Thread: Advice on a single sentence

I really should come here more often...



Anyway, I'm writing a short story for my blog, and I've been looking at this sentence for a few minutes. I'm not quite sure how to punctuate this:

"Her modest ride buckled as she shifted gears, and then she was gone, absorbed by the tree-lined street."

The comma seems misplaced between gone and absorbed. I tried a hyphen though, and it gave more punch; however, I'm not sure if I should or not. Any advice?


Thanks

I think it's okay as it is. Alternatively, you could use a semi-colon to replace the first comma. This way, the second comma wouldn't seem too much. If you choose this option delete the and and begin the second clause with then.

The second comma is correct in my opinion.

So, something like this:

"Her modest ride buckled as she shifted gears; then she was gone, absorbed by the tree-lined street."

Thanks a bunch!

Deleted.
Double post.

That looks good. I try not to use semicolons too often for fear of misuse.

Nothing at all wrong with a comma there.

I was exactly the same twelve months ago. I found a punctuation site and held it in a separate window as I wrote. Each time I was uncertain I referred to the rules of the semi-colon. If you read something enough times it sinks in, and eventually I became confident enough to use it knowing it was correct. I'm still uncertain at times, though.

Try this:
Apostrophes | Punctuation Rules
Use the drop down menu to search different punctuation marks.

oh yes, I've actually checked that place out. Great resource!

And thank you.

Thanks, Sam.

Her modest ride buckled as she shifted gears, and then she was gone, absorbed by the tree-lined street.

My first problem, sitting this side of the pond as I do, is actually making sense of the sentence itself. Are we being told that the car, if it was a car and not a horse, was so powerful, that when she accelerated the metalwork buckled under the strain? Are we being told that she was so interested in the trees that they absorbed her? Had the sentence read:

Her modest ride bucked as she shifted gears, then she was gone, absorbed into the tree-lined street. I would have had no argument with it...

I think the original punctuation is okay. It still doesn't read well though. Maybe it's the use of absorbed. I'm thinking there must be a better word choice. Absorbed suggests something relatively slow, and I'm not sure that's what you're after here. Hard to say without the context.

You raise a good point.

Something along the line of "blending in with" and then disappearing.

On first reading I imagined she dissapeared down the tree-lined street. So assumed that's what you meant by absorbed. I liked what Bilston Blue said.

Sorry to rag on it a bit more but I feel like the modest in there is a bit off. That word threw me off a bit.