2

I am working on proofreading a first-time novel. The author repeteadly uses 'said' as part of a kind of compound verb (dropping the subject after 'and'):

"I don't understand," he said, and then walked away.

"This is your fault," she said, and turned to face the mountain.

"I'm sorry," said Bill, and smiled.

As much as I feel sure that this can't be right, and that the compound verb is broken by the unconventional syntax around 'say', I can't find any grammar rules or explanations to help clarify it. Of course, just adding another subject before the second verb would fix it, but I'd like to know how to explain that this more concise structure is wrong.

Am I right and this is wrong, and why?

tchrist
  • 134,759
David Ch.
  • 171
  • 1
    In what way do you think it is wrong? – Lawrence Jul 14 '21 at 16:04
  • The sentence at "Come in!" she said, and opened the door. has not been flagged ungrammatical on ELL, nor has the 'compound predicate' classification been challenged. – Edwin Ashworth Jul 14 '21 at 16:56
  • I would say the first two are clunky but syntactically valid. The third is wrong; you can't a form a compound predicate with a quotative inversion like said Bill — the subject gets in the way. You can see that more clearly by comparing these: 1. He said, "I don't understand," and then walked away. 2. She said, "This is your fault," and turned to face the mountain. 3. Said Bill, "I'm sorry," and smiled. – Tinfoil Hat Jul 14 '21 at 17:15
  • This is a style question. As an editor and reader of modern fiction, the only one that seems particularly odd is 3. Otherwise, I'd recommend not including the commas. You can find this style in many books of fiction. – GArthurBrown Jul 14 '21 at 18:22
  • Related. – tchrist Nov 19 '23 at 17:50

1 Answers1

3

Those are not compound verbs.

A compound verb is a single verb that consists of more than one word, like "give up", "call out", "play down". Your examples have two verbs: "say" and another.

The structure is referred to as a compound predicate. A compound predicate contains two (or more) verbs, with a single subject. In your first example the verbs are "said" and "walked".

"I don't understand," he said, and then walked away.

The reversal of the verb and object in the first part of the compound is legitimate, just as it would be in a single verb predicate. "'I don't understand' he said." is just as valid as "he said 'I don't understand'".

There is no special treatment for "say" or similar verbs.

He threw the drink in her face, and then walked away.

She closed her eyes, and turned to face the mountain.

Your examples are perfectly grammatically correct.

DJClayworth
  • 25,795
  • 1
    I believe that what the asker is referencing by “compound verb“ here is not a phrasal verb comprising several words but rather a compound predicate in which more than one predicate joined by a coordinating conjunction (and, but, or) is grammatically governed by the same subject. So The children laughed and played has a compound predicate because each verb shares the same subject. These are not normally separated by a comma in English, but can be when something more than simple coordination is implied, such as sequencing. – tchrist Jul 14 '21 at 16:27
  • Compound predicates have been covered before on ELU ... several times. But I believe evidence needs to be given that '[S] [said "X"] and [did Y]' / '["X"] [said [S]] and [did Y] is licensed; it is wrong merely to assume that 'There is no special treatment for "say" or similar verbs' (though I believe that this is true). I've had << "Humbug," said Scrooge, and walked across the room." >> (originally << "Humbug!" said Scrooge; and walked across the room." >>) expunged. I didn't answer as I'm fairly sure even the 'quotative verb + quote' + ' 'second' predicate' case has been covered before. – Edwin Ashworth Jul 14 '21 at 16:39