Are either of these sentences wrong?

[RabbitsarenotHares]

"The noise hit her when she came out the room which stopped her in her tracks."

"The noise hit her when she came out the room and stopped her in her tracks."

A friend came across a sentence like one of the above and insists it's wrong and should be the other. Am not saying which is which, but would be interested to hear opinions as I disagree with him. Generally my friend admits his English isn't up to much and will usually to defer to my opinion, but he was so adamant about this last night I thought I'd put it to you.

I'll also give the actual quotation and provenance later.

TIA

In the first sentence, the room stops her in her tracks. In the second sentence the noise stops her.

Well it should be 'out of the room' for a start!

The problem with the first one is that it sounds like the room is what stops her in her tracks, not the noise. There should also be a comma before 'which', but it would still be a bit clumsy in this instance.

I think your friend's right - sorry!

The first one doesn't make sense.

The first one implies it's the room, not the noise, which is stopping her in her tracks.

The second one is better, but still not that clear.

I'd be inclined to reorder it so it reads: 'When she came out of the room, the noise hit her and stopped her in her tracks.' Or, more dramatic: 'When she came out of the room, the noise hit her. It stopped her in her tracks.'

The first one is wrong. Assuming you want it to convey the fact that the noise stopped her in her tracks.

Although actually the first would work with punctuation. The noise hit her as she came out of the room, which stopped her in her tracks.

The first one would be fine if a comma were inserted in the relevant place. Still clumsy, though.

Otherwise the second one is better constructed.

However...

... There is no sentence in which 'out the room' can be correct, so they are both wrong.

They are both fairly clumsy anyway.

I would prefer to change the last clause, so: The noise hit her as her left the room, stopping her in her tracks.

THANK YOU!!!!!

The actual quotation is:

"A volley of noise hit Léonie when she emerged from her room and stopped her in her tracks." (Kate Mosse, Sepulchre, p230)

My friend was convinced that the "and" didn't make sense and wanted to change it to "which" but I couldn't think of a decent argument why that was wrong at 23:00 after a glass or two of wine. But I was sure I was right and it's been bugging me all night.

Thanks for agreeing with me (even if you didn't realise it!).

Eek - "she" not "her".

Yy to 'out of the room' being correct.
And Sentence No2 is the better constructed and more pleasing one.
I don't think that Sentence No1 makes sense, even with punctuation.

Ah, Kate Mosse
I find a lot of her writing a bit clumsy tbh.

I think that if we're being properly pedantic the thread title should be "Is either of these sentences wrong?"

"came out the room" should be "came out of the room" in both cases.

The first sentence is definitely wrong. The "which" refers back to "the room" so implies thst the room stopped her in her tracks. The second sentence is better and grammatically correct, but it's a bit clunky.

If you wanted to keep something close to that word order, I think
"The noise hit her when she came out of the room; it stopped her in her tracks." would be best.