Comments | dwanks: Sentence Constructions

aldecoary in dwanks

Sentence Constructions

Oct 04, 2006 17:07

I have been misleading in the past, criticizing all "it was" and "there are" constructions as weak. The truth is, naturally, that these have their own strengths. Using a lot of them weakens them and a lot of any "be" verbs is weak and boring ( Read more... )

word choice, sentences, syntax, diction

Comments 8

blck_phnx October 5 2006, 01:07:08 UTC

Ooohhhhhhhhh... actually get it for once, yes. (Taking mental notes for the paper she should be writing*

aldecoary October 5 2006, 01:07:36 UTC

Yay!

garowyn October 6 2006, 04:03:35 UTC

Thanks!

tawnykit October 12 2006, 20:24:11 UTC

Hey, thanks! I always try not to use them, but some sentences don't feel right without them. It's good to know more about when to use them!

aldecoary October 12 2006, 20:58:46 UTC

;)

garowyn December 13 2006, 04:18:09 UTC

By the way, could you elaborate on "be" verbs? I just want to make sure.

aldecoary December 13 2006, 13:59:42 UTC

"Be" verbs are the following: am, are, is, was, were, be, being, been. Wouldn't that be sad if I missed one?

All those ones that slip in so easily. ;) Even when I'm mentioning not to use them, I use them...

Note: "they are going outside" is not necessarily a use of a "be" verb--"going" has to use the helper "are" to make the tense correct (though you can sometimes change these constructions to work without the "be" verb as well). The last verb is always the main verb, so the above example is not a "be" construction.

Hope I didn't just go off on a grammar-geek tangent...^^;;

garowyn December 13 2006, 18:35:37 UTC

Ah. And we do use those a lot, don't we? They do slip in very easily. *grins*

Hmm...OK.

Thanks!