Help with a minor point of grammar

He crosses the room to a line of unpacked moving boxes on the floor against the wall.

I was going to propose He crosses the room to where unpacked moving boxes sit on the floor against the wall., but I think AW Admin's is better

...but to answer your question, it's only one line, so it sits.

He crosses the room to where a line of unpacked moving boxes sits on the floor against the wall.

Click to expand...

A way to simplify, if interested....

He walks over to a line of unpacked, moving boxes against the far wall.

Enlightened said:

A way to simplify, if interested....

He walks over to a line of unpacked, moving boxes against the far wall.

Click to expand...

Are the boxes moving?

Perhaps rewrite the sentence like this (for example):

He crosses the line in the unpacked room where boxes move on the floor against the wall.

soulrodeo said:

Sorry, the boxes aren’t moving! They’re moving boxes. Like, moving house. Living somewhere new. Do you not call them moving boxes? We do! Eep. I may need to get rid of the sentence completely.

Click to expand...

No, we understood! I think Enlightened was making a joke that I took literally.

(I've got a stack of unfolded moving boxes in my living room at the moment. *struggles to make a stationary stationery pun*)

Helix said:

Are the boxes moving?

Click to expand...

Nope, I was not making a joke. My comma made moving into a verb. Good catch.

soulrodeo try this edit....

He walks over to a row of empty moving boxes against the far wall.

Helix said:

No, we understood! I think Enlightened was making a joke that I took literally.

(I've got a stack of unfolded moving boxes in my living room at the moment. *struggles to make a stationary stationery pun*)

Click to expand...

*Visualizes unfolded boxes moving in the living room.*

Is this a horror story?

Helix said:

Are the boxes moving?

Click to expand...

Yes. Because they're unpacked. If they were still packed, they'd be too heavy to stumble about on their own.

Enlightened said:

Nope, I was not making a joke. My comma made moving into a verb. Good catch.

soulrodeo try this edit....

He walks over to a row of empty moving boxes against the far wall.

Click to expand...

I personally like dropping 'on the floor' as enlightened did here, because I assume they are on the floor.

He crosses the room to where a line of unpacked moving boxes sit on the floor against the wall.


He walked across the room to a line of empty moving boxes that were sitting against the wall.

soulrodeo said:

Thanks guys!



The book’s in present tense.

Click to expand...

Oops, didn't know that. Anyway: He walks across the room to a line of empty moving boxes that are sitting against the wall. Or: He walks across the room to a line of empty moving boxes sitting against the wall. There, present tense.

Not what you asked, but why is he walking across the room to these boxes?

Is it possible to focus instead on his purpose or intent upon reaching the boxes? 'Walking across' is pretty mundane - no?

And depending upon context, unpacked could be interpreted to mean not yet unpacked. Empty is clearer.

This seems grammatically perfect:

AW Admin said:

He crosses the room to a line of unpacked moving boxes on the floor against the wall.

Click to expand...

Good point about syntax:

Bufty said:

Not what you asked, but why is he walking across the room to these boxes?

Is it possible to focus instead on his purpose or intent upon reaching the boxes? 'Walking across' is pretty mundane - no?

And depending upon context, unpacked could be interpreted to mean not yet unpacked. Empty is clearer.

Click to expand...

Since this is a grammar and syntax thread, I can't figure how the comma in "He walks over to a line of unpacked, moving boxes against the far wall" makes "moving" a verb.

Enlightened said:

Nope, I was not making a joke. My comma made moving into a verb. Good catch.

Click to expand...

Isn't it actually an unnecessary comma between cumulative adjectives where none should be to make sense? It's not two coordinate adjectives which do require a comma.

Please excuse continuing to beat this to death . It's a failing of old, has-been teachers .

Enlightened said:

A way to simplify, if interested....

He walks over to a line of unpacked, moving boxes against the far wall.

Click to expand...

This is a great example of how comma placement can change the entire meaning of a sentence

The comma, or its absence, makes it clear whether we are referring to "moving boxes" as a single noun vs boxes that are moving.

Chase said:

Since this is a grammar and syntax thread, I can't figure how the comma in "He walks over to a line of unpacked, moving boxes against the far wall" makes "moving" a verb.

Click to expand...

Because including the comma indicates the boxes are both unpacked and moving. Each of the two words separated by a comma count as separate adjectives, negating the interpretation "moving boxes" as a single compound noun.

The comma is not needed if you are referring to moving boxes that are unpacked (moving boxes being a single compound noun with an understood definition, being a special type of box used for "moving" as a noun specifically naming the process of changing house locations) anymore than you would need to put a comma in a sentence that reads: "He walks to a line of unpacked boxes against the wall."

soulrodeo said:

GUYS. OMG. I'm having a crisis now. I've used unpacked because the boxes are still packed. They're full. Bufty points out that 'empty' is clearer but I mean the exact opposite and now I'm having an existential moment about what unpacked means! lmao. Help. Unpacked doesn't mean full, does it? It literally means empty. So I'm wrong. Right? Contents removed. My brain is mush over this. I'm trying to think in all the times I've moved house if I've referred to our full boxes as still unpacked. LOL.

Click to expand...

I'm so sorry. That reminds me of how my FIL always referred to the "blunt" of an object's force, and no one ever corrected him because Man of the House.

Trust the Buft.

edit: to be fair, I think if someone said "boxes still unpacked" I read that as different from "unpacked boxes."
Now you have my brain messed up too! THANKS FOR THAT!

Hi, soulrodeo. Just goes to show all of us that clarity is king.

I assume this is your way of letting us know he's just moved into a new house/flat. But he could be on the point of moving out.

If prior context confirms the moving situation i.e., just arrived in or just moving out or whatever, the intended meaning of 'unpacked' may be perfectly clear and no change needed. Context invariably clarifies the meaning where a word has a possible double meaning.

Confusion often reigns when isolated sentences are submitted here without any context and some clown like me decides to nit-pick.

soulrodeo said:

GUYS. OMG. I'm having a crisis now. I've used unpacked because the boxes are still packed. They're full. Bufty points out that 'empty' is clearer but I mean the exact opposite and now I'm having an existential moment about what unpacked means! lmao. Help. Unpacked doesn't mean full, does it? It literally means empty. So I'm wrong. Right? Contents removed. My brain is mush over this. I'm trying to think in all the times I've moved house if I've referred to our full boxes as still unpacked. LOL.

Click to expand...

Truly a moving thread

Bufty said:

Confusion often reigns when isolated sentences are submitted here without any context and some clown like me decides to nit-pick.

Click to expand...

You don't get to be the only clown, Bufty. Not that my take was all wrong (but lots ) --it's now sunk into my thick head how others' takes were equally (even more ) right.

Special apologies to Enlightened and Roxxsmom.

If those sincere regrets are accepted, someone has to be blamed for starting all this. I've hit the blame button several times, but Admin won't ban Soulrodeo. Moving to tears am I.

PS: Great thread Soulrodeo and all.