The boy who found a pistol

[Bassim]

I am wondering if my sentences are grammatically correct.

The boy who found a pistol in the playground caused mayhem when he pulled the trigger of a gun, which in his eyes must have looked like a toy. The bullet missed his mother by a few centimetres, leaving her in shock.

 

[GoesStation]

Was the gun whose trigger the boy pulled the pistol he had found in the playground? If so, you should omit "of a gun". If not, you should tell the reader where it came from.

Or you could write that he pulled the gun's trigger, clearing up any confusion.

 

[Bassim]

But in my version it is clear where the gun comes from because, after "a gun," the sentence continues, "which in his eyes must have looked like a toy."

 

[emsr2d2]

At the very least, having already mentioned the pistol, you should use "the trigger of the gun" or "the gun's trigger". However, I agree that mentioning it again is redundant. It's clear that the trigger being mentioned is that of the pistol in the first half of the sentence.

 

[GoesStation]

But in my version it is clear where the gun comes from because, after "a gun," the sentence continues, "which in his eyes must have looked like a toy."

The indefinite article is unnatural there. The reader sees "a gun" and wonders which gun we're talking about. The definite article would clarify that, but it's more natural to write "the gun's trigger" than the wordier "the trigger of the gun".

 

[Tdol]

How about in a state of shock?