Is this a complete sentance?

[LGL]

Microsoft word says it is a fragment seems like a sentence to me.

He had imagined Katie a millions and objectifies her in every conceivable way.

 

[Guest]

Microsoft word says it is a fragment seems like a sentence to me.

He had imagined Katie a millions and objectifies her in every conceivable way.

It has issues, yes. I'm not certain what you are attempting to say.

He had imagined Katie - a million what?

He had objectified her in every conceivable way. (need past tense)

You are mixing tenses within the passage.

 

[oggbashan]

Microsoft word says it is a fragment seems like a sentence to me.

He had imagined Katie a millions and objectifies her in every conceivable way.

The first clause might technically be a sentence because it has a subject (he), a verb (had imagined) and an object (Katie) but the next part sounds like gibberish. The tense is different - past for the first clause, present for the second clause.

What does 'a millions' mean? Do you mean he had thought about Katie a million times?

What did you intend to say with 'objectifies her'. Do you mean he thinks of her as a sex-object?

I don't think the readers would follow the sense of the two clause sentence.

Og

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Is that a sentence? Between missing words and variable verbal tenses, it's hard to notice the punctuation flaws. Maybe you're going for:

He had imagined Katie a million times, and objectified her in every conceivable way.

Now, it is a sentence. It still doesn't make much sense, but that's a semantic problem now.

 

[champagne1982]

Microsoft word says it is a fragment seems like a sentence to me.<snip>

He had imagined Katie a millions and objectifies her in every conceivable way.

Hi there, I agree with the grammar tool in your MSWord program. This phrase leaves more holes than it fills and so defeats the purpose of a sentence.

To carry the edit further -

• the article "a" is used incorrectly with the noun "millions", plurals should be left without an article at all,
• the word "millions" in this instance is actually an adjective, which describes a noun, therefore the reader asks Millions of what?, and
• you switch tenses since you begin the phrase in the past perfect with, "He had imagined" and move into the present with your use of the conjucative form "objectifies".

I'd suggest rewriting this splice to properly illustrate the complete thought and try not to let it hang out there, in the breeze, like it is now. eg "He had imagined Katie a million times, objectifying her in every conceivable way." or simply "He had objectified Katie a million conceivable ways." Good Luck...

 

[cantdog]

It has enough structural flaws to leave a person wondering what it means. Are you a native speaker of English?


In any case, you should know that they don't have the programming savvy yet to make software which can reliably produce language. Translation is notoriously difficult, but even grammatical utterance in any single language is not easy. You have to invent a new grammar to write the routines.

You can't, in short, rely on a translating program like Babelfish to translate. It's usually okay word-for-word but almost never sentence-for-sentence. Even a live expert in English can't help with translating "bay," for example, given only the word. There are too many meanings for it.

You can't rely on grammar-checker programs, either.

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

Microsoft word says it is a fragment seems like a sentence to me.

He had imagined Katie a millions and objectifies her in every conceivable way.

Ogg, Sarahh is right. The tenses are screwed up. Reading the passage, I couldn't decide what the writer was trying to say. It's just too confused.

 

[cantdog]

Everyone answered at once, lol!

We are such editors!

 

[cantdog]

Seriously, you must get a native speaker to translate with you, LGL. What language is your usual one?

 

[LGL]

Sorry about that.


"He had imagined Katie a million times and objectified her in every conceivable way."

 

[Guest]

Everyone answered at once, lol!

We are such editors!

Editors make me hot.

 

[LGL]

Seriously, you must get a native speaker to translate with you, LGL. What language is your usual one?

lol! I have always had a hard time reviewing my own words. Especially when I am anxious.

I wonder how this post will look when compared to what I am actually trying to express.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

Sorry about that.


"He had imagined Katie a million times and objectified her in every conceivable way."

If Word still thinks it's a fragment, then it's probably asking for that comma in there...

 

[LGL]

How is this?


"He had fantasized about Katie a million times and objectified her in every conceivable way."

I prefer the word imagined but maybe it is the wrong word.

 

[cantdog]

and objectified her in every conceivable way.


That's not the ordinary way that word, to objectify, is used. But I would bet Microsoft will now say it's a sentence.

 

[Lauren Hynde]

He had imagined Katie a million times, and objectified her completely.

 

[MagicaPractica]

How is this?


"He had fantasized about Katie a million times and objectified her in every conceivable way."

I prefer the word imagined but maybe it is the wrong word.

I think you might want to use imagined in place of objectified. Objectified suggests he is thinking of her only as a sex object, not a person at all. She has no thoughts and feelings to him. If he "imagined" her in every conceivable way then he may be including her thoughts and feelings as important. I would also be more specific with the word "way." Every sexual position? Every sexual situation? As a sweet girl and as a slut?

 

[champagne1982]

Sorry about that.


"He had imagined Katie a million times and objectified her in every conceivable way."

He had imagined Katie a million times and objectified her in every conceivable way. Well now, here you have two thoughts joined with a conjunction. "He had imagined Katie a million times." is a complete sentence and "He objectified her in every conceivable way." is another.

If you want to say that he objectified Katie, in his imagination, in every conceivable way, well, that's what you need to say. As it reads now he was imagining her in the past perfect and "objectifying" her in the past, as two seperate activities within the same thought.

It just can't work. You have to use a semi-colon to join two unrelated ideas, not a conjunction, besides, I'm sure that's not what you're trying to say.

More good luck...

 

[LGL]

Objectified suggests he is thinking of her only as a sex object, not a person at all. She has no thoughts and feelings to him.

Exactly! Those were his previous thoughts. The relationship has changed only now does he see her as something more then a sex object.

 

[minsue]

Exactly! Those were his previous thoughts. The relationship has changed only now does he see her as something more then a sex object.

But how many ways, conceivable or otherwise, are there to objectify someone?

 

[oggbashan]

LGL,

I seems as if you are falling into a trap that is common to authors - you have an image and a form of words that you think are an ideal description BUT

The trap is that what you are trying to say doesn't work for anyone else.

You should scrap the sentence completely, forget 'objectify', and try to tell what he feels in simple short sentences that anyone can understand.

E.g. I might write it like this:

He used to think about her as a beautiful object to be watched, observed and appreciated as a work of art. He had started to believe that she was a real person with likes, dislikes, and a personality. Now he saw the reality, not the idealised image.

Og

 

[Guest]

.....

 

[Stella_Omega]

LGL,

I seems as if you are falling into a trap that is common to authors - you have an image and a form of words that you think are an ideal description BUT

The trap is that what you are trying to say doesn't work for anyone else.

You should scrap the sentence completely, forget 'objectify', and try to tell what he feels in simple short sentences that anyone can understand.

E.g. I might write it like this:

He used to think about her as a beautiful object to be watched, observed and appreciated as a work of art. He had started to believe that she was a real person with likes, dislikes, and a personality. Now he saw the reality, not the idealised image.

Og

Oh, I don't know, Ogg, I think the (corrected) sentence works quite well. I like the little bit of hyperbole, it's appropriate to the obsessiveness of having a "crush"

Stand your ground, LGL, stand your ground!

 

[oggbashan]

Oh, I don't know, Ogg, I think the (corrected) sentence works quite well. I like the little bit of hyperbole, it's appropriate to the obsessiveness of having a "crush"

Stand your ground, LGL, stand your ground!

Maybe, but the sense doesn't cross the Atlantic...

Lit readers come from all over the world and 'objectify', although in the Concise Oxford Dictionary, is rarely used in the sense intended by this sentence.

Og

 

[Stella_Omega]

Maybe, but the sense doesn't cross the Atlantic...

Lit readers come from all over the world and 'objectify', although in the Concise Oxford Dictionary, is rarely used in the sense intended by this sentence.

Og

Ahhah. Forgive me, it's a morning-after for me, and my brain might not be up to speed!
The word is only recently used in this sense here in the states at that- Group therapy jargon or something.