Quick sentence punctuation help

[Mouse]

This is the very last quibble with one of the novels out soon (I doubt it matters if I say which, but just in case it does, I won't!)

I want:

In a moment, the sky became black though the ground, and the lake ahead, remained brightly lit.

The editor and proofreader have both questioned one of the commas but I can't remember who wanted what originally now. Anyway, it's turned into this:

In a moment, the sky became black though the ground, and the lake ahead remained brightly lit.

Which I think makes no sense.

Maybe it should be: In a moment the sky became black, though the ground, and the lake ahead, remained brightly lit.

??

 

[thaddeus6th]

What's the lake lit by? Is it daytime, and can we see the sun/moon/stars even through the black sky?

 

[Mouse]

Nothing, really. There's no actual sun. It was "daylight" and now the sky is black.

 

[thaddeus6th]

Hmm. Is the rest of the world visible (as it would normally be) and the sky has just changed colour?

Edited extra bit: sorry if I'm asking too many question about a small thing, I'm just trying to work out how the lake's being lit, and then use that to describe how things.

 

[Jo Zebedee]

I think the comma before the and should be the one to take out and put back the other. Then it makes sense.

 

[Mouse]

I think the comma before the and should be the one to take out and put back the other. Then it makes sense.

So:
In a moment, the sky became black, though the ground and the lake ahead, remained brightly lit.

I don't think that's right. It links the wrong things together?

(Thad - I don't want anything more complicated added!)

 

[Jo Zebedee]

In a moment the sky became black, though the ground and the lake ahead remained brightly lit.

Either way the comma before remained must die.

 

[Mouse]

Why though? I pause there.

 

[Ursa major]

In a moment, the sky became black though the ground, and the lake ahead, remained brightly lit.

Personally, I'd add a comma after the word, black:

In a moment, the sky became black, though the ground, and the lake ahead, remained brightly lit.

The commas around 'and the lake ahead' are making a point; if that's what is wanted, they should remain.

 

[Mouse]

Ah, that makes the most sense to me, Ursa. I wonder if it'd go down well with the boss!

 

[The Judge]

In a moment the sky became black, though the ground, and the lake ahead, remained brightly lit.

This is fine, if slightly over-comma'd. As an alternative:

In a moment the sky became black, though the ground and the lake ahead remained brightly lit.

EDIT: everyone beat me to it...

 

[Mouse]

Heh. Commas! Which one makes actual sense? Like, grammatical sense.

 

[The Judge]

Both make sense grammatically.** The first one has a slightly different emphasis by putting "and the lake ahead" in parenthesis, as if it's an afterthought, that's all.


** personally I'm having problems with the sky becoming black in a moment, but I trust it makes sense in context!

 

[Mouse]

Should it be "in an instant"?

(thanks everyone, by the way!)

 

[HareBrain]

Wow, turn your back for five minutes ...

This one is easiest for me to read:

In a moment the sky became black, though the ground and the lake ahead remained brightly lit.

 

[TheDustyZebra]

Either of these:

In a moment the sky became black, though the ground and the lake ahead remained brightly lit.

or

In a moment the sky became black, though the ground, and the lake ahead, remained brightly lit.


If you have the comma before "and the lake ahead", you need the one after it as well. If not, then you don't. The commas are setting it aside as a separate thought, so it's two or none. It just depends on how you're thinking of it.

I wouldn't mind the comma after "In a moment" either, but it makes it more urgent if you leave it out.

 

[AnyaKimlin]

For me absolutely the "In a moment the sky became black, though the ground and the lake ahead remained brightly lit."

The commas make it very juddery to read.

 

[TheEndIsNigh]

Lets face it, it's a lousy sentence.

It just jars all the way to the printer. I'll be surprised if the Gestetner doesn't choke on it. IE where the commas should go is irrelevant IMO. The sentence itself should be thrown out.

I suppose there's no way we could add a little rational to it is there?

Here we go:-

In a moment, (not keen on predictive past things like this - It's only just better than Then or Suddenly)

the sky became black (Unless the whole sky has turned black then this just doesn't happen - A small cloud will reflect a little light down to the ground. Even if the effect was observed it wouldn't happen in a short time. Of course technically the sky is always black. It's the presence of light that gives it the observer the impression it's lit. Even if the light from the lake was so bright it made the sky appear darker (unlikely) it wouldn't alter the fact that the sky was lit - it's the observer that's mistaken not the sky that has changed. Also if there was a bright light source, say from a lake, then the sky would not be 'black'. The things that scatter light from the sky will still be present to scatter light coming from the ground.

though the ground, and the lake ahead, remained brightly lit. (without external influence from somewhere. It there's no light above then they are going to be dark)

(It doesn't even give an impression that will be familiar to the reader, because this doesn't happen in real life. So by attempting to describe it, it just boggles the mind)

So what's really happening here?

There's an area enclosing a lake and a bit of ground that is glowing so unnaturally bright that it appears to make the sky dark. Trouble with that is, it's difficult to observe both phenomena at once - You're either looking at the brightly lit pond or you're, looking at the dark sky: both is tricky.

Or

something really odd going on which isn't being given the gravitas it deserves.

I have seen the opposite effect during an eclipse. Where everything around you goes dark, yet the horizon has a ring of fire effect where the eclipse isn't - Quite magical.

On reading, the issue of why the ground and lake ahead remained bright. Is it that the lake is glowing and this is also lighting the land, or that lake and the land are glowing - Glowing because that's the only way this would work. IF it is glowing it should surely be mentioned - it's a major feature of the effect.

So, I would definitely rewrite it.

Something like.

As they drew nearer, the sky seemed to darken and yet the lake and the valley ahead remained fully visible.

As they drew nearer, the sky seemed to darken and yet the area ahead seemed to be brightly lit from an unearthly glow.

Etc.

Hope I helped

TEiN



​

 

[Jo Zebedee]

Sorry to be awkward - what's not to understand? The sky got dark, the lake and ground glowed and there's something odd going on. I don't think any genre reader needs to dissect that.

 

[Ray McCarthy]

"In a moment the sky became dark, though the ground and the lake ahead remained brightly lit."
@springs
but
"In a moment the sky became black, though the ground and the lake ahead remained brightly lit."
Works for me OK, only one comma means I don't get confused
I'd automatically assume "black" is descriptive rather than 100% literal. I've used the expression about the sky
"The sky went black, so I knew it was going to thunderplunk" makes perfect sense. It doesn't mean there is no light anywhere.

What you mean you don't know what a thunderplunk is? We had one two days ago.