0

I want to describe a river bank which has a lot of reeds, to the extent that I can see nothing else but reeds on the bank, till now I only came up with:

The river bank is fully covered with reeds

Is this sentence correct, and is there a much more beautiful way to say that?

When the wind blows, the rustling of the reeds is very good

I need to replace this adjective too, to convey such a feeling that I love listening to the rustling?

3
  • I like your sentence the way it is. It sounds very nice. About your rustling, I think you can write the rustling [...] is very nice or [it] is very pleasant. Feb 8, 2014 at 9:49
  • 1
    Reeds grow in marshes, bogs, and other wet areas (1,2). They do not grow on the banks of rivers. River banks are earth, rocks, etc alongside a river (3) and are elevated slightly above the river. Feb 8, 2014 at 18:42
  • 1
    Beauty is in the eye of the beholder (or, in this case, in the mind of the reader). That said, riverbank can be written as a single word; I would recommend that change. Also, I don't think you need to say "fully covered" – if something is "covered," it's (by default) "fully" covered. I prefer: The riverbank is covered with reeds. Perhaps even better: The riverbank is overgrown with reeds.
    – J.R.
    Feb 8, 2014 at 23:33

1 Answer 1

0

The sentence looks perfect as is. However I have some alternatives:

"There were reeds all over the river bank"

"At the river bank, all I could see were reeds"

For the second one, you could say:

"When the wind blows, the rustling of the reeds is very soothing"

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .