a hand v. his hand

[hhtt21]

"Having consulted Annabel with lowered eyes, Issa plunged a skeletal hand inside his overcoat, then his shirtfront, and drew out a grimy purse of chamois leather. And from it two faded press cuttings, which he passed across the table."?

It is clear that it was his own hand, so why does the author not used "plunged his skeletal hand" instead of "a skeletal hand"? Is this a novelic way of saying such a thing?

https://books.google.com.tr/books?i...ngs, which he passed across the table&f=false

Thank you.

 

[Rover_KE]

He put only one hand inside his coat - not both.

 

[hhtt21]

He put only one hand inside his coat - not both.

He has already two hands, and his hand instead his hands would be one hand.

Thank you.

 

[GoesStation]

He has already two hands, and his hand instead his hands would be one hand.

"Plunged a skeletal hand" is a more elegant style and avoids repeating "his".

 

[hhtt21]

'His (skeletal) hand' could suggest that he had only one (skeletal) hand.

I think that this is very strange because almost all people with two hands only use their one hand, and this makes me think that in speaking everybody say "his hand" instead "a hand".

Thank you.

 

[GoesStation]

...this makes me think that in speaking everybody says "his hand" instead "a hand".

That's correct. The passage is literary, and it's narration, not dialog.

 

[hhtt21]

"Having consulted Annabel with lowered eyes, Issa immersed a skeletal hand inside his overcoat, then his shirtfront, and drew out a grimy purse of chamois leather. And from it two faded press cuttings, which he passed across the table."

I changed plunge into immerse, so would the new sentence be identical in meaning with the original?

Thank you.

 

[hhtt21]

Would saying as 2. "Issa immersed a skeletal hand inside his overcoat, then his shirtfront, and drew out a grimy purse of chamois leather" be just as nice as the original?

Thank you.

 

[jutfrank]

No, immersed is not a good choice.

 

[GoesStation]

"Immersed" doesn't convey the sense of rapidity that "plunged" does.

 

[hhtt21]

"Immersed" doesn't convey the sense of rapidity that "plunged" does.

Then if it was put instead plunged, would have the use of immersed been a good choice and conveyed the same idea?

Thank you.

 

[GoesStation]

Then if it was put instead plunged, would have the use of immersed been a good choice and conveyed the same idea?

No. "Immersed" means "submerged", an idea that "put" does not convey.