A lined hand is a hand with wrinkles, referred to as "lines" because that's what wrinkles look like. An oaken barrier is a barrier made of oak. Oaken is just an extremely dated, odd word, which I'm pretty sure is used incorrectly here. I don't really understand how you wouldn't understand what a lined hand was.
I appreciate your opinion, but I disagree. I like "pale, lined hand" it is a very apt and good description.
Sorry, but I wholly agree with maia on this. The sentence if overloaded with adjectives, and tries to stuff too much description in one sentence. Lined has a meaning other than criss-crossed with creases. It also means covered with a protective layer, like a glove. So the description is muddy at best, and the appearance of the skin could be handled much better elsewhere. This sentence is a clear case of trying too hard. Also, pale ane lined do need to be separated by commas. Both adjectives independently modify "hand". It the intention was that the lines are pale, then the comma would be omitted.
Too many adjectives. imo 'Aged hand' could mean the same as 'pale, lined, hand' 'Apprehensively' could be substituted for 'with some trepidation' Finally, for 'on the studded oaken barrier' I'd drop either 'studded' or 'oaken' An aged/frail hand, apprehensively knocked on the oak/studded barrier.
As Ira Gershwin famously observed, "It ain't necessarily so". "Lined" could be read as a parenthetical, in which case the original commas are correct. I prefer your version on stylistic grounds, but it's not that your version is right and the original wrong.
Don't get rid of adjectives just for the sake of getting rid of them. They're in the language for a reason, and are sometimes just the tool that is needed. If I were microediting I would throw out "with some trepidation" as unnecessarily wordy, and replace it with "apprehensively".
Adjectives and adverbs are part of the language, yes. So are verbs and nouns. But dumping them into a sentence with a bucket loader is still going to result in a garbage sentence. Nobody said not to use adjectives. Just to use some judgement and restraint.
Well, Trilby appeared to be saying to get rid of them, although I admit I ended up confused because he suggested reducing adjectives by replacing a noun phrase with an adverb. Describing a scene, person or, indeed, appendage is just the place for adjectives, and I think "a pale, lined hand" is more informative that "an aged hand" (and anyway, who says it's aged? Maybe the hand belongs to a creature that was born with pale, lined hands), and if one tries to do away with the adjectives by writing "a hand with barely any colour, covered in lines" then it's taking too many words for the weight it carries. The only adjective in the original that I'd do anything about is "oaken" because it's archaic and sounds to me like a poor attempt to emulate all that was worst about Tolkien's writing. I have a similar problem with the noun "barrier": is it a door, and if so why not call it one?
You do have a point, but I'm still right on the basis that even as a commathetical, it serves the exact same purpose as it does as a serial adjective. "A pale, lined, hand knocked ..." presents the idea of a pale hand which is, as an aside, also lined. "A pale, lined hand knocked ..." presents a hand which is pale and lined. This version is less jarring because of how we naturally look at commas. As a commathetical, it's acceptable, but its placing is stylistically rubbish, if it was, in fact, placed as a commathetical. (come on, guys, lets get this word off the ground!) I LOVE YOU. When I was thinking of "dated" in my original post, I knew there was a better word for it. That is all.
Can't resist the temptation any longer to rearrange the sentence so that less commas are needed (if you must have all these descriptors): A pale, lined hand knocked on the studded oaken barrier with some trepidation. I've seen this amount of over-description before in fantasy stuff, so if that's what the OP wants... Also, in that genre, archaic words seem to be considered some kind of bonus. That's why I don't like fantasy much.
for the record, i am 73 years old and my hands are extremely wrinkled now, but 'lines' appear only on the palm-side, not on the top of the hand, which would be the only part showing when i make a fist in order to knock on a door... and, in fact, when i do make a fist to perform a knocking action, that actually stretches out the wrinkles so they don't even show! this is the physiological reality of 'aged' hands/fists, which must be taken into account when one is describing same... if, that is, one wants to be a good writer...
... Why do you keep saying things like that? It comes off very, very arrogant. So people are mistaken about what a wrinkled hand looks like. The major part of your post corrects that mistake. Great. But being mistaken about something like that doesn't make people bad writers. It just makes them mistaken writers. I'm willing to bet the majority of active members here wouldn't have easy access to wrinkled hands. As has been said by another member also, maybe the person really does have lined hands. Maybe our OP didn't think about which side of the hand would be visible. /rant
Just reading through this thread after a day or so and all I can think is "OMG! Nitpicking (or egos?) taken to its zenith!" "A pale, lined hand knocked, with some trepidation, on the studded oak barrier." I can see this perfectly. I know what lined hands look like (parents' aged hands plus my own, thank you very much) and one doesn't have to make a tight fist to knock on a door. It can be "some trepidation" because it describes the degree to which one is trembling or nervous. "Barrier" is stylistic and adds to the mood. That is my opinion. People may or may not like the adjectives but that's a matter of taste, not what is right or wrong. Yes, it could be simplified - but does that convey the same mood? Perhaps, perhaps not. I don't think it's an over-use here - does that make those who do wrong? Of course not! It just means if they were writing it they'd do it differently. The OP was asking about the comma placement. That's grammar. Rules. The rest is purely opinion and suggestions, with no right or wrong answer.
mea culpa, mea maxima culpa, cruci!... you're right, that closing comment was inconsiderate and then some... thanks for calling me out on it... my apologies to all... m
Me, the queen of commas. Anyone who's read my stuff will know I throw them in any damn place that suits my fancy. So it hurts to say this, I would use less. Try: A pale, lined hand, knocked with some trepidation on the oaken barrier. In my opnion the use of the words 'with' and 'on' turn the sentence (clause) into a compound sentence and there is no need for more comma's.
How about putting 'and' in there which takes out the need for two of the commas. To me, it reads smoother. You can't remove the comma after the word knocked as it would then read that the hand was knocked with trepidation, rather that the hand knocks on the door trepidly. A pale and lined hand knocked, with some trepidation, on the studded oaken barrier.
A pale, lined, hand tentatively knocked on the studded oaken barrier. (or) A hand, pale and lined by old age*, tentatively knocked on the studded oaken barrier. * Or whatever has caused it.
I like how you put it. It lost the notion of age, though. I think "barrier" may be justifiable, instead of door, if it represents an obstacle between the character and something of great importance or meaning to him/her. Otherwise, personally, I'd go with "door" too. Shouldn't there be a comma between "trembling" and "pale", though?
