Words That Define In Absolute Terms And Those That Don’t

Amateur writing is full of misused modifiers and other syntax culprits that foul a narrative, but nothing may be more glaring than the improper use of some of the rudiments of rhetoric such as “a” and “the” or “will not” and “would not.”
Tex Must have Entered a Bar on the Verge of Foreclosure
The words “a” and “the” are often interchanged without the writer understanding the implication. The cowboy sauntered up to the bar and pulled out the stool, says to the reader that there was just one lone bar stool in the place, since the article “the” implies there is only one of something. Hence, Tex should’ve sauntered up to the bar and pulled out “a” stool.
Chronology also Impacts Correctness
If it’s established for the reader that Tex had pulled out the stool at an earlier point in the scene, then it would be perfectly acceptable for our cowboy to pull out “the” bar stool he’d sat on earlier, since in the world of rhetoric he had taken possession of the object via his prior action. Likewise, if an author had written there was only one open bar stool, or there indeed was only one stool in the bar, then it would be correct to write that Tex sauntered up to the bar and pulled out “the” bar stool, since there would be no other stool in the saloon for him to grab.
Won’t and Wouldn’t are not Synonymous
I read a message on a blog by a fellow who didn’t understand the difference between “won’t” and “would not,” but who was published by a small indie. I’m glad he got it right if he used the words in his story, or certainly his publisher would’ve called him on it. “Won’t,” as the contracted form of “will not” is definitive; conversely, “would not” is imprecise. I “wouldn’t” do something means that you don’t want to do whatever it might be, but it’s not a certainty. It’s the little bit of wiggle room that “would not” provides that distinguishes its meaning from “won’t.”
Don’t Forget “That” and “Which”
It’s easy to lose sight of “that” and “which” as defining modifiers, but they are. It took me the longest time to understand an example I read years ago that differentiated “that” and “which.” It went something like this: The lawnmower that is in the garage is red. The lawnmower, which is in the garage, is red.
The “that” example implies there is more than one lawnmower, but that the specific lawnmower in the garage is red. The “which” phrase means there is only one lawnmower, and it’s in the garage and happens to be red.
If any of you are like me, this at first will make no sense. If anything, it might even seem the opposite should apply. But if you think about it long and hard, at some point the meanings of “that” and “what” in these examples will become clear. And once this is understood, a writer is one step closer to crafting prose with modifiers that accurately define.
Parse a Manuscript for Places where Words are Placed in the Incorrect Context
It’s easy to make mistakes with either of the sets of words I mentioned in this article. With most narratives, “a” and “the” are much more problematic than “will not” and “would not,” but it’s incumbent on the author to make certain these words convey their intended meaning.
Did Tex really pull out the only bar stool in the Long Branch Saloon? And what did he actually mean when he said he wouldn’t go upstairs to see Madam Carlotta? I don’t believe there was only one bar stool in the Long Branch any more than Tex would never make a visit to Madam Carlotta’s boudoir again.