Which of the statement is grammatically correct?

>>9528117
Neither of them are.

Technically, neither.

>>9528135
>>9528128
What's wrong with them?

>>9528128
>>9528135
Can you guys please rectify and tell me the correct answer?

>>9528138
Comma splice.

Just write it like this:

When your love for number 1 is so strong that you wait years to own what you've wanted all along.

>>9528150
Why did you leave "actually" and what's wrong if the writer excluded "that" and used "you wait" and also "that one thing?"

>>9528171
Actually is a useless word in this sentence and makes the writing a lot more juvenile. There's no reason for it to be there. Using you wait instead of that is what lead to the comma splice in the first place, so if you don't want to use that you'd have to rephrase the entire sentence. One thing again, feels very juvenile and is not needed in the sentence. You can express the same thing with implications rather than adding a ton of useless words that just shit up your writing.

File: Screenshot_2017-05-20-08-45-16-1.png (29KB, 718x221px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 718x221px

>>9528185
What if I tell you I want it to sound like a juvenile? How will you rephrase it?

>>9528220
Bump

>>9528220
Kinda hard to rephrase it well without context, but you could always write it like this:

You know your love for number 1 is strong when you actually, despite your best judgement, wait years for that one thing you've wanted to own all along.

I don't think it's anywhere near good writing, but this way you don't run into any grammatical errors.

>>9528248
>despite your best judgement,
Is that necessary to include? Also, I think you are making it way more complicated.

>>9528248
Will this do?

"You know your love for number 1 is strong, when you actually wait years to own that one thing you've wanted to own all along."

>>9528272
Well, if the guy wants to use the word actually he needs a reason for it to be in the sentence, and that part does the trick. I don't think that sentence is really complicated at all.


>>9528290
Take out the comma and it's technically fine.

>>9528299
>technically fine.
Just fine not grammatically perfect?

Don't use numerals in prose, it's 'one.'

>>9528309
Well obviously, but this is mostly concerned with sentence structure.

>>9528308
Yeah, and it reads a bit awkwardly. It's an improvement, though.

>>9528321

>well, obviously

dont do it then. its one of those amateurish things that triggers me, like using brand names

>>9528321
How would you phrase it if one shouldn't read it awkwardly?

>>9528290
>when you actually wait years
Why is there no "for" in there >>9528299?


Example:
when you actually wait "for" years

>>9528353
For isn't grammatically necessary in that case. And I actually prefer it without.


>>9528325
I only used it because OP put that in there, bud.


>>9528329
"Actually" and "one thing you've" just make the sentence flow pretty awkwardly. I'd find a way to phrase the sentence without relying on those.

>>9528386
>I'd find a way to phrase the sentence without relying on those.
Can you try?

>>9528386
I think this >>9528150 is 100% perfect! What do you think?

>>9528329
Why are you so obsessed with this one sentence you stupid fag. Try reading a book.

I've never properly studied grammar but this seems like it's a caption to a picture like you'll see on twitter

>>9528386
There is nothing awkward about "one thing you've."

>>9528150
>When your love for number 1 is so strong that you wait years to own what you've wanted all along.
That's an incomplete sentence.

>>9528138
they're fragments