I've listed sentences from my manuscript with Bob's edits following so
we can all benefit from his vast crossword puzzle publishing background:
I wrote --
"Accompanying the six coaches were a detachment of King's dragoons"
-------------------------------------------->
Bob's edit:
[Were they in the coaches or alongside? If the latter -- and that's what
the preceding paragraph suggests -- they were accompanying those in the
coaches, not the coaches.
--------------------------------------------->
But ...
"Accompanying the motorcade ..."
http://tinyurl.com/6tu2do
*******************************************************
I wrote --
"12 slim-waisted men bristling with sword, pistol, and
campaign gear ..."
--------------------------------------------->
Bob's edit:
"Bristle" implies some sort of aggressiveness. I'd say "wearing," which
is neutral. Surely they weren't arriving to attack the palace.
---------------------------------------------->
But ...
"Bristling with weapons..."
http://tinyurl.com/77rfgx
*********************************************************
"Poor, Franz was looking ..."
Of course the comma after Poor is a typo. No matter, Bob treats it as if
it were intentional:
--------------------------------------------->
Bob's edit:
Poor, [It's early in 2009, but this is a strong
contender for dumbest comma of the year]
---------------------------------------------->
More from Bob's fiction workshop coming directly.
EG
HVS - 11 Jan 2009 10:21 GMT
On 11 Jan 2009, elanders wrote
> I've listed sentences from my manuscript with Bob's edits
> following so we can all benefit from his vast crossword puzzle
> publishing background:
We're supposed to credit the views of an ex-hack?
The quality of your writing speaks volumes as to why that's your job
status.
elanders - 11 Jan 2009 10:24 GMT
> On 11 Jan 2009, elanders wrote
>
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> The quality of your writing speaks volumes as to why that's your job
> status.
Thank you.
And if you work as hard as I did, one day you'll be an ex-hack too.
EG
Don Phillipson - 11 Jan 2009 11:23 GMT
> I wrote --
>
> "Accompanying the six coaches were a detachment of King's dragoons"
Classic howler . . . The subject of the verb is detachment, a
singular noun, with which the verb were/was must agree in number.

Signature
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)
elanders - 11 Jan 2009 15:09 GMT
>> I wrote --
>>
>> "Accompanying the six coaches were a detachment of King's dragoons"
>
> Classic howler . . . The subject of the verb is detachment, a
> singular noun, with which the verb were/was must agree in number.
It was correct in the excerpt I posted. Check it out if you don't
believe me, it's still up.
Accompanying the six coaches was a detachment of King's dragoons: 12
slim-waisted men bristling with sword, pistol, and campaign gear.
Last night I was sleepy when I rewrote it here.
EG
Raymond O'Hara - 11 Jan 2009 14:36 GMT
> I've listed sentences from my manuscript with Bob's edits following so we
> can all benefit from his vast crossword puzzle publishing background:
>
> I wrote --
>
> "Accompanying the six coaches were a detachment of King's dragoons"
It would be 'the' King's dragoons.
There is no regt known as King's dragoons
'