Brad,
   It's a big jump from "compelled by context" to "correct". Would that 
be true of other choices as well? It would be easy to cut the first "he" 
and the second "block" in the first sentence, but I would hardly call 
them incorrect. "Reacher was hungry and [he] needed more coffee, so he 
led Vaughn another block north and another [block] west to the dinner." 
We can cut "the place was" and let "practically empty" follow a comma or 
just use a "which" (one word replaces two). How about "Reacher stood 
[for] a second and [then] slid into the booth....". If we can do without 
"for" and "then", are they incorrect as well?
   We have a parallel situation with "will" when used as a mainly time 
reference auxiliary. "The plane will leave/leaves in an hour." Would 
"will leave" be incorrect as well?
   The point I'm trying to make, I guess, is that most people don't 
equate correctness with "minimum words."

Craig

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/