Writing Reference

[Kaze_NG]

Hello,
since I started writing a few months ago, I encountered a problem I never thought existed.
I'm talking about the clarity of the references of (relative-) pronouns.

For example: '... It was the red-haired girl standing behind the blonde who caught his eye.'

Is it clear who the 'who' in that sentence refers to, or should I rewrite this sentence, or am I overcomplicating things?
In my opinion, it is clear that 'who' refers to the red-haired girl, as the other option wouldn't make any sense.
Sorry if my question sounds stupid.

 

[Deleted member 113259]

Yeah, it's clear.
It was [describes what it was] who caught his eye.
However you may just be overcomplicating this specific example, others you come up with might actually be unclear.

 

[Corty]

I see no issues with it.

 

[Desustar]

it's clear to me

 

[Rhaps]

It's clear and easy to read, don't try to be fancy if you are just beginning to write, you will just confused yourself

 

[LilRora]

...After reading it a few times, I have to disagree with people above me. My opinion is that it's logical, but it might be misinterpreted by people.

Consider the following sentence:
'The package did not fit into the container because it was too large.'

What was too large? The container or the package? Logically, we are able to infer it was the package, but nothing about the construction of the sentence says we're talking about the package. It's basically inferring the meaning from context, but that usually requires attention and conscious interpetation of the sentence - which means it can be easily misunderstood.

Your sentence has a similar problem. The first time I read it, I thought it was referring to the blonde, and I needed to analyze the sentence to understand it properly.

If you want to learn about how it works, I really recommend watching this video:

Unortuantely, I've been unable to find a single material that would help with context clues, and I'm now gonna complain about that to some people.

For now though, I recommend adding a pair of commas like this:
'It was the red-haired girl, standing behind the blonde, who caught his eye.'

This eliminates the other option, and while it changes the meaning of the sentence (it implies he's talking about one specific red-haired girl or that there's only one in the room) it can generally be used intechangeably outside of specific situations. If you had a pair of red-haired twins, for example, you would not be able to use it.

@Story_Marc I summon thee! I feel like this would be something you could help with better than me. My expertise is a little lacking in the area.

If not, perhaps that's a topic you could make a video about at some point?

 

[Kaze_NG]

Thank you for your fast responses!

@LilRora Yes, this was the problem I had since the beginning.
Especially this sentence in the video:

To avoid this, I just set up the rule for myself to never change the referred subject within a sentence, so 'they' would refer to 'councilors' in this example. (It's just me theory-crafting for myself, dunno if it's the correct way to handle the problem though.)

 

[LilRora]

I avoid this, I just set up the rule for myself to never change the referred subject within a sentence, so 'they' would refer to 'councilors' in this example. (It's just me theory-crafting for myself, dunno if it's the correct way to handle the problem though.)

If it works, then it works. It's certainly a good way to avoid messing things up.

You can ask Story_Marc or TheTriniary for feedback in their respective threads; they'll probably be of more help than me.

 

[melchi]

I think there are a lot of extra words in that sentence.

"The red-haired girl caught his eye."

Also, eliminating 'was' makes it active instead of passive.

 

[RepresentingEnvy]

I think there are a lot of extra words in that sentence.

"The red-haired girl caught his eye."

Also, eliminating 'was' makes it active instead of passive.

Agreed. Though if you want to make it ultra clear there are several ways.
Example: Standing behind a blonde-haired girl was the red-haired girl who caught his eye.
I don't really have the context, but it would be easier to write a sentence with more context.
Example: The blonde haired girl was stunning; however, the red-haired girl caught his eye.
Note: I am not a great writer, but I hope this helps.

 

[Reinaislost]

I think there are a lot of extra words in that sentence.

"The red-haired girl caught his eye."

Also, eliminating 'was' makes it active instead of passive.

Yes. To make a sentence clear and easy to understand, when a sentence begins with “there” or “it” and includes a linking verb, it is generally better to rewrite it. You can start the sentence with the subject instead.

Like the example the OP provided, it can be unclear to the reader what the sentence is referring to. A few other examples would be:

1. There are many ways you can solve this math problem.
Better: You can solve this math problem in many ways.

2. There were many complaints about the product's quality.
Better: Customers had many complaints about the product's quality.

3. It was my fault that we aren't friends anymore because I behaved badly with her.
Better: We aren't friends anymore because of my bad behaviour.

 

[K5Rakitan]

It's clear. I recommend putting your writing aside for a month or so and then going through it to see if it still makes sense.

 

[ArrogantYoungMaster]

Not clear, this daoist can interpret the sentence in different ways.

'... It was the red-haired girl standing behind the blonde who caught his eye.'

'... It was the red-haired girl standing behind the blonde who caught his eye.'

'The red-haired girl standing behind the blonde caught his eye.'
'It was the red-haired girl, who was standing behind the blonde, who caught his eye.'
'Standing behind the blonde was the red-haired girl who caught his eye.'

 

[Desustar]

first, read up ambiguous sentences on wiki

'... It was the red-haired girl standing behind the blonde who caught his eye.'

who can refer to three things - It, the red haired girl or the blonde. now it refers to the red hair, so not much confusion there. in such cases it is best to use a comma(or atleast what i do)

'It was the red haired girl, standing behind the blonde who caught his eye.' suggests that It - the red hair - was standing behind the blonde, where the blonde in question was the one that caught 'his' eye, whoever he is.

'It was the red haired girl standing behind the blonde, who caught his eye.' suggests that It - the red haired girl - was standing behind the blonde and was also the one that caught his eye.

atleast that's the convention I use and it works in some cases, but yeah, do be aware when you're using ambiguity. also, ambiguity has been used with purpose, so ambiguity is not exactly undesired.

 

[Kaze_NG]

How do you refer to a male "child"/"toddler"? Do you say it, he, or they?
Google says better to refrain from using pronouns in such cases, which sounds weird to me.

Sorry if this question sounds stupid, but as a German, I'm inclined towards "it".
For example "person" is a female noun in German. There you would refer to "The person" as "she", even if the person were male.

 

[LunaSoltaer]

Go he unless he's clearly presenting femme. Then go ahead and ask.

The reason Google is saying avoid pronouns is because it's pandering to the mainstream trans community to a rather absurd level. Pronouns aren't for us. They're for others to refer to us as a shorthand.

EDIT: even if presenting femme he might just be GNC. so you could go ahead and use he and if you get corrected go with the correction (and I hereby give you permission to correct to they if a neopronoun gets thrown at you)

.

If this is one of your characters, you make the rules, but he is the default.

 

[Cipiteca396]

How do you refer to a male "child"/"toddler"? Do you say it, he, or they?
Google says better to refrain from using pronouns in such cases, which sounds weird to me.

Sorry if this question sounds stupid, but as a German, I'm inclined towards "it".
For example "person" is a female noun in German. There you would refer to "The person" as "she", even if the person were male.

'It' is usually considered offensive, since it refers to non-human things.

On the other hand, you might refer to a small child by name instead of pronouns so that they recognize that it's their name through experience.

He would definitely be the default though. Someday we'll have to fix that, but I'm too lazy to do it myself.