No offense here arch, but the sentences you provided where you use 'as' I would have to say constitute sloppy examples of using as. As I started my motor Daisy peremptorily called "Wait!" This to me is a very boring, bland sentence. I think it could be spiced up and strengthened by eliminating "as." For example: "I started my motor and started to back out of the driveway when I heard Daisy yell, "Wait!" and looked to see her standing on the porch, waving her arms frantically in an attempt to get me to stop." While is as overused as 'as' for parallel actions. When is a better substitute almost 95% of the time. "As I ran for the doors, the blond said, 'Those are samples, not freebies.'" Again, this is a bland sentence. "I ran for the doors, trying to get away from the saleswoman. It was just my luck she noticed me and yelled, 'Hey, wait a second! Those are samples, not freebies!'" Of course, I don't know why the person's running for the doors, so I assumed a bit in my example. There's almost *always* a different word you can use besides "as" or "while" to connect parallel actions. ~Lynn
Lynn, the Daisy sentence is from The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald. He uses this sentence structure often enough in this book, I have to wonder if it is a good structure because he was a skilled writer. But not only him, many skilled writers who won prestigious awards. The very books that won such awards use these types of sentence structures. Personally if I were going to change the structure he chose for this sentence, I wouldn't use the word started twice as you did. I would change it to something like the following. I began to start the motor when Daisy called, "Wait!" This almost has the same meaning. I was starting the motor when Daisy called, "Wait!" This has the same meaning, but then we are adding another to be verb to our style and another ing word. The as or while sentence structure reduces the to be verbs and ing structures. In your rewrite of FSF's sentence, you used the word started twice and you use a filter word heard. Also, if you say she yelled, I don't see the use of the exclamation mark. Also, you have altered the meaning of his sentence and the timing of events. In both cases you've turned a short sentence into a long sentence, and I don't think the actions are important enough to justify the added length. "I ran for the doors, trying to get away from the saleswoman. It was just my luck she noticed me and yelled, 'Hey, wait a second! Those are samples, not freebies!'" In this example, you have added an ing verb, a to be verb, and a filter word (noticed), and not one but two exclamation marks. Regardless of what people might make of the great authors using the word as to begin a sentence of parallel actions, those sentences are better than having to resort to adding an ing verb, a to be verb and a weak filter word. As I ran for the doors, the blond yelled, "Those are samples, not freebies." So simple and to the point. I've read by some of these great authors that we should avoid the to be verbs, the ing verbs, and the filter words. But I have never read from them to not start a sentence with "as" to show parallel actions. I was hoping for a smack-down argument showing why these great authors shouldn't have used "as" to show parallel actions. I know I seem argumentative, but I found it to be one of the greatest ways to learn. I'm hoping Maia and COG clear this up for me.
and it would still read better and make a bit better sense w/o the 'as'... like this, for example: it's more 'active' and has more impact on the reader than a convoluted 'as' mess...
Maia that works for his example, but what about the original example, which is identical in structure to FSF? In the original example there are two people. Zoey (she) can't find her perfume so she uses a sample and before the sales lady (blond) gets a chance to try and sell her something, Zoey heads for the door. The blond says, "These are samples, not freebies." As Zoey ran for the door, the blond said, "These are samples not freebies." This is like. As I started the motor, Daisy peremptorily called, "Wait." I think there should be a comma after motor, but there wasn't one in the book.
The structure is not everything. The semantics matter as well. Personally, I would consider this a so-so sentence, regardless of who wrote it. But it isn't atrocious, because both events are equally brief in duration, and are also causually connected. Daisy is calling "Wait!" in immediate reaction to the MC starting the engine. There is nothing forced about aligning both the start and end of the joined events. Grammar consists of both syntax and semantics. Sentences can be construicted that are structurally sound, but ludicrous in meaning. The As or While constructs often leads to semantic blunders because of the manner of joining two clauses whick individually are fine. The manner of joining can subtly turn sense into nonsense.
You hate the word as? You'll hate me then. :/ You'll hate almost every sentence if you hate the word as. Why? Because is practically it's only synonym and even because doesn't work where as can. It an adverb, conjunction and pronoun. DX The English language relies heavily on as.
Seven... I think you're wrong about that entirely. The English language does *not* rely heavily on the word 'as.' If you'll notice, absolutely none of the sentences I've typed in reply to you has the word "as" in them except in quotation marks in order to show you how absurd the idea that English relying on 'as' really is. Now, you can say the English language relies on the word 'the.' But not 'as.' "As" is actually a very rarely used word (or should be) and thus makes your assumption incorrect... Just saying.. ~Lynn
Kinda related but my pet peeve are similes such as 'brave as a lion' or 'crafty like a fox' I find them to be lazy metaphors and just really bad at capturing something. I put down a book because it was using loads of similes such as 'Like a tooth you couldn't stop probing with the tip of your tongue, the song was still nagging away at her as she made a turn on to the woodborough road and easied into the outside lane' And that's from a bestselling book series...I like them as part's of people's speech, such as phrases. But they seem forced and silly when used to describe inn my opinion
Similes are ok if not overblown. Also, many of them are cliche in the strictest sense of the word - so overused they have lost all their impact. How many people literally think of molasses as the epitome of slow motion? Or bunnies as the quickest of the quick? An unexpected simile can be very effective - as quick as betrayal in the right context can grab the imagination and give it a good shake. Still, I henerally prefer a good metaphor over a simile. It's not just the absence of an expliicit comparison. A good metaphor can bring in other comparisons besides the obvious surface one.
I don't know if I can trust this advice considering all the award winning writing and bestselling writing I know of uses the word as freely, from essays to novels. I would like to know what evidence supports that idea that "as" should be used rarely.
We'll have to agree to disagree, then. I get a much more interesting and frantic feel from using the 'as' sentence. Also, aren't they both technically active?
She did not say that either was in passive voice. She said that one sentence was more 'active' than the other. Eliminating the 'as' construct freed the separate actions so they weren't constrained into lockstep. No one would be muisled into thinking the actions weren't nearly simultaneous in her version.
