I desperately want to ensure this work breaks into the markets, so obviously I need to see whether this is a real issue that I should deal with right away.

Here's an example text:

"Lemarian stood staring with his mouth open"

now compare that to

"Lemarian stared with his mouth open"

My query - is one of the above more technically correct than the other?

I'm not sure whether I'm falling into a trap of present tense versus past tense.

Uh oh. I just confused myself. What if the sentence read: “Staring, Lemarian stood with his mouth open.”? That could be describing Lemarian in open-mouthed splendor and thus be an adjective. No, I think it’s an adverb.

Anyway, to quote Pinckert: "Some words look like verbs, are made from verbs, have a couple of tenses, take subjects and objects like verbs, but really aren't verbs....They are...used as nouns, adjectives, and adverbs. They are verbals."

Your concern here, Brian, is how important is simply staring, without knowing if Lemarian is standing, sitting, or hiding in a tree -- you may have already stated his position or location in surrounding sentences and not want to repeat it.

Not being a technical writer (I have absolutely no capacity for languages ) I suddenly wondered if I'd fallen into a newbie trap of writing in the wrong tense.

So long as no one's stating that I've slipped into passive voice, or raising present vs past tense usuage, then it sounds like I should be fine.

Thanks again.

I have myself experienced death by technicallity. While being technically correct is useful and necessary the question I ask myself when going over my own work at least in the beginning is, "Does it scan?"

I had great wisdom, but it didn’t matter.
I had a baby, pitter-patter.

So I played a little with what was written, I hope you don't mind.

"Lemarian stood staring with his mouth open"

"Lemarian stared with his mouth open"

"Eying critically the ground before him Lemarian's mouth opened and shut over his long nicotined teeth."

"Critically, intensely eying (fill in the blank) Lemarian's jaw quivered as it formed a perfect circle."

"A kisser so wide a bird could nest. Eyes like window fanlights."

Love the pitter-patter couplet.

Yes, some fun would be nice. I need the diversion. I just broke my printer. <sob>

"A mouth so wide a Mack truck could park in it." (But did you hear about the new car that runs on peanut butter? It gets great gas mileage, but sticks to the roof of your garage.)

YOU WRITE: any print the size of the topic line is very hard (for you) to read?

I ASK: "Any" print that is exactly the size of the topic line font size here is not hard to read. Do you mean that the usual size for the topic lines here are fine but now you are experiencing something different?

YOU WRITE: "Email this page to a friend" and so on are almost undecipherable.

I ASK: Undecipherable, as in the font size has suddenly decreased to below 8pt. or smaller making it impossible for you to read?

YOU WRITE: Did you change a setting while working on this site and then everything changed?

I ASK: You are asking "Do you", not "Did you" correct? If the question is "Did you," the answer is 'fraid not pookie. So, you want to know if any of us know how to change a setting or font size within this dialog message box?

Or, is the text on the main body of this website decreased? (e.g. ULTIMATE BULLETIN BOARD, or other source text) If this is true I would write Kathleen, the Moderator.

[This message has been edited by Bene_Gesserit (edited July 17, 2003).]

Yes, "the usual size for the topic lines here are fine but now" I am "experiencing something different."

Undecipherable, as in they look a little like hyroglyphics. They may be smaller than before, but the rest of the print seems okay -- which doesn't make any sense. Actually, whatever the size print for, for instance, the "Forgot your password?" above this message screen is hard to read.

I'm afraid the question was "Did you," but I see the same undecipherable problem on other sites, so I guess I can't blame Ultimate BB. This site, though, has a lot of that squiggly little print so I notice it more here.

Anyway, I ignored the fact that I was saying "No" again to Internet Explorer, and proceeded to use the the View menu as you suggested-- I felt like one of those cable line pirates -- and Voila! I even jumped two notches. What a relief. Thank you. You, too, BG.

(What a shame. I can spell in French and even know where those little accent marks are supposed to go, but I can't spell hieroglyphics. Go figure.)

[This message has been edited by Kolona (edited July 17, 2003).]

If you say was ing word the result is almost always passive voice. If you use the ed form of the word the sentence is almost always more active.

And if you think editors and agents don't noitce one or two---THEY DO!!!!

I am good at the show don't tell--yet one instance of telling--one line was pointed out to me. I use almost no (I would say none) of passive voice--yup they found a couple.

So your sub may not be perfect when they read and accept it as far as none of the dirty erros (as the industry see them) but by the time they are done with you--it will be. So why not start out getting all the poopoo out to start with? Even if you argue to the moon that it is a matter of style--well then I guess it is a matter of sold or not.

Your comments, however, feed directly into what I wrote in "Modern Fantasy" in the Fragments and Feedback section. Wording and sentence structure are what separate the real writers from the rest of the pack.

Blame it on rewrite HELL.