(her) streaming eyes

redgiant

Senior Member
Cantonese, Hong Kong
Hi, would an addition of "her" in "through (her) streaming eyes" make the sentence sound unnatural? Is that as long as the meaning is clear, you can get by without "her" in this case?


Example
: "We hushed it up for your sake, you ungrateful chit, but you're just like her...." Her aunt caught hold of herself, with what Elizabeth recognized even through streaming eyes as a visible effort. "Mrs. Bronson. Conduct my niece to her room"

Source: Timepiece, Heather Albano

Background: It was well into mid-night when Elizabeth and William came back to their own time after a journey to the future. Elizabeth knew for sure that her aunt would punish her if she found out she had snuck out of the house. William walked her home and nipped back in through the back door of the kitchen where the cook Mrs Bronson was willing to hush up their mischief. Just as William murmured in Elizabeth's ears about their new time-travel plan, her aunt caught them at that precise moment. She inferred that Elizabeth must have been consorting with him. As soon as he left reluctantly, her aunt gave her a good slap, and brought into the argument Elizabeth's grandmother whom she called "harlot".
 
  • PaulQ

    Banned
    UK
    English - England
    This is a question of style - the addition of "her" makes no appreciable difference to the sense or whether it sounds natural. Elizabeth is unlikely to recognize anything though someone else's eyes, so "her" is, basically, unnecessary.
     

    redgiant

    Senior Member
    Cantonese, Hong Kong
    Yes. Sometimes a pronoun can be dropped for style but still within the confines of correct grammar. I've found quite a few examples in the book where pronouns are omitted, especially in this kind of sentence (I don't know the specific term, no expert on grammatical terminology):

    She got back to her feet after being knocked down by a shadow, blouse dripped with flesh blood.
     
    < Previous | Next >
    Top