroundings, half-hoping that someone would see her."

 

[SimonDoom]

I think "hoping and not" is somewhat awkward, and I would replace "and not" with a suitable antonym of "hoping" and then, if you wish (I'm agnostic on the "that" issue), getting rid of "that." Like this:


"both hoping and fearing someone would see her."

"both hoping and worrying someone would see her."

I think your use of the active "someone would see her" is preferable to the passive "she would be seen" as proposed by MelissaBaby.

 

[NotWise]

I'd go with MB's revision.

I'm not sure the original sentence was syntactically correct because it contains the negation (not) without a clear indication of what is being negated.

That aside, I agree with you on removing "that." I do it a lot.

 

[MelissaBaby]

I think "hoping and not" is somewhat awkward, and I would replace "and not" with a suitable antonym of "hoping" and then, if you wish (I'm agnostic on the "that" issue), getting rid of "that." Like this:


"both hoping and fearing someone would see her."

"both hoping and worrying someone would see her."

I think your use of the active "someone would see her" is preferable to the passive "she would be seen" as proposed by MelissaBaby.

I prefer the passive there, because being seen is passive, but I think either of your suggestions would be just fine.

 

[SimonDoom]

I prefer the passive there, because being seen is passive, but I think either of your suggestions would be just fine.

I can see that. It's comes down to what sort of feeling or impression the author wants to give.

 

[Haulover]

Ignoring that sentence for a moment and getting back to the key point of the thread:

I strongly agree. Eliminating "that" - when appropriate - contributes to brevity, cleaner language, and an easier read.

I do the same thing with commas when editing. They make sense when writing, but if I read the text a few days later I find them annoying. The prose is more fluent with the careful elimination of commas - or sometimes, similar to that "that" editing, it's necessary to re-write the sentence.

 

[Requiax]

“She scanned her surroundings, half in fear of being seen, half wanting it.”

 

[KindofHere]

..................

 

[LiamHDunn]

“She scanned her surroundings, as concerned with behavior by seen as going unnoticed.”

 

[KindofHere]

...............

 

[LiamHDunn]

The key point of the thread is the sentence by the OP's wording. They've already stated they are getting rid of 'That' but sometimes they are unsure. What do you do when you're unsure? Like in their example sentence.

If I’m uncertain how well a sentence reads, I change it.

 

[HectorBidon]

Just go ahead and take the "that" out: "She scanned her surroundings, both hoping and not someone would see her."

Even pithier. The real problem is that "both hoping and not" is too pithy to begin with.

It's clear what "hoping someone would see her" means, but no one would say "She scanned her surroundings not hoping that someone would see her." The "not" indicates that she is of two minds. This is an important dramatic element in the sentence, but it's given short shrift by the epigrammatic style.

"hoping and yet not hoping" is better, but I think that articulating the inner conflict is even better. So "half in fear of being seen, half wanting it,” or "torn between wanting to be seen and going unnoticed," or something along those lines.

Sometimes you need to use enough words to say what it is you're trying to say.

 

[Gentleman_G]

If I’m uncertain how well a sentence reads, I change it.

That's generally good advice. If you read it over and it doesn't sit well, rewrite it. It doesn't matter if it's technically correct; if it doesn't flow well, it's a bad sentence anyway.

I'm bad with the comma too ... I tend to overuse it

 

[Kantarii]

Wouldn’t hoping and fearing at the same time be viewed as having nervous anxiety?

Or just say she reluctantly wanted someone to see her?

 

[ElectricBlue]

Sometimes though, 'that' works perfectly (that's why it's a word).

I scrub my text for "and then" for the same reason - one or the other but not both. I've not yet trained myself not to write them as a pair, but am getting better.

 

[KindofHere]

............

 

[LiamHDunn]

That's generally good advice. If you read it over and it doesn't sit well, rewrite it. It doesn't matter if it's technically correct; if it doesn't flow well, it's a bad sentence anyway.

I'm bad with the comma too ... I tend to overuse it

My weakness is for semi-colons. Love them. Apparently...

 

[tomlitilia]

Thanks everybody. I think this is one of those instances were indeed "that" is an indicator the sentence is off.

 

[OneAuthor]

What did "that" ever do to you?

In the bits of writing I have done, I only go on a crusade if I see an absurd repetition of a particular word or phrase. I have eliminated instances of "that" when I read a paragraph and spot a bunch of them in close proximity. Overall, I view it very much like other short words ("this", "then", etc.). You know it will be used quite a bit in a story, but don't write it three or more times in every sentence.

 

[KindofHere]

................

 

[tomlitilia]

What did "that" ever do to you?

The problem, typically, is that it did nothing. Sorry, I mean... The problem, typically, is it did nothing.

 

[OneAuthor]

The problem, typically, is that it did nothing. Sorry, I mean... The problem, typically, is it did nothing.

I think your next crusade should involve "it".

 

[tomlitilia]

I think your next crusade should involve "it".

Oh, believe me. It's going down