which contruction do you like better?

She put on a short skirt.


I think the second construction will lead to more confusion than the first. Part of the problem is 'changed into' makes it sound like she shape shifted. Using the 'ing' form makes it sound even worse. The 'ending high on her legs' part is ambiguous as to what it is referring to. But I'm no expert, just a reader.

She wore a dress cut high on her leg... She put on a short dress, showing lots of leg... Lots of leg visible to the eye, thanks to a short dress...

Yeah, I'm not caring for either, but would go with the first. The second sounds like *she* ended high on her legs - which leaves a very strange and confusing picture...

To answer the question, I like #2 better than #1; although, I'm not fond of either. Women would have to answer this, but does dresses have "endings?" Seems to me they're either hemmed short, medium or long.

#1.

And is there a reason this is in past perfect tense? If not, change she'd to she.

The first is less confusing. "The dress she'd changed into ended high on her legs" would get rid of the "that." And as others have stated, the "end" is awkward.

How about simply "She'd put on a minidress"?

I think that minidress covers (pardon the pun) the fact that its hem is high on the leg. Also, unless she's a real weirdo, a reader would reasonably assume that she isn't layering on clothing; she presumably removed her previous garb, and replaced it with the short dress.

Forgetting the dress, because you asked about the construction (He'd brought in a tractor that had a backhoe on its rear. He'd brought in a tractor ending in a backhoe. They'd put in a path that had blue stones sprinkled in it. They'd put in a path sprinkled with blue stones.) I'd use whichever one fits the place you have it, considering the rhythm of other sentences around it. I don't see that one's better than the other.

Keep it simple.

I think both are wordy, but would go with number two.

However, why not, She put on a short dress?

bonitakale said:

I'd use whichever one fits the place you have it, considering the rhythm of other sentences around it. I don't see that one's better than the other.

Click to expand...

Hi, bonitakale. I don't see why you have to always write with such straightforward common sense. It spoils the fun. Can't you let us go on and on for awhile before you do that?

tko, I know you were pulling an example from the top of your head, but in that case, I'm with all the alternates....short and sweet, like a midget covered in marshmallow fluff.

While both are somewhat wordy and unwieldy in construction, in general, editors seem to want a "that-ectomy" performed on the manuscript. It's all a part of honing it down to the essential.

pegasus said:

Hi, bonitakale. I don't see why you have to always write with such straightforward common sense. It spoils the fun. Can't you let us go on and on for awhile before you do that?

Click to expand...

Drat, my social ineptness is showing !