The Crow

[exvagrant]

…

 

[emsr2d2]

It's too long for me to deal with the whole thing right now, but I've read the first couple of sentences. My revisions are:

Last week, on my way back to work, I killed a crow. ("back to work" is much simpler than "back to the company I work for", and we don't say "a crow bird". It's just a "crow".)

I had never killed a crow before. (You need the past perfect here because it refers to a time before the time you killed this crow. You can't say "the crow" because that suggests you had never killed this specific crow before. That is illogical - if you had killed it before, it would have been dead and you couldn't have killed it again!)

 

[exvagrant]

Thanks at least for that. Now, when you pointed it out I realize you right I know grammar but have problem to get used to it and no one in real world to correct me . Hope practice makes perfect.

 

[emsr2d2]

Thanks at least for that. Now (no comma here) [strike]when[/strike] that you have pointed it out, I realize you are right. [strike][/strike] I know grammar but have problems/a problem [strike]to get[/strike] getting used to it and I have no one in the real world to correct me. Hopefully, practice makes perfect. [strike][/strike]

See my corrections above. Please don't try to make your own emoticons. On the rare occasion that they are needed, click on and choose from the many available to you.

 

[exvagrant]

Originally posted by emsr2d2:

"Now (no comma here) [strike]when[/strike] that you have pointed it out"

Is it possible to use "when" in sentences like above at all? I am asking because in my language it is very natural to use equivalent in that kind of sentences therefore it is very difficult for me do not use it unless I will understand it thoroughly.

 

[emsr2d2]

Is it possible to use "when" in sentences like above at all? I am asking because in my language it is very natural to use equivalent in that kind of sentences therefore it is very difficult for me do not use it unless I will understand it thoroughly.

The standard phrase is "Now that ..." so I would use "Now that you point it out" or "Now that you have pointed it out". If you want to use "When", I would say something like "When you put it like that, I can see what you mean" or "When someone explains it to me, I understand".

 

[exvagrant]

The standard phrase is "Now that ..." so I would use "Now that you point it out" or "Now that you have pointed it out". If you want to use "When", I would say something like "When you put it like that, I can see what you mean" or "When someone explains it to me, I understand".

What about using "when" in the past ?

 

[tedmc]

The Crow
Last Friday, on my way back to the company I work for, I killed a crow [STRIKE]bird[/STRIKE].

I had never killed [STRIKE]the [/STRIKE] a crow before. As a lorry driver, I had killed many pigeons, at least a dozen the last five years, and I am not very proud of it. However, after some time, I [STRIKE]became [/STRIKE]reconciled myself to [STRIKE]happening it[/STRIKE]doing it sometimes and to [STRIKE][STRIKE]having no any influence on it [/STRIKE][/STRIKE] and not be affected by it. At [STRIKE]first stage[/STRIKE] the beginning, when I killed [STRIKE]one of[/STRIKE] the first pigeon, I explained [STRIKE]it [/STRIKE]to myself it was just a stupid bird but my feelings were far from[STRIKE] settling[/STRIKE] settled for quite a while. Once, I got very angry when a pigeon destroyed a mirror [STRIKE]in[/STRIKE] of the lorry by hitting it and killing[STRIKE] himself[/STRIKE] itself instantly making a [STRIKE]wreath [/STRIKE] shower of [STRIKE]down [/STRIKE] feathers [STRIKE]hanging[/STRIKE] in the air for a while like exploded snowing ball and then snowing down. I don’t know how much a new mirror [STRIKE]were[/STRIKE] cost but I know my boss didn’t believe my story at all. Speaking with other drivers, I found out it is quite common among pigeons to die this way and after another occurrence I got a sudden enlightenment. I realized that pigeons are not stupid. On the contrary, they are unbelievably clever. I came to the conclusion pigeons commit suicides this way as soon as they realize how cruel the world is and how pointless life is in it. I also have been persuaded by the way pigeons were doing it. They would always [STRIKE]came[/STRIKE] come out of nowhere [STRIKE]with [/STRIKE] at an incredible speed usually [STRIKE]changing theirs flying route[/STRIKE] veering straight into an oncoming lorry[STRIKE] not [/STRIKE] without giving [STRIKE]me[/STRIKE] the driver any chance to avoid it and without [STRIKE]hurting [/STRIKE] posing a risk to others [STRIKE]people[/STRIKE] on the motorway. And then – bang! The remains of the corpse, feathers and often [STRIKE]sheet[/STRIKE] on lorry, broken mirror or sometimes even cracked window screen. Instant death. Another pigeon left his troubles behind by committing[STRIKE] selfish [/STRIKE]suicide selfishly and sowing my soul with grieve and remorse for rest of the day.

But let’s go back to the crow.
Crows are another matter. They never ever commit suicide. It seems they want to stay on this world no matter how cruel it is. They seem just [STRIKE]don’t [/STRIKE] not to care about it. It rather looks like they have different problem in their heads and to be honest I do not have any idea what it [STRIKE]can[/STRIKE] could be but one thing I am quite certain is that they, because of that, don’t give a damn about what is going on in this world [STRIKE]about[/STRIKE]. Crows are very happy about what they find on roads and motorways though. They realize that many pigeons, and in particular, rabbits, mice, rats and other rodents, give up their [STRIKE]lifes[/STRIKE] lives under a vehicle’s wheels and becoming an excellent source of food. One can see crows on the road feasting on corpses every single day if they happen to be [STRIKE]on the trip[/STRIKE] passing by. Crows don’t give a hoot to oncoming lorries or other[STRIKE]s[/STRIKE] wheeled monsters, and very reluctantly leaving the table (?) just in time and getting back before wind being sacked behind the vehicle disappear (?) making birds' feathers dancing in the air for a while as if they [STRIKE]got [/STRIKE] are still alive.
I thought, it is quite easy to be clever enough to commit suicide like a pigeon but how clever one has to be knowing the world and behave like a crow? Or… how stupid…
Anyway…, I completely fell in love with crows so imagine how [STRIKE]did[/STRIKE] I fell last Friday, but don’t pick your nose when I spin a yarn…

 

[exvagrant]

Thanks for your correction. However, I don’t quite fallow some of your suggestions.
Below just three of them:

1. I became reconciled --- What wrong with it? I found that description of it: “Becoming reconciled to something means putting up with something because it is not going to go away” and that what I meant. Oxford dictionary also shows it as correct. So, what do you think is wrong there?
2. having no any influence on it and not be affected by it – If I understand dictionary correctly have no influence on sth and not to be affected are two completely different things. The latter changes sense of sentence. Question again: what did you meant by changing it?
3. You changed: “wreath of down feathers “ into “shower of feathers” . Why ??? After oxford dictionary: “wreath - an object wound or coiled into a circular shape” , it can be metal and it can be smoke… in my text it is down of feathers: after oxford dictionary: down – “Soft loose fluffy feathers, as on young birds (used in cushions, quilts, etc.). “ If you use it first time you could say down feather (instead down only) to make clear what you meat and that is what I did. Why shower of feathers then?

Nevertheless, thanks for help. I see that articles and using correct tense is what I need to learn more. Thanks.

 

[emsr2d2]

You can have a "wreath of down". "Down" means "young, fluffy feathers" so you don't need to repeat the word "feathers".

 

[tedmc]

Thanks for the feedback.

1. You cannot say "you become reconciled yourself to something". "Become reconciled" is a state, an adjective, so it is not followed by "myself"(pronoun). When you say " I reconciled myself to..", "reconciled" is a transitive verb which takes an object.
http://forum.wordreference.com/threads/become-reconciled-with-to.1190055/

2. What do you mean by "I have no influence on it"? Have what influence on what? It is not clear. My understanding is that you were immuned to the experience of killing pigeons, having done that on many occasions before and you do not think much about it (not emotionally affected by such killing).

3. Wreath of feathers? A wreath is a ring of flowers. It would sound unbelievable, almost 'magical',that a pigeon would get smashed by a fast-moving vehicle and disintegrates in the air to form 'a ring of flowers' as you described, even as a metaphor. I used 'shower' to mean bits and pieces of the bird being scattered in the air due to the impact of the collision.

Let's hear from the teachers.

 

[exvagrant]

"You can have a "wreath of down". "Down" means "young, fluffy feathers" so you don't need to repeat the word "feathers"."

Thank you.
I added "feather" because I am obsessively concerned with being understood, if fact so much, I had not noticed that writing about pigeons should make clear what "down" means in this sentence.

 

[exvagrant]

Thanks for the feedback.

1. You cannot say "you become reconciled yourself to something". "Become reconciled" is a state, an adjective, so it is not followed by "myself"(pronoun). When you say " I reconciled myself to..", "reconciled" is a transitive verb which takes an object.
http://forum.wordreference.com/threads/become-reconciled-with-to.1190055/

2. What do you mean by "I have no influence on it"? Have what influence on what? It is not clear. My understanding is that you were immuned to the experience of killing pigeons, having done that on many occasions before and you do not think much about it (not emotionally affected by such killing).

3. Wreath of feathers? A wreath is a ring of flowers. It would sound unbelievable, almost 'magical',that a pigeon would get smashed by a fast-moving vehicle and disintegrates in the air to form 'a ring of flowers' as you described, even as a metaphor. I used 'shower' to mean bits and pieces of the bird being scattered in the air due to the impact of the collision.

Let's hear from the teachers.

Thanks. I hope I understand your intention now.

ad1. What about : "As a lorry driver I killed many pigeons, at least dozen last five years, and I am not very proud of it however after some time I became reconciled to happening it sometimes and to having no any influence on it." ? Lack of "myself" makes it more sensible?

ad2. It is one long sentence, I thought it is clear that "having no influence on it" refers to the beginning of sentence. Maybe some commas would make it more clear?

ad3. After oxford dictionary: "wreaths of smoke ring, loop, circle." Why not wreath of down then? I was so puzzled by your comment I asked my English friend. He was a bit surprised but said it is correct although sounds very poetic. My intention was to describe it as main character ( not me by the way) have seen it and trigger a bit imagination of reader at the same time. For me reading is all about imagination like this sentence : " making birds feathers dancing for a while as if they got alive" when in my head I see feathers dancing/moving by wind on the bird itself ( with connection with my text of course) and your corrected sentence : "making birds' feathers dancing in the air " where actually I see feathers unattached to the bird... but in the air .

I could only promise I will work harder on my next text to make it more transparent. Thanks.

 

[tedmc]

I became reconciled to happening it sometimes and to having no any influence on it.

This sentence is still not right.

I leave it to the teachers to give their comments.