Quick Fire Questions (A Place to Ask and Answer)
- Thread starter HoopyFrood
- Start date
- Status
Easy one, esp. if Chrispy sees it;
Lichio looked up to see he'd reached the end of the walkway, and shrank back from the crowd's coldness, glad of the protection of the guard's.
Should I have the 2nd apostrophe, I'm pretty sure I should if it's guard's protection, but wasn't sure if I should here.
Lichio looked up to see he'd reached the end of the walkway, and shrank back from the crowd's coldness, glad of the protection of the guard's.
Should I have the 2nd apostrophe, I'm pretty sure I should if it's guard's protection, but wasn't sure if I should here.
Last edited:
If the word, of, is there, you don't need the (second) apostrophe. At least, not in this case.
However, consider this sentence:
Now if the crowd was armed, and so were the guards** (go figure
), you would have:
** - I've used the plural of guard in the last example as one guard might have trouble deterring an armed crowd.
However, consider this sentence:
Now if the crowd was armed, and so were the guards** (go figure
), you would have:Clunky, I know (I'd probably want to contrast the weapons the crowd have - clubs, kitchen knives - with those of the guards, i.e. swords, pikes, AK47s), but I wanted to show that the use of grammar does depend on the context.
** - I've used the plural of guard in the last example as one guard might have trouble deterring an armed crowd.
Last edited:
Thanks kindly, that makes sense; I've been looking at a bit of tricky prose all morning - between inane witterings - and I think a cup of tea time is looming!
"Crowd's coldness" sounds weird and, in a way, not actually very threatening. "The antagonistic/bellicose/threatening crowd" might be better but "baying mob" is always a winner.
"...the protection of the guard's" leads me to ask "the guard's what?". I would just say "the protection of the guards".
No, I definitely want the sense to be more cold, potentially threatening than an all out riot, they're under the thumb of a pretty mean cookie and there's no sense of overstepping the mark here. No baying mobs allowed, I'm afraid.
Pity because I like the term, too.
Pity because I like the term, too.
Ah, OK. I would say 'shrank back from the crowd's cold stares' or something similar.
You don't need the second apostrophe. You either have "the guard's protection" or "the protection of the guard" (or, for a plural, the "guards' protection" or "the protection of the guards"). The apostrophe indicates possession and is used instead of saying "of the".
This also illustrates how bizarre a word 'guards' is when you type it loads of times.
GWARDS! GWARDS! AWWEST THIS VIWWAIN!
Just saw this point, which I mentioned in my post.
You don't need the second apostrophe. You either have "the guard's protection" or "the protection of the guard" (or, for a plural, the "guards' protection" or "the protection of the guards"). The apostrophe indicates possession and is used instead of saying "of the".
This also illustrates how bizarre a word 'guards' is when you type it loads of times.
GWARDS! GWARDS! AWWEST THIS VIWWAIN!
Yes, that's probably the way I was feeling I posted it! Losing the plot, quite literally - not good halfway through.
Hello. Is anyone living in/ familiar with London able to suggest a bridge that goes over a river but has enough space on the ground underneath it for a coffee van and for a few people to drink a coffee? (ideally, while watching lights come on across the river)
As far as I can remember (and can see from a map) Waterloo, Hungerford and Westminster Bridges all have a path going under them on the south bank.
You're safe with Waterloo Bridge -- I've walked under it many a time. Here's a link with a piccy, Hex, that might help: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waterloo_Bridge -- the bottom photo and the bit to the far right. I've been to street fairs with booths there, but whether they allow hot dog vans and the like, I'm not sure. There might be licensing issues.
I assume that the licensing authorities are the London Boroughs. In the case of Waterloo Bridge, the northern end is in Westminster and the southern in Lambeth.
I'm still trying to balance my overuse of passive and have probably gone a little too far the other way. What I'm trying to show here is that the onslaught on the person's senses runs through the scene and then describe the tiredness, and I've tried to be clever (undoubtedly a bad idea) and use the verbs to show this:
The sweat was running down his back, the heat and smell of the quarry assaulting him. Tiredness ran through him like a ribbon which joined each part of his body; his mind, his arms, his legs.
Is this the right way to do this/ the right balance?
The sweat was running down his back, the heat and smell of the quarry assaulting him. Tiredness ran through him like a ribbon which joined each part of his body; his mind, his arms, his legs.
Is this the right way to do this/ the right balance?
I'm not sure about the whole colon/semi colon thing. I thought it I'd done this, it should be a colon
Tiredness ran through him like a ribbon which joined each part of his body: his mind; his arms; his legs.
But because I've used commas after the ; I thought it should be a ;.
Oh that's 2 questions now!
Ty
Tiredness ran through him like a ribbon which joined each part of his body: his mind; his arms; his legs.
But because I've used commas after the ; I thought it should be a ;.
Oh that's 2 questions now!
Ty
- Status
| Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quick question on titles | Writing Discussion | 7 | |
|
Quick question about fire | Writing Discussion | 19 | |
|
A quick question about FIRE | Writing Discussion | 14 | |
|
|
A quick FIRE question | Writing Discussion | 16 | |
| T | Quick Poll - Will Firely fly again? | Firefly | 3 |