FILL: Not so prompt

[mbarker.livejournal.com]

Original posting 14 March 2009

Writer's Digest, October 2006, has a writing prompt on page 16. They simply want a story in response to the prompt, which they say is taken from The Writer's Book of Matches by the staff of Fresh Boiled Peanuts: A Literary Journal. What I find amusing is that the prompt is a bit ambiguous. See if you have the same trouble I that I do:

A lawyer discovers that his client is guilty of the horrible crime for which he was just found innocent.

The lawyer was just found innocent of the crime? Oh, I see, they meant the client was found innocent -- but then shouldn't that be was guilty? In technical terms, I think they have an ambiguous pronoun reference -- does "he" refer to the lawyer or the client? And then they have mixed tenses -- the beginning is present tense, discovers and is guilty. But the trailing "for which..." seems to be past tense.

I think what they mean is something like "a lawyer discovers that his client committed the horrible crime that the judge ruled that the client was innocent of." Even if it does end with a proposition. Or maybe "After the client is ruled innocent of a horrible crime, a lawyer discovers that he was actually guilty."

Aha, part of the problem is that "for which..." is a dangling modifier -- we don't really want to comment on the crime. We want to comment on the innocence of the client.

Definitely -- After his client is ruled innocent of a horrible crime, a lawyer discovers that the client was actually guilty.

And I did that before my morning tea! Don't you love English? All those little phrases writhing around trying to connect, and sometimes they just manage to grab the wrong reference. Fun!

Oh -- and you could write about the situation, too, I suppose. Although fretting about the grammar seems like a great distraction.

clear skies and fluffy clouds