So, I just realized I do this all the time. Think 4 a.m. is a good time for an existential crisis? Lets find out.
Haven't read anyone elses replies yet, but I think my biggest single bug bear, at the moment at least, are passages that come across as overly filtered when they aren't serving the story. I'm not saying ban all filtering, but when filters are not used judiciously they can be so distancing. And yes, @Tenderiser (since I can see your post above mine.) I HATE comma splices with a passion. It's not that I don't like run-on sentences, but I'm aware (in my own case at least) that my punctuation is simply not of a standard yet that I can employ them, without looking like the absolute amateur that I am. Because I'm aware of this, I'm very quick to notice when someone elses run-on sentence isn't working either.
This thread worries me, because I'm reading all these bugbears without really understanding what most of them are (unless they're backed up by examples - and even then I'm still not clear), so I'm left wondering if I use them. I've just had to look up what a 'comma splice' is, and worrying I don't see what's wrong with them. Do I use them? Who knows? This is an example given on wiki: It is nearly half past five, we cannot reach town before dark I don't really know why this is considered bad. Are we supposed to just put an 'and' in place of the comma? A full stop? A dash?
Oh dear. I got a taste for writing in the present tense over the last year or so. It helps keep my writing from getting too formal or artificial... I think.
I think it's entirely possible that the confusing grammatical labels (I think from Old English? Or German?) are what's led to the weird idea that there's something wrong with the "weak" verbs. I mean, if we'd reliably called them "regular" and "irregular" verbs, I don't think we'd have this weird cult of people saying we shouldn't use regular verbs. My version of how it happened... Someone stumbled across the grammatical terms but didn't get much past the labels. Started talking about "weak" and "strong" verbs as if those were terms that actually mattered to creative writing. Was asked to explain what the terms meant, couldn't do it, and so came up with some nonsensical ideas like avoiding "to be" in all forms. Spread misinformation like wildfire. Aargh.
A comma splice is when two complete sentences are joined with just a comma. It's grammatically non-standard. There are readers (including myself) who are totally able to look past a sentence fragment or other non-standard structure but who grit their teeth at the sight of a comma splice. I can't explain why they're so ugly to me, but they sure are. That said, I sometimes see them in published work, so they're clearly not an absolute deal breaker.
I wouldn't worry about it unless you're planning on Tenderiser being your sole market Lots of people love it - me included. It's noticeable at first (as it's not the 'norm') but less than a page in, present tense rolls off my brian as naturally as can be.
You could fix it a variety of ways. It is nearly half past five. We cannot reach town before dark. It is nearly half past five; we cannot reach town before dark. It is nearly half past five, so we cannot reach town before dark.
It's just grammatically non-standard. The grammar books call it wrong. I don't see what's wrong with spelling pterodactyl as terrodactile, but... it's non-standard.
Slavish, uncomprehending adherence to artificial "rules." "My writing teacher said you should always avoid the passive voice, and that means you should never use any form of the verb 'to be.' It's always wrong and it's always bad." "Hah! I caught you using an adverb, you horrible writer! Gawd, what a rank amateur you are!" "Well, you used a semicolon! You used it correctly, but semicolons are always bad and indicate that the writer has ineradicable flaws in his own character, you disgusting worm!" Etc. Mindless adherence to stupid "rules" makes everyone's prose read the same, like it was all written by fifth-grade kids writing for a school newspaper. Remember that the same "rules" that help keep beginners from falling on their asses also prevent experienced masters from soaring. Brevity for the sake of, well, nothing more than brevity. "I thought your paragraph was too wordy, so I rewrote it and saved eleven words! My version is eleven words shorter, so it's eleven words better! Let that be a lesson to you. Remember, readers hate reading and just want to get through your book as quickly and painlessly as possible, so spare them any words that don't directly move the plot forward. It has been scientifically proven that the shorter the book, the better, so make it as short as possible. In fact, don't write it at all - the best books are the ones that don't exist in the first place." Grr. Argh. Rawr. This kind of thinking relegates every masterpiece ever written to the junkheaps and elevates every pedestrian piece of crap to the status of an immortal classic. I hate that.
You would hate my collab novel hahaha! It's written in the present tense and in first person, and while i don't usually commit the crime of dreaded self-description, my co-author does, all the time
excellent! And yes, whenever i see someone's critique saying, "your writing is bad because you used a dialogue tag instead of 'said'," (or some other arbitary rule ) i find myself thinking it's the critic who's the amateur and thereafter second guess their every opinion as untrustworthy
Thought of another one--when accents are written phonetically, either in dialogue or narration. Like a French character saying, "Eet iz vairy good." or... a less extreme example I can't think of. Just tell us they have a French accent and spell things correctly, please. I'm the same. I don't mind the odd sentence fragment (would find them distracting if they were on every page) but comma splices? Blurgh. About... two chapters I owe people on the forum so much reading.
I don't know why (perhaps because your writing is compelling) but I didn't find that boring. In fact, I found it built up an expectation for me that the next sentence would be something like: Only then, as he reached for his mouse, did John realize his hands were on the wrong arms.
Strong verbs can be regular, they just don't conform to the basic -ed rule. Drink, drank, drunk; swim, swam, swum; begin, began, begun; are all following the same rule. Of course, strong verbs aren't productive in English any more, so they tend to be lumped in with the other irregulars, but in other Germanic languages, such patterns persist regularly.
Never read Anne Rice, but that reminds me of "preternatural" in Jane Eyre which, in turn, reminds me of "ardent" in Frankenstein. Those Victorians and their fancy schmancy writing...
If it doesn't conform to the -ed rule, then it is an irregular verb. https://learnenglish.britishcouncil.org/en/english-grammar/verbs/irregular-verbs
You can certainly put an 'and' in there if you want, which is grammatically correct. A comma splice is when you separate two complete sentences with a comma. You either need a conjunction like 'and' which implies the second half of the statement is a direct follow-on from the first. Or you need a period (or question mark or exclamation mark, depending on the sentence.) Here's the best article I know regarding this issue. (Do the exercise at the end as well, and you'll nail it.) This is a fantastic site for grammar and punctuation issues, by the way. http://www.bristol.ac.uk/arts/exercises/grammar/grammar_tutorial/page_07.htm
As pretentious as this sounds, I got one page into the Hunger Games and put it down because of the tense. Do I suck as a human being for that? Probably.
