Talk:Conjunction (grammar): Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Pat Palmer
imported>Pat Palmer
 
Line 2: Line 2:


== Possible ideas for this article ==
== Possible ideas for this article ==
Right now, this article is fine strictly in terms of grammar, but these is more possible richness.  I'll just drop a couple of ideas here and let them percolate.
# Could we somehow work in the everyday phrase "No ifs, ands, or buts"?   
# Could we somehow work in the everyday phrase "No ifs, ands, or buts"?   
# Of the three most common clause-linking words (and, but, or), ''and'' and ''but'' deserve special mention, because ''but'' perhaps tends to get used as a sort of (possibly unconscious) weapon.  ''But'' implies a contradiction to the preceding clause and can set up resistance or hurt feelings when people hear it, whereas ''and'' does not tend to create the same resistance.  This is something I learned as a helpful "people skill" and off the top of my head, I don't know how to present it, but I feel it might belong in this article, or linked to it somehow.  The challenge is to find a way to word things without needing to resort to ''but'' (or any of its workarounds). [[User:Pat Palmer|Pat Palmer]] ([[User talk:Pat Palmer|talk]]) 03:27, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
# Of the three most common clause-linking words (and, but, or), ''and'' and ''but'' deserve special mention, because ''but'' perhaps tends to get used as a sort of (possibly unconscious) weapon.  ''But'' implies a contradiction to the preceding clause and can set up resistance or hurt feelings when people hear it, whereas ''and'' does not tend to create the same resistance.  This is something I learned as a helpful "people skill" and off the top of my head, I don't know how to present it, but I feel it might belong in this article, or linked to it somehow.  The challenge is to find a way to word things without needing to resort to ''but'' (or any of its workarounds). [[User:Pat Palmer|Pat Palmer]] ([[User talk:Pat Palmer|talk]]) 03:27, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 21:29, 17 January 2021

This article is developing and not approved.
 Main Article
 Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
To learn how to update the categories for this article, see here. To update categories, edit the metadata template.
 Definition:  Word or phrase that connects other items within a sentence, such as and in salt and pepper (co-ordinating conjunction) or because in Mary sighed because Bill was wrong (subordinating conjunction). [d] [e]
Checklist and Archives
 Workgroup category:  Linguistics [Categories OK]
 Talk Archive:  none  English language variant:  British English

Possible ideas for this article

Right now, this article is fine strictly in terms of grammar, but these is more possible richness. I'll just drop a couple of ideas here and let them percolate.

  1. Could we somehow work in the everyday phrase "No ifs, ands, or buts"?
  2. Of the three most common clause-linking words (and, but, or), and and but deserve special mention, because but perhaps tends to get used as a sort of (possibly unconscious) weapon. But implies a contradiction to the preceding clause and can set up resistance or hurt feelings when people hear it, whereas and does not tend to create the same resistance. This is something I learned as a helpful "people skill" and off the top of my head, I don't know how to present it, but I feel it might belong in this article, or linked to it somehow. The challenge is to find a way to word things without needing to resort to but (or any of its workarounds). Pat Palmer (talk) 03:27, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://citizendium.org/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:Conjunction_(grammar)&oldid=777963"