Why do authors do this? The context is the daughter of Michael Render sees her the face of her father in one of the ET hands, and Vince Hoit's in the other hand. This is from The Taking by Dean Koontz. (1a) The ET closed its enormous hands, and from within its clinched fingers, she heard her father screaming in agony, and Vince Hoyt. Instead of: (1b) The Et closed its enormous hands, and from within its clinched fingers her father and Vince Hoyt screamed in agony. Even this is better: (1c) The Et closed its enormous hands, and from within its clinched fingers she heard her father and Vince Hoyt screaming in agony. It makes no sense to me. I don't see any benefits of writing a sentence like that. It's confusing, takes the power away from the action, and robs the sentence of the end stress. Screamed in agony is much better than and Vince Hoyt. Also, why say she heard her father? The sentence is stronger without the filter word "heard." Sentence 1b has a strong ending, with the stress on the scream. The stress is also on the scream in 1c, so why do authors sometimes write sentences like in 1a?