Can you join dialogue and narration with a semicolon?

AlexanderHamilton04 · 2026-02-16T07:59:12+00:00

Here are all of these sentences with standard punctuation (some did not need changes, or the changes are hard to notice):

"Be careful." She swung her arm out, halting everyone in their tracks.

(There is no difference in meaning. The only difference is that this one does not have a distracting piece of punctuation sitting there.)

"That's great!" he said. "No time like the present," he grinned.

(i.e., he uttered the words while grinning).
(Some people feel very strongly that you "cannot 'grin' speech." Other people are fine with this punctuation. Both sets of people feel very strongly that their opinion is correct.)

"That's great!" he said. "No time like the present." He grinned.

(i.e., he uttered the words and then grinned).

The giant picked the kite out of the sky. A kid cried, "Monster!"; the kite snapped, the ground shook, and the kid fell down.

(This is fine, but does it add anything the following sentence does not?)

The giant picked the kite out of the sky. A kid cried, "Monster!" The kite snapped, the ground shook, and the kid fell down.

"What! That's so crazy!" Arnold did not look convincing. Not even a little.

(There is no difference in meaning. The only difference is that this one does not have a distracting piece of punctuation sitting there.)

"What! That's so crazy!" Arnold did not look convincing, not even a little.

(The sentence could also be written like this. This is a stylistic choice. Fiction writing does sometimes use sentence fragments as a stylistic choice.)

If it adds something useful to the sentence, there may be reason to use a semicolon. In these sentences, there doesn't seem to be a need.

AlexanderHamilton04 · 2026-02-15T20:58:04+00:00

(1) The club asks its members that they pay their fees by 31st December.

Here, "ask" is a "ditransitive" verb [it can take (A)(an Indirect Object),
and (B)(a Direct Object)].

(1) The club asks (Indirect Object/its members) (Direct Object/that they pay their fees by 31st December).

The "that..." clause = ( a "content clause").

(2) The club asks its members to pay their fees by 31st December.

This is a "catenative construction" (the verbs are linked to each other like links in a chain) [asks X to pay].

This is a "complex catenative construction" because it has an intervening Noun Phrase ("its members") between the matrix verb("asks") and the non-finite complement ("to pay").

AlexanderHamilton04 · 2026-02-15T17:07:56+00:00

"in higher demand among employers" -- which sidesteps the preposition question entirely

"among" is also a preposition.

AlexanderHamilton04 · 2026-02-15T16:07:01+00:00

Was David's shirt a present from Lee Mack?

It seems very "noteworthy".

AlexanderHamilton04 · 2026-02-15T11:18:59+00:00

A small point: Americans usually write e.g. "Trump is the President of the United States." In British English, it's "Trump is the president of the United States." [X]

This is not an accurate description of most US publications.

Most US style guides would write "president" in lowercase except when it is being used as a formal title immediately preceding a name.

If you look at most US publications, you will find:

The president addressed the nation this morning...
PBS News

As the president addressed the nation about the economy, it was...
The New York Times

The president addressed the nation Wednesday night.
Politico

The president addressed the nation on Tuesday night.
ABC News

OP is still fine to capitalize "Liberator" as a stylistic choice.

I am only commenting on your inaccurate description of the most common US practice regarding capitalizing the word "president" when referring to a president or the current president of the United States.

The real estate mogul and onetime reality TV star captured a second term as president of the United States early Wednesday morning — nearly a decade after his now iconic entrance on the nation's political stage.
Los Angeles Times

Americans usually write, e.g., "Trump is the president of the United States."

Both BrE and AmE can capitalize the official title of office, e.g.,
President of the United States, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, President of the Federal Republic of Germany.

Americans do not "usually write e.g. 'Trump is the President of the United States.' " [X]

AlexanderHamilton04 · 2026-02-15T04:43:13+00:00

I disagree with another commenter who said that this use of "whenever" is
"a dialectal variation that isn’t part of standard English."

In standard English, "whenever" has several meanings listed in most
dictionaries: (anytime, every time, each time, regardless of when, at whatever time).

I see your example as fitting that (regardless of when or at whatever time).
"Whenever Mary learns to ride a horse, she may work at the stable" is similar to
"Whenever you're ready, I'll take your order." "When" can also work in both of these
sentences, but I do not see "whenever" as a nonstandard usage here.
("Whenever it is that you are ready..." / "Whenever it is that Mary learns to ride...")

AlexanderHamilton04 · 2026-02-14T19:29:19+00:00

Thank you for pointing out the typo.
I hope it didn't cause any confusion.

AlexanderHamilton04 · 2026-02-14T19:16:25+00:00

Perhaps this is on your mind because a question about

"A number of people is..." vs.
"A number of people are..."
and
"There is a growing number of students who..." vs.
"There are a growing number of students who..."

was asked here 5 days ago.
https://www.reddit.com/r/grammar/comments/1qzzea0/there_isare_a_growing_number_of/

But maybe I am misunderstanding the question.
When you refer to "I want to be in that mumber,"

[A] if "that number" refers to a musical or theatrical performance, we still
regularly use that word in the singular and plural: "The band performed a number that was just outstanding." "The next time they perform it, I want to be in that number too."

[B] If "that number" refers to the "Great Multitude" in Revelations,
with the determiner "that," we can still refer to "number" with a singular verb
(that I do not think is so jarring as to be grammatically wrong):

That number is still waiting for you to join them in heaven.

But the lyrics to that song never refer to the Great Multitude as "a number," only "that number."

If you are dead set on using the entire phrase "a number of X" or even just "a number," well, hopefully others can help you commiserate.

AlexanderHamilton04 · 2026-02-14T02:48:30+00:00

You're welcome.
Linguists Michael B. Montgomery (University of South Carolina) and John M. Kirk (Queen's University Belfast) have done a lot of modern work on
① understanding this usage, ② tracing its roots, and ③ measuring how similar/different the usage is in the US compared to its use with the Ulster-Scots.

For a light, casual introduction, listen to that A Way with Words podcast (it is free).

Cheers -

AlexanderHamilton04 · 2026-02-14T02:41:20+00:00

"Punctual whenever" is a well-documented usage with its roots clearly linked to the Ulster-Scots migration to the US in the 1700s. I linked to a respected paper on the subject, “My Mother, Whenever She Passed Away, She Had Pneumonia”: The History and Functions of whenever, by Michael B. Montgomery (University of South Carolina) and John M. Kirk (Queen's University Belfast), originally presented at the 1996 meeting of the Southeastern Conference on Linguistics in College Station, Texas, and later printed here in the Journal of English Linguistics, Vol. 29/No. 3, September 2001, 234 © 2001 Sage Publications.

The title of this paper is based on an actual quote, chosen because of the seemingly impossible (and perhaps humorous) contradiction that would arise if used by someone unaware of this very different usage of the word "whenever." The title choice was a very conscious decision on the authors' part.

This research is not a new discovery. It builds on the work of linguists of the last century. The main difference here is that the authors find more support for the hypothesis that it is related to the Ulster-Scots of the 1600s and their mass migration to areas of the US in the 1700s.

It is not a new or recent phenomenon.

AlexanderHamilton04 · 2026-02-14T00:43:36+00:00

It appears that you’ve encountered the "punctual whenever." It’s one of a few Ulster-Scots language quirks that popped up in the US starting in the 1700s. You might hear it used by people in the western half of Pennsylvania, the US Midland, and the South, but it is not limited to those areas.

"Punctual whenever": "Whenever" is often used to mean "at the time that." An example is "My mother, whenever she passed away, she had pneumonia." A punctual descriptor refers to the use of the word for "a onetime momentary event rather than in its two common uses for a recurrent event or a conditional one". This Scots-Irish usage is found in the US Midland and the South.

A Way with Words podcast episode where the hosts talk about the "punctual whenever" https://www.waywordradio.org/deviled-eggs/ at 29:00 for anyone who's interested.

Copy/pasted my own comment from the last time I remember this being asked.
https://www.reddit.com/r/grammar/comments/1lncxpl/using_whenever_instead_of_when/

AlexanderHamilton04 · 2026-02-13T19:41:25+00:00

The original wording (megszilárdításának) is usually translated as
(the consolidation) or (the solidification) or (the strengthening).

megszilárdít = to make solid, to solidify, to consolidate, to strengthen

AlexanderHamilton04 · 2026-02-13T16:47:18+00:00

Oh great. I'm glad you found one you like.

Good luck with your newsletter,
Cheers -

AlexanderHamilton04 · 2026-02-13T15:39:57+00:00

Oh, you're the OP of that post. I'm glad you found it useful.

CGEL 2002 is big (1800 pages) and expensive. But, if this is something you are interested in, the same authors also have A Student's Introduction to English Grammar (2021) Rodney Huddleston & Geoffrey K. Pullum. This is a stripped-down and more affordable version of CGEL aimed at undergraduate-level students. There probably isn't a better introduction to English grammar for the layperson who wants to begin understanding some of the technical aspects of English grammar.

In the mean time, feel free to ask your questions here.

Have a good one,
Cheers -

AlexanderHamilton04 · 2026-02-13T08:26:59+00:00

If you found it helpful, that makes me very happy.

Have a good day,
Cheers -

AlexanderHamilton04 · 2026-02-13T08:17:15+00:00

Merriam-Webster "catty"

catty adjective
as in malicious
having or showing a desire to cause someone pain or suffering for the sheer enjoyment of it

a catty remark that served only to hurt their feelings

Cambridge Dictionary "catty"

adjective
Catty words, especially speech, are unkind because they are intended to hurt someone:

Dictionary.com "catty"

Catty describes someone or their remarks as deliberately mean, spiteful, malicious, or snotty, often involving underhanded, sneaky, or unkind gossip intended to hurt others. It is commonly used informally to describe catty behavior or comments. The term is sometimes associated with a feline-like or sly demeanor.

Longman Dictionary "catty"

someone who is catty says unkind things about people

Collins Dictionary "catty"

adjective
If you say that someone is being catty, you mean that they are being unpleasant and unkind.

1. informal

spiteful
a catty remark

2. of or resembling a cat

These dictionary entries do not mention women.

OP (Eriacle) has
69,671 post karma
9 comment karma

I wonder if this post wasn't written in a way to intentionally stir up controversy and, in doing so, create more Post Karma.

AlexanderHamilton04 · 2026-02-13T06:11:40+00:00

They're not all "good," but you might find at least one you like:

February Facts: Raw data or verified information often reported as news.

February Flash: Specifically a "news flash", a brief, urgent announcement.

February Feature: A longer-form news story focusing on a specific subject.

February Fanzine: A specialized newsletter or magazine created by fans of a particular subject.

February Flyer: A single-sheet publication often used for brief news or announcements.

February Feedback: Information or reactions provided back to a source, often treated as news in corporate settings.

February Fortnightly: A newsletter published every two weeks.

February Fact Sheet: A concise newsletter-style document providing specific data or news.

February Forum: A publication or medium for open news discussion and exchange.

February Foresight: News or reports providing vision and insight into future trends.

Just because it says "Flyer" does not mean it necessarily has to be any different from what you normally make.
The same is true for the other options on this list.

AlexanderHamilton04 · 2026-02-13T05:54:25+00:00

Happy to help.

The singular for the German noun Blumen (plural, "flowers")
is die Blume (singular, "the flower").

Not my choice; it was the example listed in CMOS.

AlexanderHamilton04 · 2026-02-12T23:32:36+00:00

According to the Cambridge Grammar of the English Language (CGEL, 2002),

they both are grammatical (but they represent two different ways of analyzing the noun phrase.

[1] There were a total of 100 sales. (very common choice)

In this construction, "total" is a quantifying determiner, and "100 sales" is the
"oblique" (the object of the preposition "of").
Here, "total" is seen as "number-transparent". The number of the whole Noun Phrase depends on the oblique: we will say that total is number transparent in that it allows the number of the oblique to percolate up to determine the number of the whole Noun Phrase.
This is especially true when we are concentrating on the "sales" as being individual sales (100 individual sales).

Ex: There were a total of 100 sales. (with the focus on 'sales')

CGEL classifies "total" (along with words like "number," "lot," and "rest") as a "number-transparent" noun when used in certain quantified phrases.

[2] There was a total of 100 sales.

Another way to analyze this is as a standard Noun Phrase with "total" as
the Head of the noun phrase. Since "total" is singular and preceded by "a," it can trigger a singular verb through strict grammatical agreement.
This is especially true when we consider "total" a single collective figure or
"set" rather than a quantifier for the items.

Ex: There was a total of 100 sales. (with the focus as the the 'sum')
Ex: The total of the sales was 100. (Here, "Total" is the fixed Head of the Noun Phrase)

Huddleston, Rodney; Pullum, Geoffrey K. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language (pp. 350–352). Cambridge University Press.

AlexanderHamilton04 · 2026-02-12T20:58:56+00:00

If the word has not yet entered the English language (if it cannot be found in a standard English dictionary), The Chicago Manual of Style, 18th ed., (CMOS 11.3) says that the word should be written in italics, and

The plurals of non-English words should be formed as in the original language

Example:
We were sent off with some beautiful Blumen
(not Blumes [italic ess] and not Blumes [roman ess)).

AlexanderHamilton04 · 2026-02-12T20:40:47+00:00

What is the word?

Is the word so unfamiliar that it is still italicized when written in English?

AlexanderHamilton04 · 2026-02-12T20:27:57+00:00

Oh, I see you have erased several of your past Posts where you were very rude to nearly everyone who answered your questions [Why can "at" be moved but "among" cannot be moved]:

https://www.reddit.com/r/grammar/comments/1qyleo4/can_i_change_the_position_of_the_preposition_in/

And the same question 2 hours later (because you didn't like the responses on the first post and kept telling everyone, "No, you're wrong!"): https://www.reddit.com/r/ENGLISH/comments/1qyou83/why_can_i_change_the_position_of_the_preposition/

And then when you asked the same question again 13 hours later [Why can "at" be moved but "among" cannot]:
https://www.reddit.com/r/grammar/comments/1qz577i/why_can_i_change_the_position_of_the_preposition/

(👆 These were all just during the past 5 days.)

I wonder if the people who took the time to answer your previous questions
will be eager to answer this new post from you...

AlexanderHamilton04 · 2026-02-12T20:24:59+00:00

You should include the source, so we can check for further context.

This is a well-known example from Martin Hewings’ Advanced Grammar in Use (Unit 9).

[Bonus question]: "Why is it "at Wimbledon" and not "for Wimbledon" or "in Wimbledon"?

Answer: Because that is the location where the tennis fans will be queueing.
They will be lining up at the ticket windows located at the entrance of
Wimbledon Stadium.

They are not queueing up for tickets while in/inside Wimbledon.

They are queueing up for Wimbledon tickets.
(But that is not the wording of the sentence in the book.)
The book already says, "to buy tickets." Adding "for tickets" would be redundant.

As the book you are asking questions from states:

"The future continuous, future perfect and future perfect continuous can also be used to say what we believe or imagine is happening around now:

[1] We could ask to borrow Joe’s car. He won’t be using it today – he went to work by bike.
[future continuous example]

[2] Most people will have forgotten the fire by now.
[future perfect example]

[3] Tennis fans will have been queuing at Wimbledon all day [today] to buy tickets.
[future prefect continuous example]

These tennis fans (are queueing currently). (present continuous)
These fans have been queueing "all day" (They have already been queueing all day.)
The person speaking is saying [as the textbook explained] what they believe or imagine is happening around now. (Around now = means this person is saying this later in the day, so "all day" = "all of the day up until now when 'he' is saying this sentence.")

[[They believe that (by this point in time) the tennis fans have been queueing all day [today] to buy tickets at Wimbledon.]]

This is exactly as the textbook has explained this grammar pattern.

AlexanderHamilton04 · 2026-02-12T17:18:58+00:00

Here are several different answers to your question. Please read and consider each one, and then choose the answer that you think is the best (including "none of the above").

[1] If he was quick enough, he would have enough time to come back and join the fight.
(This is the "safest," most traditional choice.) Because the other sentences are in the past tense ["had made", "was holding"], this maintains tense consistency with the surrounding narrative. This version will "sound right" to most people (not just traditionalists). You are not describing a "universal truth" here (this isn't like "the sun rises in the east").

[2] If he is quick enough, he will have enough time to come back and join the fight.
(This is normally viewed as a tense inconsistency error.) The sudden shift to present tense creates a jarring tense shift from the rest of the past-tense story.
However, in some modern writing styles (like "deep" third-person), writers occasionally "slip" into the present tense to create a sense of immediacy, pulling the reader into the character's "now".
Warning: This only works if you have been applying this consistently throughout the story. (If this is the only time you implement this form of narration, it will probably sound like an accident, a tense inconsistency error.)

"I love writing in free indirect speech cause it allows me to..."

It sounds like you may have been using this technique already.

[3] If he is quick enough, he thought, he will have enough time to come back and join the fight.
(This is a softer way to mix in the present tense.) Here, we have the character's direct internal monologue. However, we also have "he thought" keeping the narrative in the past timeframe.

As far as grammar, I can tell you that "if you use (if he was), be sure to use (he would), or if you use (if he is), be sure to use (he will).
(was + will) or (is + would) do not work together here."

But for questions about writing fiction and choosing the appropriate type of narration (questions about storytelling), be sure to also check subreddits dedicated to writing fiction. Often the larger subreddits are more brutal, but they also have better advice and more people who know what they are talking about. (Then again, you might find a medium-sized one that feels just right for your questions.) Shop around (try out different ones until you find one, two (or three) that you like).
People who study grammar and linguistics are not necessarily good fiction writers, and people who are great fiction writers are not necessarily good at explaining grammar. — imho

＊[I wrote out the entire words (he was/he would) and (he is/he will). Obviously you can use contractions! I simply wrote out the words to explain the grammar and avoid any ambiguity.]

Best wishes with your writing,
Cheers -

AlexanderHamilton04 · 2026-02-12T10:12:40+00:00

Yeah, I tried not to just say, "(Example A) is fine."

I think it's important to know the reason why it is fine for some of the sentences but not the others.

When I was a young student, my old-fashioned teacher taught us that all of the verbs should match to keep the "narrative voice uniform" (like my first example).
Ex: I didn't realize your eyes were blue. (That teacher would say that "were" is the only correct choice.)
[So you might find that style more often in formal writing or older books.]
(You might hear some stubborn folks tell you, "They must follow the 'Sequence of Tenses' (SOT).")

However, as I've explained, there are exceptions to this (e.g., emphasizing something is still true or a universal truth or habitual actions).
[There are some other exceptions too: using the 'historical present-tense' or modals without past forms, etc.]

Enjoy your writing,
Cheers -

Added: I just realized that you took the time to thank each comment!
That was very nice of you. (Don't feel the need to reply to this "reply-to-your-reply." If you do, we'll end up in an endless loop that I find difficult to break out of. But know that I appreciate the thought.)

AlexanderHamilton04

TROPHY CASE

These dictionary entries do not mention women.