Talk:Conjunction (grammar): Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>John Stephenson (Talk page generated using Special:MetadataForm) |
imported>Pat Palmer (couple of possible ideas for this article) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{subpages}} | {{subpages}} | ||
== Ideas for this article == | |||
# 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) | |||
Revision as of 21:27, 17 January 2021
Ideas for this article
- 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). Pat Palmer (talk) 03:27, 18 January 2021 (UTC)