"Reassigned his eyes to the computer screen."?

No. It's out of context and clumsy to boot unless he has eyes outside his body that he is remotely controlling or instructing somehow.

Why use 'reassigned'?

He glanced back to the computer screen, or similar is simpler, clearer and more correct if he is human like the rest of us.

"Reassigned" is not the verb you're looking for, methinks. And, for a short sentence, it's pretty wordy. "He looked back at the computer screen" expresses the same thing. And context matters. You might not need this sentence at all. Or you might. But you don't need to describe every little motion or action at every point.

caw

That's a peculiar way to put it, but it does make it clear that he started looking at the monitor. It would be more common to simply say, "He turned his attention to the computer monitor." or "He started looking at the monitor."

"Reassigned" is not right for that. You might look at synonyms to see if something works better. I think that "turned" or "shifted" would work better.
http://www.thesaurus.com/browse/reassigned

Do you have a particular reason for mentioning his eyes? If you don't then
"He looked at the computer."
"He turned his attention to the computer."
More context might make it easier to think of suitable wording.

It is grammatical, is right, and does make perfect sense. Whether it's the best way of saying it is another matter. It all depends on the particular story and character.

Good writers charge what they say, an dhow they say it, based on the particular story and character, so, yes, "reassigned" is perfectly correct, if it's in the right story, and pertains to the right character.

yeah, depends on the context and character
impossible to really give an opinion without that
your first version could be fine

Maybe "readjusted" would be a better choice.

I'd use "He returned his eyes to the computer screen." It seems the most ordinary way of saying what you're trying to say, and it sounds like that's what you want.

(There is a place for sentences that jump! out! at! the! reader! but it doesn't sound like that's what you're looking for here.)

Skabr said:

Hi,

Thanks for all the helpful replies!

In order to give context, I'm quoting a few lines of the text:

I enter the room and find Timmy working at the computer, probably doing school work. Wow! He is becoming diligent!
I go ahead and smile at him.
"How are you, Timmy?" I ask.
"I'm busy, Olivia," he says as he looks up at me.
"Good!" I say. He nods and reassigns his eyes to the computer screen. I leave him there and come out of the room.

This is a YA short story (written in present tense) with a YA protagonist. So, what would you now say about the sentence? Does He nods and reassigns his eyes to the computer screen. sound right?

Thanks a lot,
Skabr

Click to expand...

I think that, "He nodded and turned back to the computer monitor," would be better. "Assign" or "reassign" doesn't really fit.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/reassign?s=t

or, as Mark Twain put it:
13. Use the right word, not its second cousin.
From "FENIMORE COOPER'S LITERARY OFFENCES"
http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/3172/pg3172.txt

Redirected? Refocused his eyes on? Returned his eyes to?

Skabr- if you want folk to read what you write you have to write with clarity, and that means not using totally inappropriate verbs such as 'reassign' in the scene you have outlined.

'Reassign' will only work in this scene if the character concerned can give his eyeballs separate instructions, which means he is a robot of some sort. If he is human like us, the verb is totally wrong.

Jamesaritchie said:

It is grammatical, is right, and does make perfect sense. Whether it's the best way of saying it is another matter. It all depends on the particular story and character.

Good writers charge what they say, an dhow they say it, based on the particular story and character, so, yes, "reassigned" is perfectly correct, if it's in the right story, and pertains to the right character.

Click to expand...

I'd agree with this. It's so hard to say whether something works without context.

I don't know what the context would be for "reassigned" instead of turned back towards. Maybe if the point of view character is pedantic or self important, and he always uses that kind of coercive language about his own body. I'd probably write, "He forced himself to focus on the monitor again" or something like that, but it's hard to say.

Isolated snippets are hard to judge.

Well, at this point of the thread we have six people, I believe, all of them obviously good readers, who find the verb "reassign" to be inappropriate, and only two who think it might be. That says something about how this construction will be received by readers in general. I don't think having 3/4 or more of your readers stumbling over a verb like this is what you want. To me, the sentence just reads like you are trying to hard to sound "writerly" and looking for the unusual in a place where simpler is better. There are moments to goose the writing a bit with an unusual construction or word choice, but those are nearly always done for emphasis, to be noticed by the reader. This example, describing a mundane little action, just doesn't strike me as one of those.

Also, as has been pointed out, it's not a grammatical issue. Perfect grammatical construction does not equate to effective writing.

caw

I agree that it sounds a bit strange. Also, I'd watch overdoing the small motions and facial expressions in general. It's a common error and the reason I say it's an error is because it's often not adding anything to the story. We usually assume people's eyes are appropriately focused wherever they should be and usually get it by the situation and dialogue when someone would be smiling. Same with looking up, nodding, and leaving the room. It adds up to a lot of very uninteresting detail that's expected anyway, like telling us the characters breathed in and then breathed out. Or, when they are given a small motion/facial expression along with every dialogue line, it begins to sound like everyone in the story has St. Vitus dance. Best to add lightly and for a reason, not everywhere.