Which of these is correct?
"He made a quick note, then fumbled his pen."
"He made a quick note, then fumbled with his pen."
Thanks.
"He made a quick note, then fumbled his pen."
"He made a quick note, then fumbled with his pen."
Thanks.
Use of the word "fumbled".
- Thread starter m00bah
- Start date
- Joined
- May 4, 2010
- Messages
- 929
- Reaction score
- 103
- Location
- in ur B&N...facin out AWers bookz...
- Website
- www.jessicaschley.com
This is just native speaker intuition here, I have no grammar book to back this up.
But "to fumble" on its own, because of its use in American football, often connotes to most readers the equivalent of "to drop."
"to fumble with" on the other hand is often interpreted as being the same or similar to "fiddle with," except maybe with the connotation of the fiddling being a bit less skillful.
The dictionary (I did go look it up--Oxford Essential American Edition, 1999), says that the transitive version means "to handle clumsily" in both instances. But I would still think that most people would read "fumbled his pen" as "dropped his pen." Though to be fair, I went to a major Division 1 football school and almost everyone I consort with watches a lot of football.
But "to fumble" on its own, because of its use in American football, often connotes to most readers the equivalent of "to drop."
"to fumble with" on the other hand is often interpreted as being the same or similar to "fiddle with," except maybe with the connotation of the fiddling being a bit less skillful.
The dictionary (I did go look it up--Oxford Essential American Edition, 1999), says that the transitive version means "to handle clumsily" in both instances. But I would still think that most people would read "fumbled his pen" as "dropped his pen." Though to be fair, I went to a major Division 1 football school and almost everyone I consort with watches a lot of football.
'fumbled' doesn't fit either of your examples. How do they sound to your ear?
....he fumbled for his pen.
What are you trying to say -without using 'fumbled?
....he fumbled for his pen.
What are you trying to say -without using 'fumbled?
I don't much like either one. I think this is what you're heading for, but this is too wordy:
"He made a quick note, then dropped his pen, and fumbled with it before [putting it away/getting it back into writing position]."
"He made a quick note, then dropped his pen, and fumbled with it before [putting it away/getting it back into writing position]."
He has hand cramps and basically I was trying to indicate that he struggled to hold onto his pen.
I don't think fumbled for it works. He already had the pen, or he couldn't have made the quick note.
Now you tell us. Why didn't you say this when posing the question?
Did he hold on to it or not?
It really does not help others answer queries when random phrases are quoted out of context.
Did he hold on to it or not?
It really does not help others answer queries when random phrases are quoted out of context.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2010
- Messages
- 2,134
- Reaction score
- 211
I agree with the earlier post that "fumbled his pen" doesn't sound right. The image I get is someone tossing him a pen and he nearly catches it but fails.
I have different problems with the second sentence. "[T]hen fumbled with his pen" leaves me hanging--"fumbled with" doesn't strike me as a result and I want to know what the results of his "fumbling with" his pen are. Either that or I find myself wanting to know what caused the sudden fumbling.
Forced to choose between the two, I'd suggest: "He made a quick note, then fumbled his pen." But I also agree with Bufty that it isn't stellar without context.
Now you tell us. Why didn't you say this when posing the question?
Did he hold on to it or not?
It really does not help others answer queries when random phrases are quoted out of context.
*sigh*
I really don't like your tone again. I've had this problem with your posts before if you remember. I read that post, and it gets my blood pressure up. You could say the same thing without such blunt, aggressive subtext.
The reason I didn't feel the need to provide context was because I thought "fumbled" meant something it isn't. Since I thought that, I presumed everyone else knew that, and it was just a case of finding out what way it should be phrased.
Posts like the ones you provide Bufty are almost enough to make me quit this community because I dread you posting in one of my threads.
Last edited:
Oh, for goodness sake. You're the one who puts the tone in whatever you read. I'm more interested in getting to the heart of what is being asked than searching for ways of putting aggressive sub-text into posts.
If an OP were sitting in front of me I would say exactly the same thing.
Back on track -did he drop the pen or not?
I ask because that determines whether any version of 'fumbling' is appropriate. But you should keep in mind that to have hand cramps suggests he would not be able to do any fumbling at all. Cramp usually means the muscles tighten up.
If an OP were sitting in front of me I would say exactly the same thing.
Back on track -did he drop the pen or not?
I ask because that determines whether any version of 'fumbling' is appropriate. But you should keep in mind that to have hand cramps suggests he would not be able to do any fumbling at all. Cramp usually means the muscles tighten up.
He did drop it but after struggling to hold onto it. The term fumbling in my head meant grasping and re-grasping, so it does not mean what I thought it did, so I have removed all cases of it from my manuscript.
I did not presume that you were looking for ways to put in subtext. That is just the way the posts come across.
Also, in future, if you think one of my posts does not include enough information for you to accurately answer, then I urge you not to bother. Your posts bother me, and it clearly is an issue for you when a post is not to your liking. I have no problem with the way anyone else communicates in this community.
Good day Bufty.
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Messages
- 55,679
- Reaction score
- 25,853
Good heavens, is it Pay No Heed To Direct Address week?
That should be Good day, Bufty.
Do remember that if a particular member gets under your skin, you have the option of ignoring his or her every post. Problem solved, every time. If you feel there's been a violation worthy of the board moderator's intervention, you also have the option of reporting a particular post to the moderator.
Maryn, genteel in her white gloves
That should be Good day, Bufty.
Do remember that if a particular member gets under your skin, you have the option of ignoring his or her every post. Problem solved, every time. If you feel there's been a violation worthy of the board moderator's intervention, you also have the option of reporting a particular post to the moderator.
Maryn, genteel in her white gloves
Glad you have managed to resolve the 'fumbling' issue.
You're unnecessarily hyper-sensitive, my dear, and I really am a friendly wee soul at heart despite the occasional grump.
Us haggis-eating, kilt-swinging, scotch-swilling gits are allowed to grump - we can't help it - we get rejected by our elders and tossed out of the kirk if we don't
- but if my or anyone's posts bother anybody there are three options available.
1. Left click on the red triangle button below that person's avatar and report the post to the mods.
2. Left click on the UserCP to the left in the blue strip along the top of the thread. Select the Settings & Options choice from the drop down list, and then select Edit Ignore List. Pop the offending poster's name in the box, click 'Okay' and Hey Presto! none of the content of that poster's posts anywhere in the site will ever appear on your screen. Now how's that for a helpful and considerate suggestion?
All you have to do then is relax and resist the temptation to be curious when the name appears with no message.
You're unnecessarily hyper-sensitive, my dear, and I really am a friendly wee soul at heart despite the occasional grump.
Us haggis-eating, kilt-swinging, scotch-swilling gits are allowed to grump - we can't help it - we get rejected by our elders and tossed out of the kirk if we don't
- but if my or anyone's posts bother anybody there are three options available.1. Left click on the red triangle button below that person's avatar and report the post to the mods.
2. Left click on the UserCP to the left in the blue strip along the top of the thread. Select the Settings & Options choice from the drop down list, and then select Edit Ignore List. Pop the offending poster's name in the box, click 'Okay' and Hey Presto! none of the content of that poster's posts anywhere in the site will ever appear on your screen. Now how's that for a helpful and considerate suggestion?
All you have to do then is relax and resist the temptation to be curious when the name appears with no message.
You know I wrote an incredible, mind-altering and detailed FAQ on Ignoring another member.
FAQ: How to Put Another Member on Ignore
It even works for Scotsman. It doesn't work for Admins ( I know! It's an unfair and cruel world).
As an aside, if you think Bufty has a tone, best not to think about editorial letters or comments.
Many editors are crusty, vituperative, scotch-swilling curmudgeons; Bufty is a Goidelic pussy-cat in comparison. Heck, he's not even as ornery as the average dissertation chair.
I however am crusty, ornery and vituperative.
I note that the dictionary, as always, is your friend. Note that the American Heritage and Merriam-Webster dictionaries tend to give words in context. So does the Cambridge Dictionary of English, for you British types.
You can even go to Google Books and search for the word or phrase in question and find many instances in publications.
FAQ: How to Put Another Member on Ignore
It even works for Scotsman. It doesn't work for Admins ( I know! It's an unfair and cruel world).
As an aside, if you think Bufty has a tone, best not to think about editorial letters or comments.
Many editors are crusty, vituperative, scotch-swilling curmudgeons; Bufty is a Goidelic pussy-cat in comparison. Heck, he's not even as ornery as the average dissertation chair.
I however am crusty, ornery and vituperative.
I note that the dictionary, as always, is your friend. Note that the American Heritage and Merriam-Webster dictionaries tend to give words in context. So does the Cambridge Dictionary of English, for you British types.
You can even go to Google Books and search for the word or phrase in question and find many instances in publications.
Last edited:
Not to go too far off topic but, speaking as someone who has occasional hand cramps, I have to say it's difficult to write a quick anything while in the grip of one.
Oh, Admin. How could you describe me thus?
You really know how to hit where it hurts.
(Bufty assumes lonely, heart-rending posture and shuffles off stageright left. See how confused I am now? 
)
How could you describe me thus? You really know how to hit where it hurts.
(Bufty assumes lonely, heart-rending posture and shuffles off stage
)
No - I'm never falling in love again after this - never - ever...ever... hey, some of these rhythmic gymnastics ladies at the Olympics are beautiful to watch, aren't they?
Saturday night session at the Olympic Stadium starts in around twenty minutes - byeeeeeee!
Saturday night session at the Olympic Stadium starts in around twenty minutes - byeeeeeee!
Oh, Buff -
You'll break myone day...
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Messages
- 55,679
- Reaction score
- 25,853
I, for one, wonder what Bufty needs to do for twenty minutes to get ready to watch TV. My own ritual is pretty brief and involves the powder room.
Maryn, with a wink, or perhaps a tic
Maryn, with a wink, or perhaps a tic