Just curious

[Agentt]

So, I was writing a chappie when I noticed something. Or rather, realised something? Got curious?

The line is this

He must be very exhausted, for even after noticing me, it took a while for him to steady himself.

See that "it"?

What does it stand for?

Like, pronouns are supposed to be substitutes for actual nouns, right?

So, the "it" here should be standing for something? But what is it?

 

[Deleted member 58005]

Yes.

 

[greyblob]

it refers to the action mentioned later (steadying himself)

 

[Cipiteca396]

The 'it' is referring to 'him'. Whoever he is.

Rather than "it took a while for him to steady himself."
It could be "He took a while to steady himself."

 

[JayDirex]

"it took a while" is phrase that westerners say. But the "it" is referring to the action of steadying himself. So basically it can be rewritten as. "The action of steadying himself took a while." Or "it took a while to steady himself."

 

[Agentt]

it refers to the action mentioned later (steadying himself)

But I already did said steadying himself at the end of sentence, so i don't think there would be a need for both the word and the substitute?

it refers to the action mentioned later (steadying himself)

"it took a while" is phrase that westerners say. But the "it" is referring to the action of steadying himself. So basically it can be rewritten as. "The action of studying himself took a while." Or "it took a while to steady himself."

Ah, well, I guess i am outvoted

 

[greyblob]

But I already did said steadying himself at the end of sentence, so i don't think there would be a need for both the word and the substitute?

well it is redundant but not necessarily incorrect

 

[RisRizRitz]

You can just write 'he took a while to steady himself.'

 

[BlackKnightX]

So, I was writing a chappie when I noticed something. Or rather, realised something? Got curious?

The line is this

See that "it"?

What does it stand for?

Like, pronouns are supposed to be substitutes for actual nouns, right?

So, the "it" here should be standing for something? But what is it?

I see nothing wrong with it? “It” seems to represents the passage of time here. “It took a while to steady itself”—now if it’s like this, then you need to worry about that it, but you add “for him” after “a while”, so it’s quite clear who you’re referring to. There’s no problem with it.

Though, if you’re still in doubt, you can also use: “He must be very exhausted, for even after noticing me, he took a while to steady himself.”

I still prefer the original, though. Dunno, it just sounds more natural to me.

 

[Agentt]

I see nothing wrong with it? “It” seems to represents the passage of time here. “It took a while to steady itself”—now if it’s like this, then you need to worry about that it, but you add “for him” after “a while”, so it’s quite clear who you’re referring to. There’s no problem with it.

Though, if you’re still in doubt, you can also use: “He must be very exhausted, for even after noticing me, he took a while to steady himself.”

I still prefer the original, though. Dunno, it just sounds more natural to me.

There isn't any problem with it, I was just curious