Post History
It depends on what you want to say/imply. "Engulfed" implies the fire completely surrounded him. "Jumped on" is an odd one, because it implies that it only affected a particular part of his body....
Answer
#3: Attribution notice added
by
System
·
2019-12-08T01:27:41Z (almost 5 years ago)
Source: https://writers.stackexchange.com/a/2282 License name: CC BY-SA 3.0 License URL: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
#2: Initial revision
by
Craig Sefton
·
2019-12-08T01:27:41Z (almost 5 years ago)
It depends on what you want to say/imply. "Engulfed" implies the fire completely surrounded him. "Jumped on" is an odd one, because it implies that it only affected a particular part of his body. It doesn't sound severe, either. "Covered" is similar to engulfed, but isn't as strong. "Devoured" also has a similar connotation to engulfed, but is probably stronger, and it also implies that he was "eaten" by the flames (which raises questions as to how he is still able to shout for help). Therefore, I'd use "engulfed".
#1: Imported from external source
by
System
·
2011-03-28T13:18:53Z (over 13 years ago)
Original score: 2