Why is this wrong?

[Boneman]

Ouch. That's like the people who itch at something when the rest of us would scratch it.

That's because they're from mmm... ichigan...

I look forward to your corrected version Anya, because I've been convinced by each different argument, and I think I'm now more confused than I was...

 

[AnyaKimlin]

As I put on my jeans I imagined him on the other side of the door, checking his watch and tapping his foot.

I think that is the edited version lol By the time I am finished it will be the most corrected sentence in the novel.

 

[Erin99]

You really need TJ to wade in here (for 'twas she who put me right about the "was sat" usage).

*checks self* I'm not TJ as far as I can see, but I once covered this topic on the tips page of my website. In Anya's first example - "As I pulled on my jeans, I imagined him stood in the hallway, checking his watch and stamping his foot" - she's mixing tenses. When you imagine someone doing something, you imagine them doing the act in the present tense. You imagine someone STANDING, not doing the past tense action of "stood".

Consider other examples: I imagined him eating, not "I imagined him ate".

I imagined her walking, not "I imagined her walked".

Hope this helps. Sorry if it doesn't - I'm just getting over a nasty migraine and I've still got a lingering pressure headache and wobbly head.


I'm going to hold up my hand and say that I, too, was one of those who used to write "was sat" and "was stood" - until John Jarrold pointed out my colloquial usage. Teresa, don't be afraid to correct it in people's manuscripts. And *coughs* I may have a bad habit of saying "I'm itching my itch" rather than "scratching". I even once wrote it in my novel, too.

 

[Dozmonic]

Itching an itch makes me give out a slap as fast as "can you borrow me a tenner" (and not because I resent lending money)

 

[barlennan]

EDIT { I'm going to be Devil's advocate for "stood" as a participle, being unconscious UK slang to connote something between "standing" and "posed"; it suggests an attitude in the mode of standing, as if the person had stood themselves up in a particular fashion. It may simply be regional bad grammar, but it has always held this implication for me.}

On similar ground, I am often confused about which of 'woke', 'awakened', 'wakened', 'awoke', and 'waked' is right in various contexts. So my characters don't sleep, and I don't lose sleep.

 

[nightdreamer]

I never knew such a simple question could get so complicated. My initial thought was that it should be "standing" (universally agreed upon) but that "him" should be "his." My rationale: "standing in the hallway" is a gerundial phrase being the object of the transitive verb "imagined." In this interpretation, "him" would be incorrect, because it is a pronoun and you need an adjective, "his" modifying "standing in the hallway." I understand, though, that it's much more common, at least in the US, to stick with "him."

However, it seems that Glitterspeck's interpretation, that "him" is the object of "imagined", and that "standing in the hallway" is a participial phrase modifying it, is also valid. I guess it goes to show how English can be so open to interpretation. Perhaps we need a god of usage to jump in and tell us how it should be.

Either way, "stood" is clearly a verb, and so can't be an object.