Conjunctions

Ampersand vs. “And”

Conjunctions, Versus

I sometimes see an ampersand used where the word “and” is required.

Problem:
These two conjunctions are not quite synonyms.

Explanation:
Wikipedia has an excellent overview of the ampersand.

As Wikipedia notes, “The word ampersand is a corruption of the phrase ‘and per se and’, meaning ‘and [the symbol which] by itself [is] and‘.”

The ampersand symbol — & — comes from a ligature of the letters “e” and “t” in the Latin word et, which means “and”.

Although the rise in popularity of SMS text messaging — with its 140-characters-per-message limit — has spurred the increasing use of the one-character “&” as a substitute for the three-character “and”, it is NOT appropriate to use the ampersand absolutely everywhere as a substitute for “and”.

Here is a summary of where the ampersand is appropriate:

  • In the name of a business (e.g., “Smith & Jones”);
  • When addressing an envelope to a couple (e.g., “Dr. & Mrs. Johnson”);
  • In book and movie titles (e.g., “Harry & Tonto”);
  • When giving credit for close collaboration on a screenplay (e.g., “William Benson & Mary Gallagher”);
  • When citing sources in text, per the APA style guide (e.g., “(Watson & Crick, 1955)”).

An ampersand is also used in many computer languages.

Otherwise, an ampersand should NOT be used as a substitute for the conjunction “and”.

Solution:
Reserve the use of the ampersand (&) as a substitute for the conjunction “and” in business names, movie and book titles, names of couples on envelopes, and some other special situations.

“Because” vs. “Since”

Conjunctions, Devolution toward Simpler, Versus

I read one of these words today where it seemed to me that the other was more appropriate.

Problem:
Most dictionaries treat these two words as synonymous conjunctions, but one is preferable over the other for expressing cause and effect.

Explanation:
Many, if not all, dictionaries indicate that the second or third definition of the word “since” when used as a conjunction is “because”.

An unambiguous example of using “since” as a synonym for “because” is “I kissed her since I love her.”

However, it is easy to construct an ambiguous sentence with the conjunction “since”.

For example, “I decided to learn French since my company moved me to Paris.” has two possible meanings:

  1. A causal meaning — “I decided to learn French because my company moved me to Paris.”;
  2. A temporal meaning — “I decided to learn French after my company moved me to Paris.”

The temporal version clearly tells us when the writer decided to learn French. The causal version tells us why the writer decided to learn French.

A commenter at another website noted that Bryan Garner wrote in his book Garner’s Modern American Usage that the causal meaning of “since” has existed for more than one thousand years.

I believe that the use of “since” as a substitute for the conjunction “because” is consistent with my “Devolution toward Simpler” linguistic hypothesis. It is simpler to say or write the one-syllable, five-letter “since” than it is to say or write the two-syllable, seven-letter “because”, and clarity can be easily sacrificed for simplicity.

Solution:
To avoid confusion, prefer the conjunction “because” over the conjunction “since” when joining two sentences in a causal relationship. And prefer the conjunction “after” over the conjunction “since” when joining two sentences in a temporal relationship, unless “since” clearly carries a temporal connotation.

Beginning a sentence with “And” or “But”

Commas, Common English Blunders, Conjunctions, Hypercorrection

I learned yesterday that I have incorrectly begun sentences for years with “And” or “But” — but not in the way that some readers might expect.

Question:
Should a comma follow a coordinating conjunction that begins a sentence?

Explanation:
The coordinating conjunctions in English are “for”, “and”, “nor”, “but”, “or”, “yet”, and “so”, a mnemonic for which is FANBOYS.

Some teachers instruct their students that a coordinating conjunction should never begin a sentence, but this is incorrect instruction.

In contrast, I was (incorrectly) taught relatively early that a comma should immediately follow one of these coordinating conjunctions when the conjunction begins a sentence.

For example, I was taught that the comma belongs after “And” in “And, he was happy with the results.”

Similarly, I was taught that the comma belongs after “So” in “So, you should see a doctor immediately.”

As a result, for years I have put commas immediately after the coordinating conjunctions that began my sentences.

Imagine my surprise, then, when I read on several websites yesterday that a comma should not be put immediately after a sentence-opening coordinating conjunction unless that conjunction is followed by an interrupter in a sentence such as “But, given the circumstances, you should not travel tomorrow.”

Here are some of those websites:

I do not know why I was taught to put a comma after a coordinating conjunction that begins any sentence.

But my guess is that it could be due to hypercorrection on the part of my teacher(s), as if to say “We should not begin a sentence with a coordinating conjunction. However, if we do, then we should follow the coordinating conjunction with a comma, just as we put a comma after a conjunctive adverb — such as “However” — at the beginning of a sentence.”

Having learned this lesson, which I should have learned a long time ago, I searched all of my old blog posts for the error of putting a comma immediately after a coordinating conjunction at the start of an interrupter-less sentence.

“So” was the coordinating conjunction with which I made this error the most often. (Learning truly never ends!)

I believe that I corrected most of my errors, but it certainly is possible that some remain. If you find one, then please contact me.

Answer:
If an interrupter immediately follows the coordinating conjunction at the beginning of a sentence, then put a comma after the conjunction. Otherwise, do not put a comma after the (FANBOYS) conjunction.