Homepage
Login
New Post
Profile
We resumed our way, until we finally exited the woods and reached a
valley. Two ridges stood on both sides, meeting together on the far
horizon. In the middle was a river, its quiet surface perfectly
reflecting the moon in the sky. There were no trees. Only bushes and autumn-colored
shrubs.
In the passage above, this part:
Where were no trees.
I wrote it so I have a short sentence in a paragraph full of long ones. The next sentence is connected to it. So I could have written:
There were no trees: only bushes and autumn-colored
shrubs.
This makes more sense grammatically, but I'll end up with sentences of almost the same length.
I could also write:
In the middle was a river. Its quiet surface perfectly reflected the
moon in the sky.
Which puts me in the same dilemma.
What should take precedence? Rhythm or clarity?
(2)More posts by @Candy753
2 Comments
Sorted by latest first Latest Oldest Best
Sentence length is pacing, and a component of rhythm, and sets up subtle expectations, whether for more of the same or something different. After three long sentences, a short and simply declarative one produces a certain affect, and feels good, rhythmically. But breaking the pattern and changing the rhythm also changes the emphasis, and (as I hear it) gives those words a higher level of significance than the more purely descriptive words and phrases of the previous sentences. Their meaning changes, however subtly. And if a change in rhythm brings about a change in meaning, then rhythm or clarity is not an either/or question.
In this case, I think the best solution would be to use a dash instead of a period, and keep it one sentence. This would let you retain most of the emphasis effect of the four single-syllable words at the start of the sentence, without creating a grammatical issue. You could accomplish similar with a semicolon, but it lacks the urgency of the dash (at least in part because it's less visually dramatic), and doesn't visually set off the words that follow. It might also feel a little "stuffy" in what seems like a relatively "poetic" context.
If you wanted to keep it two sentences, then (again to my ear), the word 'Only' feels too rhythmically soft to begin a new sentence following that short one, and so you might consider changing it to 'Just', which has a harder tone, and would better work as a bridge between the crispness of the previous words, and the longer, slower pace that returns for the rest of the sentence. It's still grammatically questionable, but that might be easier to buy if the rhythm and sound of the words help justify it.
Splitting up the sentences didn't alter the rhythm substantially. However, it did alter the meaning, in the sense that it sounds as if you are trying to emphasize that there were no trees and only bushes. Using very short sentence fragments can alter rhythm, but it does this by adding emphasis to elements. Within your. Writing. I don't think that was your intention, since that sounds normal for a valley on the outskirts of a woods.
Terms of Use Privacy policy Contact About Cancellation policy © selfpublishingguru.com2024 All Rights reserved.