251. The Grammar of “Only”

.

“Only” has various adverb uses, and can also be an adjective or conjunction

THE MULTI-USE NATURE OF “ONLY”

Most experienced users of English would be very quick to say, if asked whether they were familiar with the basic word only, that they certainly were. If they were further asked to say what they knew about this word, they would surely give a good description of what it means and where in a sentence it is typically used. However, I am not so sure that the full range of grammatical possibilities would be easily described.

Only in fact occurs in quite a wide range of grammatical structures, and is consequently a good example of what I call a “multi-use” word (see 3. Multi-Use Words). The present post aims to highlight some of the more esoteric grammatical uses. This is a similar kind of approach to that taken in various other parts of this blog that make a detailed study of a small familiar word (for a list, click on the SPECIFIC WORDS tab above).

.

FUNDAMENTAL MEANINGS

As a preliminary, a brief look at the main meanings of only may prove useful. The adjective meaning is “not accompanied by other instances or amounts”. For example, both the only explanation and the only two explanations mean no other explanations exist.

Common adjective synonyms are sole and lone. Like them, only cannot be alone after BE or similar (see 184. Adjectives with Limited Mobility, #3), but can combine there with the … one(s) (see 263. Uses of “One” and “Ones”, #6). One adjective that is not a synonym is unique. It combines the meaning of only with the idea of “unequalled” (see 284. Words with a Surprising Meaning, #13).

Sometimes adjectival only is necessitated by the choice of noun (i.e. it is “collocational” – see 16. Ways of Distinguishing Similar Words, #5). For example a child without siblings is usually an only child.

As an adverb only is again often found before a noun (see 313. Adverbs Linked Closely to a Noun, #2). It must precede any use of the, a(n) or similar. Thus it is an adverb in only the explanation. It carries the same meaning as the adjective, but also one of various other meanings, depending on the context. For example, only one week would variably suggest:

INSUFFICIENT: schooling time in a year

IMPRESSIVE: time taken to write a dissertation

UNIMPORTANT: time saved over ten years

These extra meanings make adverbial only useful in data interpretations (see 115. Surveying Numerical Data). Sometimes, though, there can be uncertainty about which meaning applies, so that a more precise synonym becomes advisable. For example, just is more suggestive of impressive achievement, while merely can more definitely indicate unimportance.

One other notable use of adverbial only is before adverbial expressions indicating time of occurrence. In past ones, such as only last month or only just, the time is implied to be surprisingly recent; in future ones, such as only tomorrow, later than desired. Only ever means “always without exception” (see 272. Uses of “Ever”).

.

SPECIAL GRAMMATICAL USES

Probably the most familiar grammatical aspect of only, besides its adjective / adverb usability, is the multiplicity of sentence positions that the adverb use can occupy, with consequent potential for misunderstandings. I exclude it here because it is widely described elsewhere. Six other uses are as follows.

1. With a Conjunction

Adverbial only can precede some conjunctions to limit their meaning. For example, only when… means no other times are possible besides the one specified; only because… works similarly with reasons or causes; and only if… does the same with conditions (see “Open Conditions” in 179. Deeper Meanings of “if”).

It is mainly “subordinating” conjunctions that can follow only (i.e. not those that must go between two linked statements, like and, but and or – see 174. Eight Things to Know about Conjunctions, #3). The commonest possibilities express time (when, while, after, until, since), cause (because, since, seeing that), condition (if, provided that) or purpose (so that, in order to). Combination with although is unlikely.

When only follows a conjunction, it is usually combining with the next word rather than the conjunction. However, one exceptional case involves if (if only…) to express a wish for an unfulfilled past or present, or an unlikely future. The tense choices are the same as after wish that… (see 254. Tricky Word Contrasts 10, #6).

There is also a historical description use that perhaps expresses a less personal, more general regret (see 282. Features of History Writing, #12):

(a) If only the dangers of smoking had been known, much suffering would have been avoided.

For more on wishing, see 238. Using a Verb to Perform its Action, #6.

.

2. Starting a Sentence

After a starting only, some or all of the accompanying verb often goes before its subject, like in direct questions (so-called “inversion”):

(b) Only children DO they allow inside.

(c) Only when vaccination is possible WILL the virus BE DEFEATED.

In (b), the “auxiliary” verb do precedes they, the subject of allow. In (c), will precedes the virus, the subject of will be defeated. The earlier verb is in (c) does not precede vaccination because it follows when, which postpones the influence of only (see 37. Subordination).

The main situation where no inversion follows a starting only is when the subject of its accompanying verb follows immediately:

(d) Only children can enter.

When only is not the first word, inversion is not normally allowed. A major exception, however, is in some sentences starting with not only…. This expression introduces information implied to be already familiar to the addressee, the main point of the sentence being in a later but (also) statement (see 64. Double Conjunctions):

(e) NOT ONLY will the virus be defeated, BUT the world’s economy will also recover.

Here, two different verbs are used (will be defeated, will recover), with different subjects (virus, economy). In such situations, not only needs to start the sentence and requires inversion.

The situation is slightly different when two different verbs have the same subject (one expressed with a pronoun):

(f) Not only will the virus be defeated but it will never reappear.

Again, with not only at the start, inversion is necessary. However, such sentences also allow not only to be later, ruling out inversion and making the pronoun optional: The virus will not only be…but (it) will….

A third possibility is two different subjects with the same verb:

(g) Not only the virus will be defeated but also economic instability.

Here, not only must start, but inversion is optional. The verb is usually mentioned only once, either between the two subjects or after them. For more about inversion outside questions, see 307. Word Order Variations, #3.

.

3. Before “to”

Only can precede a to statement at the end of a sentence:

(h) Motorways speed up traffic movement, only to cause jams elsewhere.

In such sentences, the to statement expresses an unexpected and often undesirable consequence of what is said before it. The subject of the to verb will be the same as that of the earlier, main verb (here motorways), unless a different subject is mentioned in a for phrase after only.

For a fuller description of this use of only, see 247. Exotic Grammar Structures 6, #1.

.

4. Indicating an Exception

Exceptions are members of a general class that contradict or fail to follow a rule or generalization about it. Their mention usually needs an accompanying statement of the rule or generalization, either in the same sentence or separately beforehand – rather as happens with examples (see 1. Simple Example-Giving) or lists (see 122. Signpost Words in Multi-Sentence Lists).

Only is useful for naming all (not some) of the exceptions to a generalization expressed in a preceding sentence:

(i) Few creatures survive extreme cold. Only certain micro-organisms have this ability.

As this suggests, the exception wording (underlined) is usually a noun phrase, with only directly before it. The rest of the sentence often just paraphrases the main part of the rule, but not always (see 215. Naming Exceptions, under “Other Options”).

.

5. As a Conjunction

This is a rather informal use of only, uncommon in professional writing. Some books say it means but, but I think it is narrower. Compare:

(j) Cycling has numerous benefits, only there is a risk of accidents.

(k) Accommodation is cheap, only the location is isolated.

(l) Train travel would be easy, only the state will not subsidise it.

In all these, only is easily replaceable by but: both are “coordinating” conjunctions (located between two linked statements, unable to go before them as although can). The sole meaning difference seems to be that only is clearer that no other possibility exists. With but, this interpretation is possible but not inevitable.

In (j), the meaning is very similar to the exception-showing one described above: the words after only name a disadvantage outside a general advantageous trend. In (k), a single advantage (cheap) is compared with a single disadvantage (isolated), so a contrast rather than exception is being indicated. Sentence (l) mentions an unreal idea using would (easy train travel), then gives a reason for the unreality.

Although but can usually replace only, the reverse is not always the case. Only but, for example, is possible in the following, despite the similarity to (k):

(m) The storm was fierce but the ship survived.

A requirement for using only in sentences like (j) and (k) is perhaps that it should introduce something undesirable. The absence of such an idea in (m) seems to explain why but is necessary there. Only would sentences like (l) seem to allow mention of something desirable after only, as in the following rewording of (l):

(n) Train travel would be difficult, only the state is subsidising it.

.

6. Before “too” + Adverb / Adjective

Only too is close in meaning to “very”. There are two uses. One combines the “very” meaning of too with the idea of “disastrous”:

(o) Addiction can develop only too easily.

Here, only too easily indicates ease that is so great as to be disastrous. Similarly, is only too true indicates disastrously definite truth.

This use of only too… can be paraphrased with all too… . It is unlikely to start a sentence. Only too… at the start of a sentence is likely to have a more standard, alternative-denying meaning of only:

(p) Only too late were the dangers understood.

Here, the denied alternatives are other times, such as “early”, “in time” and “late”.

The second use of only too… meaning “very” accompanies adjectives expressing a positive human state, such as happy:

(q) The villagers were only too happy to demonstrate their skills.

Other possible adjectives here include eager, glad, keen, pleased, ready and willing.

.

7. In Predictions

Only can follow predictive will (or equivalent: see 147. Types of Future Meaning, #1) to predict occurrence of something unwanted instead of what is planned. A common usage is …will only make matters worse.

230. Multi-Word Conjunctions

.

English has numerous word combinations that work together as a conjunction

GENERAL NATURE AND IMPORTANCE

Conjunctions, like other generally recognised word classes (“parts of speech”), tend to be thought of as single words but can also be multi-word. Conjunctions of two, three or even more words can be identified, though usually the last word will be a familiar shorter conjunction like that. Common examples are provided that, as soon as and in case. Some grammarians call one-word conjunctions “simple” and multi-word ones “complex”.

A slightly surprising observation about multi-word conjunctions is their quantity and variety. In this respect, they are rather like multi-word prepositions (see 221. Multi-Word Prepositions) and multi-word connectors (see 259. Multi-Word Connectors) – a reflection of the general similarity between all these word types (see 174. Eight Things to Know about Conjunctions, #2 and #8). The quantity and variety of multi-word conjunctions means that studying them is likely to be a useful language-learning exercise. Here I wish to list the possibilities and analyse various aspects of their form and meaning.

.

DEFINING FEATURES

Recognising a multi-word conjunction is often helped by seeing whether it can replace or be replaced by an ordinary one-word conjunction in a sentence without changing the sentence’s overall structure (ignoring changes in the meaning). Consider this:

(a) As soon as the sun sets, mosquitoes become active.

As soon as is indicated to be a multi-word conjunction from the fact that it is easily replaced in this sentence by single-word conjunctions like as, when, after or while. The reason why conjunctions are possible at all is that the sentence contains two ordinary-form verbs (sets and become) – possible together in the same sentence only if they are accompanied by some special linguistic facilitator, or “joining device”, since without one the general rule is that each new verb needs a new sentence (see 30. When to Write a Full Stop). Conjunctions are the only kind of joining device that can directly replace as soon as above.

However, there is a problem with this method: not all word groups that can be replaced by a conjunction are true multi-word conjunctions. Consider this:

(b) People may avoid eating meat in the belief that this improves their health.

It is easy enough here to replace in the belief that with the conjunction because, but intuitively the longer phrase is not a multi-word conjunction. I believe that an additional requirement is for a combination to be fixed (see 164. Fixed Preposition Phrases). In the belief that lacks this feature because belief can be replaced by expectation or hope. The best that can be said is that the alternatives are relatively few in number, so that in the belief that could perhaps be considered a borderline case.

As these observations suggest, there is an element of subjectivity in deciding fixedness of conjunction-like phrases, with the result that different people are likely to produce different lists of multi-word conjunctions. However, the examples that I propose below will hopefully still prove useful.

.

COMMON MULTI-WORD CONJUNCTIONS

Grammarians sometimes divide multi-word conjunctions into three main groups: those ending in that, those with other endings, and those split by words in between.

1. Conjunctions Ending in “that”

That at the end of a multi-word conjunction is itself a conjunction (see 153. Conjunction Uses of “that”). In the following examples, the highlighting indicates a link leading to further discussion elsewhere in this blog.

assuming that
considering that
despite (or notwithstanding) the fact that
except that
given that
granted that
*in order that
*in that
*not that
now that
on condition that
once that
provided/providing that
save that
seeing that
*so that
*such that
supposing that
*to the extent that

Mention might also be made of the borderline cases *with the result (or consequence) that and on the understanding (or assumption) that.

Most of the above conjunctions can drop that (leaving it “understood”). Of the exceptions (marked *), some express purpose and/or result, the others mostly limitation. Among the former, so that can show either purpose or result (see 32. Expressing Consequences); in order that expresses just purpose; while such that may express just result. Purpose uses can start a sentence but result ones cannot.

Such that statements can be adjective-like or adverb-like. The former describe a preceding noun (often a subject of BE), with such meaning “of such a kind”:

(c) The new law was such that traders changed their behaviour.

Sometimes, such statements express a classification more than a result, especially if that… describes the same noun as such (e.g. …that it was difficult to enforce above).

The adverb-like use, by contrast, links with verbs. It would exist in (c) if, for example, was became was designed. Such then means “in such a way”. It is often replaceable by so that. However, the latter is more widely usable because it does not always mean “in such a way”.

Sometimes, both analyses of such that are possible:

(d) Draw a line such that every point stands within 1 cm. of it.

Such that here might be linking with either a line or draw.

The limitation conjunctions – in that and to the extent that – again tend to be mid-sentence ones. They often limit a similarity or difference (are similar/different in that…: see 82. Common Errors in Making Comparisons, #7). However, any verb or adjective can have its meaning limited:

(e) The problem was difficult in that it demanded patience.

This means the problem was not difficult in every respect – just in the specified area.

Not that similarly occupies the middle of a sentence (see 269. Exotic Grammar Structures 7, #1).

Assuming that, considering that and provided that are all similar to if, but more precise. For a detailed analysis, see 179. Deeper Meanings of “if”.

Given that, seeing that and granted that all introduce a reason (see 306. Ways of Giving a Reason, #1), often in support of an argument (see 167. Ways of Arguing 1). Given that and seeing that imply that the information used as the reason is already accepted as true (see 244. Special Uses of GIVE, #7):

(f) Given/Seeing that nobody was injured, no further action will be taken.

The association of given/ seeing that with accepted information makes them common at the start of a sentence, where such information is typically placed (see 37. Subordination). Of course, they are both replaceable by because, but that is neutral about acceptedness, so is as often in the middle of a sentence as at the start. For more about because, see 61. “Since” versus “Because”.

Granted that introduces information that the writer has reluctantly accepted, often from someone else:

(g) Granted that new roads attract extra drivers, what else could ease traffic congestion?

This implies the writer has struggled to accept the point about new roads.

.

2. Conjunctions without “that”

Here, the last word is usually a conjunction itself, like that above, but exceptions occur (underlined):

as if or as though
as (or so) long as
as soon as
as though
in case
in order to
insofar as
insomuch as
just as
just because
just when
let alone
rather than
sooner than
so as to
up until

Also notable are some borderline combinations mostly comprising an adverb and simple conjunction. Even is common before as, if or though (see 118. Problems with Conditional “if”, #4). Just meaning “immediately” commonly precedes the temporal conjunctions after, as, before or when. Much frequently precedes as. During which time is sometimes preferable to as, when or while (see 225. Simultaneous Occurrence, #2).

Just as, just because and just when seem true multi-word conjunctions when they have a particular special meaning. Just as must mean “very like”, rather than the temporal “exactly while” (see 149. Saying how Things are Similar). For the special uses of just because and just when, see 88. Exotic Grammar Structures 1, #2, and 311. Exotic Grammar Structures 9, #1.

Four expressions above – in order to, so as to, rather than and sooner than – typically link with a base-form (infinitive) verb, rather than an ordinary subject and verb, and the latter two may also have an -ing participle. However, most grammarians still classify them as conjunctions. For details of rather than and sooner than, see 148. Infinitive Verbs without “to”, #3. For details of in order to and so as to, see 60. Purpose Sentences with “For”.

In case is the only conjunction in the list that ends with a noun. It is used differently in British and American English (see 118. Problems with Conditional “if”, #1).

As (or so) long as introduces a condition for a desirable outcome, similarly to provided that (see 179. Deeper Meanings of “if”), but literally suggests as well that the condition and its consequence occur in parallel through time, like this:

(h) Students perform well as long as they work hard.

Sometimes, though, this time suggestion is absent, making the use more metaphorical (see 258. Saying How Long Something Lasts, #3).

Insofar as is another synonym of in that as illustrated in (e) above – which it could replace.

As if and as though introduce a “like” statement about something that is either possibly true or not true at all, depending on the tense of the verb after (see 191. Exotic Grammar Structures 3, #3). Consider this:

(i) It is best to continue as if nothing is happening.

Here, the present tense is after as if suggests that nothing…happening is possibly true. However, was would deny its truth: the message would be that something is actually happening. Note that with a past tense main verb, this distinction is not possible, since the verb after as if must be past even with true events.

As soon as marks an occurrence as earlier in time than one expressed by the main part of its sentence. It differs from when, after and once in such situations in indicating minimal time between the two occurrences. For information about its verb tense requirements, see 171. Aspects of the Past Perfect Tense.

Let alone makes its statement more negative than the one before it (see 191. Exotic Grammar Structures 3, #2).

.

3. Conjunctions Split by Words in between

Technically, these are often referred to as “correlatives”. The main ones are:

as…(so)…
just as…so…
both…and…
either…or…
if…then…
neither…nor…
no sooner…than…
not…any more than…
not only/not just…but also..
would rather/would sooner…than…
so/such…that…
whether…or…

For detailed analyses, see 64. Double Conjunctions and 99. Meanings of “whether…or…”.

No sooner…than… is a synonym of as soon as, but starting with no sooner requires the verb’s subject to follow an auxiliary verb or BE (see 307. Word Order Variations, #3).

After would + rather / sooner, the next word is usually an infinitive verb (without to), and the than part can be left unsaid:

(j) Many cyclists would rather wear a silly-looking helmet (than risk serious injury).

The so/such…that… combination only expresses result. After so, there must be an adverb, or an adjective without a noun; after such, there must be a noun, with or without an adjective in between.

225. Simultaneous Occurrence

.

English has numerous ways of associating separate events & situations with the same time

SIMULTANEITY IN ENGLISH

Saying that an action or state is simultaneous with another one, rather than earlier or later, is a common need in professional writing (see, for example, 210. Process Descriptions). Of course, some advice about it is usually provided by elementary language courses. However, like numerous other basic meanings, it can be expressed in English in many more ways than just those described at elementary level.

I wish here to explore this variety in detail. My aim is not just to unearth vocabulary and grammar that might be new to at least some readers, but also to provide ideas for more effective paraphrasing and more sophisticated general writing.

.

TYPES OF SIMULTANEITY

It is possible for a simultaneity statement to mention more than two actions and/or states, but for simplicity mentions of only two will be considered here. These might be two actions, two states, or an action and a state. They might have equal duration, starting and ending together, or one longer than the other:

(a) (ACTION-ACTION) The war ended when the clock struck one.

(b) (STATE-STATE) Snow covers the ground. Many trees have no leaves.

(c) (STATE-ACTION) Snow lay on the ground. A lone wolf howled.

All of these can reverse their order. For more examples of state verbs, see 66. Types of Passive Verb Meaning.

There are two types of action: brief, like ended and struck in (a), and extended. Extension may be through repetition, e.g. BREATHE, HAMMER, TICK and TYPE, or just through taking a long time, e.g. BUILD and GROW. Most verb actions can alternate between brief and extended. For example, ends can be extended as well as brief, and howls can be multiple as well as single. Even the action of verbs like GROW, which most would consider extended, can become brief if compared to a long time period.

.

WAYS OF SHOWING SIMULTANEITY

Simultaneity does not always need special language to be understood. It usually seems to be recognizable without it if at least one of two closely-linked verbs inherently represents a state or extended action. This is the case, for example, in sentences (b) and (c) above, which respectively have the clear state-describing verbs covers and lay. Simultaneity is understood regardless of whether or not the other verb in these sentences inherently describes a state, regardless of which verb is mentioned first, and regardless of the presence or absence of any special simultaneity language.

The need for simultaneity language arises when two closely-linked verbs either definitely or possibly represent two brief actions. This is because such verbs without this language represent a sequence rather than simultaneity. In sentence (a), both ended and struck definitely represent brief actions, and when is added to show their simultaneity. In the following, the absence of a context causes uncertainty about whether blew represents a brief or extended action, leading to uncertainty about simultaneity and hence a need for simultaneity language:

(d) The wind blew. The clock struck one.

Simultaneity language includes the following.

1. Continuous Verb Tenses

The BE -ing verb form typically indicates states and extended actions. This means it cannot show simultaneity of two brief actions like those in sentence (a). I would argue that it is also not the main simultaneity indicator with verbs that inherently represent a state or extended action, like covers in (b). This is because, as mentioned above, they already indicate simultaneity through their very meaning. They can often be put into a continuous tense – is covering in (b) – but this tense would just highlight or emphasise the simultaneity.

Note, though, that this use of continuous tenses is not always an option: have in (b), for example, could not become *are having because HAVE meaning “possess” is one of those verbs that rarely allows a continuous tense anywhere.

Where continuous tenses are useful for showing simultaneity is with verbs like HOWL and BLOW when absence of simultaneity language would leave their meaning unclear. Thus, replacing blew in (d) with was blowing would make it clear that the two sentences were expressing simultaneous rather than successive events.

.

2. Conjunctions

In sentence (a), the added simultaneity-showing word when is a conjunction. It is hardly surprising that simultaneity indicators include conjunctions, given the association of both with verb pairs.

When can show simultaneity when positioned either before or between the two verbs that it links. In the latter case, it sometimes creates a double meaning (see 301. Structures with a Double Meaning 5, #6).

A problem with using when to mark two brief actions as simultaneous, as in (a), is that it can also mark them as a sequence where it means “after” (see 171. Aspects of the Past Perfect Tense):

(e) Prices typically rise when demand increases.

Fortunately, the context or logical reasoning usually ensures that the correct meaning of when is understood. Moreover, the “after” meaning can be made clearer by changing the tense of the verb after when to one with HAVE – has increased in (e) – and/or replacing when with after.

When can alternatively combine with an extended action or a state to show simultaneity:

(f) When Hannibal crossed the Alps, his elephants died.

Here, crossed is an extended action during which the brief one died occurs. When could also occupy the middle of the sentence, becoming associated with died (though probably with crossed changed to was crossing). In the following example, when shows simultaneity of an extended action and an equally long state. One could precede, or even replace, when with the whole time for emphasis:

(g) When Hannibal was crossing the Alps, he wanted to surprise Rome.

Other major simultaneity conjunctions are while and as. Their following verb always expresses a state or extended action. Either could replace when at the start of (f) and (g), though in (g) the meaning would change, giving the understanding that Hannibal’s desire to surprise Rome existed only during his Alps journey – not before or after. In other words, while and as events limit the time taken by the main action or event in their sentence (wanted above) to their own duration, whereas when events do not. While means “when and only when”.

As resembles while in not being usable with a brief action or one lasting longer than the action or state of the main sentence verb. However, its verb can only represent an extended action – not a state. Consider these:

(h) As vocabulary expands, conversation becomes easier.

(i) The young ones lay around their mother as she slept.

In both cases, the as action passes through time in parallel with the main action or state. There is also a suggestion of a close link – often causal – with it: conversation is facilitated by the expansion of vocabulary; the resting of the young ones is a response to the sleeping of their mother. I take slept to be more an action than a state because the latter is more clearly expressed with the adjective expression was asleep (see 66. Types of Passive Verb Meaning) – and was asleep requires while, not as.

For another use of when in this blog, see 271. Tricky Grammar Contrasts 3, #4. For other uses of as, see 53. “As”, “Like” and “Such As”,  92. Complement-Showing “As”,  104. Naming Data Sources with “As” and 183. Statements between Commas.

.

3. Connectors/Adverbs

The meanings of simultaneity conjunctions are equally expressible with adverb-like expressions acting as connectors, which require the two verbs to be in separate sentences (the connector in the second) so that they have equal focus (see 40. Conjunctions versus Connectors). There are numerous simultaneity connectors, reflecting the variety of simultaneity types identified above. Most are phrasal (see 259. Multi-Word Connectors):

BRIEF-BRIEF: at the same time, at that moment, simultaneously

EXTENDED-EXTENDED: all along, all the while, at the same time, concurrently, during this time, in the meantime, meanwhile, simultaneously, then, the whole (of the) time, throughout (this time) (see 258. Saying How Long Something Lasts, #1 and #4).

Note how then indicates later time with brief events, and a simultaneous one otherwise (see 282. Features of History Writing, #8).

EXTENDED-BRIEF: during this time / period, at one (or some) point, in the process

BRIEF-EXTENDED: at that moment, at this time, then, this is (or was) while/during…

The following illustrate these latter two categories:

(j) (EXTENDED-BRIEF) The Great Depression lasted 10 years. At one point, US unemployment reached 25%.

(k) (BRIEF-EXTENDED) A sudden change occurred. At that moment, the liquid was boiling.

Neither of these, however, allows in the process, which needs both verbs to have the same subject:

(l) The Great Depression lasted about 10 years. In the process, it raised US unemployment to 25%.

.

4. Prepositions

Prepositions, like conjunctions, accompany an event or situation that is not the focus of their sentence (see 37. Subordination). In addition, they need it expressed with a noun, not a verb:

(m) A sudden change occurred during the boil.

If the event or situation after a simultaneity preposition was the focus of the previous sentence, its repetition with the preposition is a kind of connector synonym.

Various prepositions can express simultaneity. Different ones are necessary according to whether they introduce a brief (B) or extended (E) event / situation, and also which of these possibilities the sentence’s verb expresses. The main options are:

B (verb = B): at the time of, alongside, along with

B (verb = E): with

E (verb = B): during, in

E (verb = E): during, in, alongside, throughout, with

A simultaneity-showing with phrase usually goes at the end of its sentence (see 88. Exotic Grammar Structures, #7), as in this paraphrase of sentence (j):

(n) The Great Depression lasted 10 years, with US unemployment peaking at 25%.

A with phrase expressing an extended simultaneous period here could be …with people suffering greatly.

.

5. Verbs

English conjunction meanings can surprisingly often be expressed with a verb instead. Sometimes the verb is a conjunction synonym, with a subject and object corresponding to the partner verbs of the conjunction (see 131. Uses of “Action” Nouns, #1), e.g.:

(o) Hannibal’s passage across the Alps COINCIDED WITH the death of his elephants.

(p) The Great Depression SAW 25% unemployment to the USA.

Other verbs like this include ACCOMPANY, CO-OCCUR WITH, INVOLVE, PARALLEL and BE SIMULTANEOUS / CONCURRENT WITH.

The participle form of ordinary verbs (excepting brief-action ones) also expresses simultaneity:

(q) The disease spread widely, inflicting much suffering.

For a full overview, see 267. Participles and Gerunds with “Having”.

.

6. Add-On Adjective Phrases

An alternative to the above participle use is an adjective + extra words, e.g. deadly to all in (q) (see 159. Exotic Grammar Structures 2, #3).

216. Indicating Differences

.

The way we give information about a difference depends on a variety of factors

THE VARIETY OF DIFFERENCE LANGUAGE

As with similarities, discovering and naming differences is a major way of thinking analytically. It is important both in itself (see, for example, “compare and contrast” essays in 94. Essay Instruction Words) and for such academic activities as data analysis, classification, naming exceptions and describing advantages & disadvantages. As a result, difference-naming features quite heavily in both academic and professional writing.

The simplest kind of difference statement merely says a difference exists:

(a) Essays are different from reports.

More often, however, there is information about the nature of the difference:

(b) Unlike reports, essays usually lack subheadings.

Another cause of linguistic variety is the degree of familiarity the writer expects the reader to have with one of the contrasted ideas (not such a surprising expectation: see 156. Mentioning What the Reader Knows Already). In sentence (b), unlike shows the reader is expected to be already familiar with reports (see 56. Comparing with “Like” and “Unlike”), and that these are only being mentioned in order to make the message about essays clearer.

One way to reword (b) so as to imply reader unfamiliarity with both contrasted ideas is:

(c) Reports usually allow subheadings while essays do not.

Further linguistic variability results from the fact that differences themselves vary. Sentences (b) and (c) describe what I call an “absolute” difference: one of the compared items has something (subheadings) that the other does not. Other differences are “relative”: the compared items both have something, but in different quantities, such as focus…on the past in the following:

(d) Reports tend to focus more than essays on the past.

Even more variability of difference-naming comes from the fact that it can be done in not just one sentence as illustrated above, but also in many (or in multiple statements within one sentence), just as is the case in other key writing functions like simple example-giving, expressing consequences, restating generalizations more specifically and listing.

This post looks in depth at the numerous ways of indicating a difference in English.

.

DIFFERENCE STATEMENTS IN ONE SENTENCE

1. Prepositions

The main difference-indicating preposition is unlike. It usually goes just before a familiar idea that the writer is comparing something with, and of course as a preposition it requires this idea to be in noun form or equivalent (see 84. Seven Things to Know about Prepositions, #1). The resultant preposition phrase may, like most preposition phrases, have either adjective or adverb properties.

Adjective phrases with unlike always describe a preceding noun. Sometimes there is a link verb like BE, LOOK or SEEM in between, sometimes not:

(e) Essays are unlike reports.

(f) Researchers saw structures unlike anything known.

Various other expressions can replace unlike in such sentences, although they usually seem vaguer about the expected familiarity of the idea after them. Common ones are different from/than, dissimilar to, distinguishable from, distinct from and not the same as. Different from in sentence (a) above is a straight replacement of unlike in (e).

In the above examples, there is mere mention of the existence of a difference. To say what the difference is, it is common to add in… after the unlike phrase (see 82. Common Errors in Making Comparisons, #7). The difference can be expressed with either a noun, e.g. …in length in (e), or a that statement, e.g. …in that they lack subheadings. Nouns usually name a relative difference (distance, extent, length, number, scope, size etc.), that statements an absolute one.

Adverb phrases with unlike differ grammatically from adjective ones in lacking a preceding noun to describe. They often go at or near the start of a sentence, with a following comma, a position where the familiarity suggestion is strongest:

(g) Unlike coal, nuclear fuels produce no carbon dioxide.

Sentences of this kind always say both that a difference exists and what it is.

The other common position of adverbial unlike phrases is the end of a sentence. They vary here in their need for a preceding comma, depending on meaning. Without one, they give “how” information:

(h) Traditionally, Inuit people lived unlike most other humans.

This means the traditional way in which Inuit people lived was different from that of most other humans. The nature of this difference is not indicated, but it could be with in… . Alternatives to unlike include not…like (…did not live like…) and differently from/than.

A comma before adverbial unlike…, by contrast, expresses a comparison between the verb action happening and not happening: that the verb meaning is true of the subject of the sentence (Inuit people above) but not of the noun after unlike. In (h), this would nonsensically state that Inuit people lived while most other humans did not. Sentence (g), however, could logically end with unlike coal after a comma. This would give coal the implied positive verb produce (carbon dioxide), in opposition to the negative main verb produce no…, thus saying the same as (g).

For more about unlike, (see 56. Comparing with “Like” and “Unlike”)

.

2. Verbs

Verbs are often useful for paraphrasing BE + adjective (see 270. Paraphrasing Adjectives with Words of Other Kinds, #). Verbs corresponding to BE + unlike etc. include BE DISTINGUISHED FROM, DIFFER FROM and CONTRAST WITH. They can have not just one of the compared ideas as their subject, but also both, in which case they will be followed by either nothing or their preposition + each other:

(i) Essays and reports differ (from each other).

The use without a preposition is also possible with VARY. Statements naming both of the contrasted items at the start like this do not assume that the addressee has previous familiarity with either of the contrasted features. Their exact difference can be specified in either the same sentence (with in) or a new one.

.

3. Conjunctions

The word while in sentence (c) above is a difference-showing conjunction. It not only indicates the existence of a difference but also requires it to be identified. Absolute differences are more likely to be involved than relative ones. When the verbs in the two contrasted statements are the same, as in (c), the second is likely to be replaced by DO (see 212. Special Uses of “Do” 1).

Alternatives to while are whereas and but. The position of whereas is similarly either before or between the contrasted ideas, but that of but is always between (see 25. Conjunction Positioning). While and whereas placed before both ideas tend to imply that the first is already familiar to the reader, like most other conjunctions in this position (see 174. Eight Things to Know about Conjunctions, #4).

The conjunction if can also contrast a unfamiliar idea with a familiar one. The difference must be a relative one between two extreme qualities. For details, see 247. Exotic Grammar Structures 6, #2.

.

4. Comparatives

Comparative adjectives like shorter, adverbs like more often and pronouns like less are the main way of indicating a relative difference. This is probably because they are more informative than in phrases like different in length: a word like shorter shows not just that there is a shorter and a longer length but also which one belongs to each compared item.

To a greater extent and to a lesser extent (or not…to the same extent) are more emphatic alternatives to more and less used alone as adverbs.

Comparative ideas are not always expressed with comparative forms. Adverbs like relatively and comparatively precede a base-form adjective or adverb, e.g. relatively often, always without than… or equivalent. The preposition compared to, a possible equivalent of than, also needs to accompany base form adjectives or adverbs rather than comparative ones (see 231. Confusions of Similar Structures 3, #5). It is useful at the start of a sentence, where than is never possible, often with an adjective that would not typically describe its neighbouring noun (see 221. Multi-Word Prepositions, #3).

The combination X is one thing (but) Y is quite another says Y is a much greater problem than X (see 260. Formal Written Uses of “Thing”, #15).

.

DIFFERENCE STATEMENTS IN MULTIPLE SENTENCES

As with similarities, multiple sentences can state a difference in two alternative ways. In one, the existence of the difference is stated first, then its detail:

(j) Essays are unlike reports. They…

Here, the second sentence will describe a special feature just of essays, since reports are shown by unlike to be considered already familiar to the reader. However, familiarity-assuming language is not compulsory: (j) could, for example, start Essays and reports differ, thus requiring the second sentence to say something about each, for example with whereas.

The first sentence can also be neutral about familiarity expectations, starting There is a difference (or a contrast) between… (see 161. Special Uses of “There” Sentences, #2). Often, difference will follow an adjective like major or interesting.

If the first sentence introduces a list of differences, it should include a number word or vague equivalent like various (see 122. Signpost words in Multi-Sentence Listing and 96. Avoiding Untruths 2). In There are sentences, this word will accompany the plural differences; elsewhere it can go at the end in the phrase in … ways. An alternative to ways is respects (but not aspects – see 81. Tricky Word Contrasts 2, #4).

Difference-detailing sentences like the second one in (j) should not normally have any special expression to show how they are linked to the first (see 117. Restating Generalizations More Specifically) – they just state the difference.

The other main type of multi-sentence difference-naming places one of the two contrasted ideas in the first sentence and the other in a later one:

(k) Reports usually contain subheadings. Essays, by contrast, use signpost language.

This kind of combination is very similar to the kind made with a conjunction, as in (c) above, and similarly suggests no idea familiarity. In each case, there are separate statements with separate verbs (underlined), plus an intervening difference-showing expression: while in (d) and by contrast here. The reason why a full stop is necessary here is that by contrast, though similar in meaning to while, is grammatically a different kind of word – a connector rather than a conjunction.

The need for a full stop between the relevant statements is one of various special characteristics of connectors (see 40. Conjunctions versus Connectors). Another is that connectors are not compulsory to the same extent as conjunctions: by contrast could be omitted from (k) without either changing the meaning or breaking a grammar rule.

Other connectors that act like by contrast are in contrast, however and on the other hand (but not on the contrary: see 20. Problem Connectors, #1). Also usable – again after the first sentence – are various words that express similar meaning without being a conjunction or connector. Some, such as difference, are what I have elsewhere called Synonyms of Connectors. Others are “reflexive” pronouns (see the end of 143. Subtleties of “-self” Words).

215. Naming Exceptions

.

Exceptions have to be named in different ways in different situations

FEATURES OF EXCEPTION-NAMING

Exceptions are closely associated with the frequent professional writing need to state a rule or generalization: they are the realities that so often contradict or fail to fit in with an attempt to generalize (see 95. Numbers & Generalizations). Language learners will have a special familiarity with the way rules and generalizations tend to involve exceptions!

Like most common meanings, exceptions can be expressed in English in a wide variety of ways. Some are often mentioned in language courses, but I have rarely seen a complete overview. This post considers the variety of exception-showing prepositions, important differences between except, except for and except that, and the numerous other types of word that can show exceptions. Among these latter are some rarely-described possibilities like unless, only, however, unusual and breaks the trend.

.

NAMING EXCEPTIONS WITH A PREPOSITION

Exception-naming prepositions are, like prepositions for saying how and naming a cause, surprisingly numerous. The main ones are apart from, aside from, bar(ring), but not (or but alone after all…, every…, anything…, nothing… or little…), except, except for, excepting, excluding, other than, save, save for and with the exception of. Many, it is clear, are multi-word, while some are “multi-use” – more familiar when used in another way (see 3. Reading Obstacles 2).

Except and except for are the most central prepositions. They are sometimes interchangeable and sometimes not. Excepting, excluding and barring are preposition-like participles (see 205. Paraphrasing Prepositions with Words of Other Kinds).

1. Except

Most prepositions combine with a following noun to make either adjective-like phrases (describing a preceding noun or equivalent) or adverb-like ones (relating to a verb or entire statement – see 84. Seven Things to Know about Prepositions, #2). However, except makes adjective-like phrases more easily than adverb-like ones. Part of the reason is that, without for, it often cannot start a sentence. Adjective-like except phrases normally follow a noun expression involving the general idea of “all” or “nothing”:

(a) London has everything except reliable SUNSHINE.

(b) No creatures survive in extreme cold except certain MICRO-ORGANISMS.

(c) An interview will be granted to any applicant except past EMPLOYEES.

The underlined noun expressions here can precede not just except but also any of its synonyms listed above – though but not would sound clumsy after the negative no in (b).

Except in the above sentences is acting like a normal preposition, with a following noun or equivalent (capitalised). However, it is also used sometimes before wording that is not noun-like, but adverb-like or a verb instead.

Adverb-like wording after except (and its synonyms excluding except for and save for) may take the form of an adverb (e.g. except occasionally) or a preposition phrase (e.g. except in winter) or a conjunction statement (e.g. except when winter comes). Hardly surprisingly, except phrases containing any of these are always adverb-like rather than adjective-like – they add information to a verb rather than a preceding noun, and the preposition and conjunction types can start a sentence.

Of the three types of adverb-like wording able to follow except etc., ordinary adverbs are quite rare. Most seem to indicate time or place:

(d) Detainees can go anywhere except outside.

Preposition phrases after except words again mostly indicate either a time, like on occasion, or a place:

(e) Plant growth is ubiquitous, apart from in the desert.

Occasionally, though, a preposition phrase after except may start with a more abstract preposition like regarding, in terms of or in the case of.

The third kind of adverb-like wording after except words, conjunction statements, contain a standard-form verb as well as a noun (see 174. Eight Things to Know about Conjunctions, #7). Likely conjunctions besides when include after, before, if, in order to and while. Although that after except is also a conjunction, it differs from the others in helping to make a single conjunction phrase rather than a preposition + conjunction (see “Other Options” below).

If a verb rather than adverb expression follows except in place of a noun, it normally needs not the typical -ing (“gerund”) form of verbs after a preposition, but the infinitive:

(f) The program DOES EVERYTHING except monitor performance.

(g) Victims of some illnesses can DO LITTLE except rest.

As these show, infinitives after except (monitor and rest) lack the normal to in front of them – i.e. they must be “bare” infinitives (see 148. Infinitive Verbs without “to”). Of the synonyms of except, only apart from, but, other than and save can be used similarly.

An infinitive is not always possible after except: generally the main verb must be DO, and its object must include an extreme quantity expression like all, anything, most, little or nothing. Even then, an infinitive is not always necessary: if DO is in a continuous tense, e.g. is doing in (f), the verb after except will normally have -ing – except monitoring in (f).

This kind of -ing after except is not the same as the following:

(h) Online shopping INVOLVES little except choosing and clicking.

Here, the main verb is INVOLVE, not DO. There is never a possibility of using the infinitive choose instead of choosing. The reason why CHOOSE has -ing is that it is part of the object of a verb (INVOLVE) that always requires any verb within its object to have -ing (see 232. Verbs with an Object + “-ing”).

.

2. Except for

Except for usually seems to need a noun-like partner. This would explain why it can replace except in sentences (a)-(c) but not in (d)-(g). However, except for + noun is more widely usable than except + noun, being more easily able to make adverbial phrases as well as adjectival ones.

One special adverbial use of except for + noun is at the start of a statement, before any generalizing word. Sentences (a)-(c) could all have their exception at the start after except for but not except. They could also have apart from, barring, excepting, excluding, save for and with the exception of (but not but or save).

In addition, except for is necessary later in a sentence, instead of except + noun, when the idea of “all” or “none” is indicated by wording other than a preceding noun or pronoun, e.g.:

(i) The website is perfect except for some access difficulties.

Here, except for links with perfect, an adjective. The idea of “none” is clearly implied because perfect means “has no defects”. Adjectives with such clarity may be quite common before except for (e,g. deserted meaning “without people” and complete meaning “without gaps”). However, adjectives with less clarity also seem possible, e.g. accommodating and uncomfortable.

A problem to guard against with except for is that occasionally it will be not the single multi-word preposition illustrated in (h) but the two separate prepositions except and for acting independently like except and in (e), as in this example:

(j) The average maximum does not exceed 20C except for a few weeks in summer.

Here, for means “throughout” (see 258. Saying How Long Something Lasts). If apart from is used, for would still need to be present.

.

OTHER OPTIONS

1. Conjunctions

Two common conjunctions are except that and unless. The former can, like most …that conjunctions, drop that (see 230. Multi-Word Conjunctions), and is replaceable by except for the fact (that) or save (that). It is needed instead of except for when the wording of the exception contains a verb. Compare the following with (i):

(k) The website is perfect except that it gives some access difficulties.

Gives is the verb here necessitating except that instead of except for.

A particularly common type of wording before except that indicates similarity or difference, e.g. (un)like, similar(ity), identical, the same, different and (un)related:

(l) Time is like a river, except that it never ends.

Unless, on the other hand, seems usable only as an alternative to except if or except when¹. Consider this rewording of sentence (c):

(m) An interview will be granted to any applicant unless (= except if) they are a past employee.

There will often be a pronoun after unless (they above), representing the previously-mentioned general class. This is any applicant above (they showing gender neutrality: see the end of 204. Grammatical Agreement). In sentence (b), unless they are would refer to creatures, while in (e) unless it is would refer to plant growth. 

Here is an example of an except when sentence that is easily paraphrased with unless:

(n) Snakes will generally not attack except when they feel threatened.

.

2. New-Sentence Expressions

Exceptions can be named in a different sentence from that of their relevant generalization. One way to do so is with only. However, its basic meaning implies that all possible exceptions are being named (see 251. The Grammar of “Only”, #4), thus ruling out selective naming:

(o) Few creatures survive in extreme cold. Only certain micro-organisms do.

(p) Plant growth is surprisingly rapid. Only in winter is it different.

(q) Online shopping INVOLVES little. Choosing and clicking are the only requirements.

Note how (o), unlike (b), begins with few rather than no. I think this is a consequence of the naming of the exception in a new sentence.

An alternative to only is various words derived from except. In (o), for example, Only…do could be replaced by …are exceptions or …are exceptional. The second part of (p) can be rewritten The exception is in winter or Wintertime is exceptional. There are also synonyms of such replacements: exceptional can become unusual or atypical, and is exceptional can become breaks the trend or does not conform.

With exceptional, the context must just imply “breaking the rule” – otherwise the idea of “special” will be present (see 284 Words with a Surprising Meaning, #9). To link exception/s to a noun like this rule / trend / pattern, the preposition must be to, not of (see 35. Words Followed by “to -ing”). 

Another useful option for stating any kind of exception in a new sentence is a “concession” connector like however, yet or nevertheless (see 20. Problem Connectors, #3). Often this will correspond to an except that or except when statement without a new sentence:

(r) Time is like a river. However, (= except that) it never ends.

(s) Snakes will generally not attack. However, they will do so when (= except when) they feel threatened.

Also notable is the use of not all or similar (not every, not always etc.) in the first sentence:

(t) Not all species were destroyed by a meteorite. Crocodiles survive to this day.

Here, the second sentence just names the exception without the use of exception wording. This is common but not compulsory – Crocodiles are an exception is possible above too. Using not all usually implies that the generalization in the first sentence (excluding not) is already known by the addressee.

___________

¹I am grateful to a reader for pointing out a flaw in a previous sentence about using unless (see comments by “Neo” below).

209. Fixed Phrases with “and”

.

English has numerous fixed expressions made by combining two words with “and”

DEFINITION AND IMPORTANCE OF FIXED “AND” PHRASES

The conjunction and is unusual in being able to link not just verb-based statements but also grammatically similar words or phrases. Fixed phrases with and tend to be of this latter sort. They are “fixed” in the sense that most fluent English speakers feel they are very common combinations; indeed, if presented with the first word(s) of one of these expressions plus and, they would normally be quite easily able to provide the rest. It would not be difficult, for example, to complete husband and… and far and… with, respectively, wife and wide.

This property of fixed and expressions makes them a type of “collocation”, or “word partnership” – an aspect of vocabulary that is almost as important to master as word meanings. For examples of other collocation types within this blog, see 164. Fixed Preposition Phrases,  173. “Do Research” or “Make Research”?,  180. Nouns that Count the Uncountable,  241. Some Common Figurative Phrases and 273, Verb-Object Collocations.

Collocations with and are surprisingly numerous. Most advanced English courses make reference to them and provide a few examples, but I have not seen them extensively surveyed and classified. This is what I aim to do here. My list, which has been gradually compiled over time, is probably not complete, but will still hopefully be useful. Readers who know examples not included here are invited to contribute them via the comment facility below.

.

CATEGORIES AND EXAMPLES

The categorisation below is in terms of word classes. These are not of individual words within an expression but rather of the whole expression. For example, a pairing that is a “noun expression” is typically used in sentences in noun positions (subject, object, complement, etc.). Usually the words within the expression will reflect this word class, but not always.

A noticeable trend among the examples is that the word after and often has more letters than the one before, or at least the same length.

1. Noun Expressions

aches and pains
airs and graces
all and sundry
bits and pieces
bread and butter
carrot and stick
checks and balances
comings and goings
*cut and thrust
day and night (or night and day
doom and gloom
facts and figures
*give and take
heaven and hell
highways and byways
husband (or man) and wife
hustle and bustle
*ins and outs
law and order
life and death
part and parcel (of…)
pros and cons
*push and pull
*rise and fall
*rough and tumble
salt and pepper
spit and polish
sticks and stones
stresses and strains
toil and trouble
*toing and froing
trouble and strife
twists and turns
*ups and downs
wear and tear
*whys and wherefores

EXAMPLES

(a) Magazine sales are our bread and butter.

(b) Successful relationships involve give and take.

I have omitted many food combinations in this category because they are rare in formal writing. Bread and butter is included because it has a metaphorical meaning of “primary source of regular income”. It frequently follows a possessive adjective like our in (a).

The two words combined with and are usually nouns like the whole phrase. A few, indicated by *, seem like other word types but are still nouns. The noun-like use of verbs in their base form, as in cut and thrust and give and take is also found after HAVE (e.g. have a look – see 116. Rarer Uses of HAVE, #6) and in some preposition phrases (e.g. on the go in 164. Fixed Preposition Phrases).

.

2. Verb Expressions

chop and change
come and go
compare and contrast
cut and run
done and dusted
give and take
huff and puff
read and write
rise and fall
stop and start

EXAMPLE

(c) When share prices fall, it is time to cut and run.

This seems to be quite a small category. Give and take is also usable like a noun. For an explanation of compare and contrast, see 94. Essay Instruction Words.

.

3. Adverb Expressions

again and again
at (someone’s) beck and call
back and forth
by and by
*by and large
by/in leaps and bounds
day and night (or night and day)
down and out
every now and then
*far and away
far and wide
fast and furious(ly)
*first and foremost
here and there (or hither and thither)
home and away
in dribs and drabs
in fits and starts
in/by leaps and bounds
in this day and age
little and often
*lo and behold
nice and easy (informal)
nip and tuck
now and again
(every) now and then
off and on
out and about
over and over again
round and round
thick and fast
through thick and thin
*through and through
time and (time) again
*to all intents and purposes
to and fro
up and down
with care and attention

EXAMPLES

(d) Errors occur off and on in all contexts.

(e) It is wise to shop little and often.

The kinds of words that help make these adverb phrases are not all the same. Nouns are common, usually with a starting preposition, the typical means of putting nouns in adverb positions (see 84. Seven Things to Know about Prepositions, #2); otherwise, one tends to find adverbs, including ones that elsewhere might be prepositions, such as by (see 120. Six Things to Know about Adverbs, #5).

Nevertheless, there are some exceptions. We find two verbs in lo and behold and nip and tuck, while time and again combines a noun with an adverb. Time and again means “regularly”; now and again means “occasionally”.

Day and night, which also appears in the noun list above, and could have by in front when an adverb, is usable without it like this:

(f) Background radiation was the same in all directions day and night.

It seems that day and night breaks the preposition rule in the same way as various other time nouns do (cp. every Sunday, next week). There is a similar situation with home in home and away, the “understood” preposition being at.

Nice and easy is an informal expression that also appears in the adjective list below. It is usable as an adverb because the individual words that make it do not have to add -ly to become adverbs in informal contexts (see 120. Six Things to Know about Adverbs, #6).

The adverb uses of the above-listed expressions are not all the same. Saying something about a verb is possible for all except those marked *. Of these latter, by and large, first and foremost and to all intents and purposes may describe a sentence or adverb, or a complement as in …was by and large a success. Through and through is only usable in this last way, and must also, like enough, follow the complement (e.g. …is honest through and through). Lo and behold and by and by only describe sentences (an adverb use detailed in these pages in 121. Sentence-Spanning Adverbs); while far and away is only a “degree” adverb, and only possible with a superlative adjective or adverb (far and away the easiest).

In addition to the above-listed expressions, there are many involving a repeated comparative adverb, such as better and better or more and more rapidly. Practically any comparative adverb seems able to make such an expression, some more “fixed” than others. Other common fixed ones include higher and higher, harder and harder, more and more successfully and more and more often. The meaning is always a gradual increase in the manner indicated by the adverb.

.

4. Adjective Expressions

belt and braces
black and blue
black and white
bright and early
cheap and nasty
dead and buried (A)
*down and out (A)
few and far between (A)
+ first and foremost
free and easy
hard and fast (B)
high and dry
high and mighty
hit and miss
home and dry
+nice and easy
+nip and tuck (A)
*off and on (or on and off)
*out and about (A)
out and out (B)
pure and simple (A)
safe and sound (A)
spick and span
such and such
swings and roundabouts (A)
touch and go (A)
tried and tested
up and coming
*up and down
willing and able

EXAMPLES

(g) Safety is first and foremost among our priorities.

(h) There are no hard and fast rules for making friends.

Like adjectives in general, the above phrases are not all able to go in both of the common adjective positions, before their noun and after it with a link verb like BE in between (see 184 Adjectives with Limited Mobility). Those that can only go before their noun are marked (B), while those that can only follow it have (A).

The phrases marked * and + appear additionally in the earlier adverb list. Those with * resemble single preposition-like words that have both an ordinary adverb use, e.g. went up and an adjective-like one after BE, e.g. was up (see 154. Lone Prepositions after BE).

The phrase pure and simple is often placed directly after its noun with no verb in between, e.g. an adjective pure and simple. This gives it the special meaning “and nothing more needs to be said”. Black and white is often used metaphorically to mean “clearly defined” (see 278. Colours), while black and blue usually means “extensively bruised”.

It will be seen that most of the adjective expressions are made with two ordinary adjectives, or two preposition-like ones. Exceptions are out and out (two adverbs meaning “complete”, as in an out and out failure), nip and tuck (two verbs), hit and miss (two verbs), touch and go (two verbs), belt and braces, (two nouns), swings and roundabouts (two nouns), home and dry (noun + adjective), and up and coming (adverb + participle).

Like adverbs, most adjectives in their comparative form can be repeated with and in order to express a gradual increase. Examples of a more fixed kind are better and better, stranger and stranger, more and more worrying and more and more important.

.

5. Preposition Expressions

A small number of and expressions work as multi-word prepositions (see 221. Multi-Word Prepositions). They are all made with two prepositions of the ordinary kind:

in and around
above and beyond
over and above

192. When BE can be Omitted

.

The verb BE is omissible in English, given the right circumstances

THE OMISSIBILITY OF be IN ENGLISH

The verb BE can sometimes be omitted in English without losing grammaticality or changing meaning, just as its equivalent can in many other languages. However, English BE omission does not always match omission of a BE word in other languages. For example, it cannot happen when BE is the only verb in a sentence (though see 158. Abbreviated Sentences), as in the following:

(a) The problem was difficult.

This post catalogues English contexts where BE omission is grammatical. It excludes BE combined with a “modal” verb (will, can, should etc.) since dropping that does change meaning. Six main contexts are described. Some also feature in other posts, but bringing them all together in one place and adding to them will hopefully make their appreciation and memorization slightly easier.

.

WITH PAIRED COMPARATIVE ADJECTIVES

Most readers will have met sentences like the following:

(b) The higher the price (is), the lower the demand (is).

Both uses of BE here can be omitted, but sometimes the first is kept.

.

AFTER CONJUNCTIONS

Conjunctions allow (but do not compel) omission of numerous kinds of words after them (see 174. Eight Things to Know about Conjunctions, #6). One situation where BE can be omitted is when it is repeated in its sentence in the same form:

(b) The problem was difficult BUT (it was) quickly solved.

Here, the second was is omissible because (1) it repeats an earlier one linked to it in the same sentence by the conjunction but; and (2) its subject it (which must also be omitted) represents the same thing as the subject of the first was (the problem). Many but not all conjunctions allow this kind of BE omission. Albeit seems to have it more commonly than not (see 191. Exotic Grammar Structures 3, #1). Conjunctions that mostly disallow it include after, before, as, because and since.

A similar kind of BE omission is possible after a sentence-starting conjunction:

(c) ALTHOUGH (it was) difficult, the problem was solvable.

Here, the omitted was precedes rather than follows the one it mirrors. This use is not possible with as many conjunctions: excluded are those that can only go between the two verbs that they link – so-called “coordinating” conjunctions – such as and, but, or, so and yet (see 174. Eight Things to Know about Conjunctions, #3). In other words, only “subordinating” conjunctions (with the same exceptions as above) allow it.

The same subordinating conjunctions also allow omission of a pronoun + BE when the other verb in the sentence does not contain or comprise BE. The conjunction usually starts the sentence, with the pronoun referring forward to the subject of the later verb:

(d) Although (it is) slow, walking enables places to be appreciated.

For more examples, see 36. Words Left out to Avoid Repetition (final section) and 191. Exotic Grammar Structures 3, #1.

A rather different kind of BE omission is possible with passive verbs after the conjunction as:

(e) As (is) shown by the graph, growth has been constant.

Passive verbs of this kind will typically represent some kind of information-giving, and be followed by mention of the information source, e.g. a neighbouring graph or another text (see 104. Naming Data Sources with “As”). All of this will form a parenthesis between two commas or a full stop and a comma (see 183. Statements between Commas).

As also allows a special kind of BE omission when it introduces an example:

(f) The letter “u” is sometimes pronounced like “e”, as (it is) in “bury”.

This usage is characterised by as before in or an occasional alternative like with (see the end of 53. “As”, “Like” and “Such As”). Between them is an omitted pronoun and either BE as above or another auxiliary verb.

Further conjunction uses that allow omission of BE again allow it of other verbs too. The conjunction than is particularly notable:

(g) Whales are larger than elephants (are).

There are situations, though, where omission after than is best avoided because it creates a double meaning (see 233. Structures with a Double Meaning 3, #5).

.

WITH RELATIVE PRONOUNS

It is very often the case that BE after a relative pronoun (who, whom, which, that) can be dropped along with the pronoun. An example is:

(h) The reforms (which were) introduced by Napoleon were revolutionary.

The key point here is where such combinations cannot be dropped. There are two rules: one involving “auxiliary” BE (before an -ing or -ed verb, as above), and one involving BE before no other verb. A relative pronoun + auxiliary BE must be kept when the verb is active (with -ing) and either surrounded by commas or signifying a past completed event. For details, see 52. Participles Placed Just after their Noun, #4.

The situation where a relative pronoun + lone BE cannot be dropped is before an adjective, but not always. Dropping is not possible before high in the following:

(i) Clouds which are high are not normally rain-bearing.

What makes it possible to drop a relative pronoun + BE before an adjective is words after the adjective that expand it into a longer phrase. In (i), for example, which are could be dropped if high was expanded into the adjective phrase high in the sky.

Describing words that can follow an adjective, enabling BE to be dropped, may begin with a preposition (like in above), or that (e.g. interesting that…), or a question word (e.g. doubtful whether…), or a to verb (e.g. easy to understand), or an -ing verb (e.g. angry seeing…). For details, see 203. Expanding an Adjective with Words after it.

Note that describing words before an adjective, such as very before high in (i), do not permit BE-dropping in the manner of words after it – which are in (i) would have to be kept before very high (see 109. Placing an Adjective after its Noun, #3).

.

BEFORE COMPLEMENTS

Complements are nouns or adjectives equated by a special kind of verb to a noun or equivalent placed before them. In sentence (a), for example, difficult is a complement equated by the verb BE to its subject problem. It is consequently a “subject complement”. In the following example, San Salvador is an “object complement”, equated by the verb CALL to its object island:

(j) Columbus called the island he first reached San Salvador.

For a fuller discussion of subject and object complements, see 220. Features of Complements.

1. Omission before Subject Complements

There are at least two situations where BE is omissible before a subject complement. One is extensively described elsewhere in this blog (159. Exotic Grammar Structures 2, #4), so is only considered briefly here:

(k) These bacteria spread easily, their effects (being) invisible.

In this sentence type, a comma separates two closely linked statements. The second starts with a possessive adjective (their) referring to the subject of the first, followed by a noun, the omissible BE, and the complement of the noun (invisible). If BE was present, it would need -ing because it is not the main verb in the sentence (see 30. When to Write a Full Stop).

The other situation where BE is omissible before a subject complement is when it is in the to form after certain verbs. One group of these is APPEAR, LOOK and SEEM, as in the following:

(l) Demand for illegal drugs seems (to be) unstoppable.

Also usable in this way are passive verbs of a particular kind, such as BE CONSIDERED (see the next section).

.

2. Omission before Object Complements

With object complements, the condition for BE becoming omissible is similarly the choice of the verb. A common one is CONSIDER (see 48. Tricky Word Contrasts 1, #3):

(m) Plato considered the world (to be) a copy of reality.

The object here is the world, and the object complement is a copy of reality. Other verbs that at least sometimes allow this option frequently have a complement indicating a description, role or belief. Examples are APPOINT, BELIEVE, DECLARE, ELECT, FIND, JUDGE and THINK (see 92. Verbs with an Object + “As”). If such verbs are used in the passive voice, converting their object into their subject, and the object complement into a subject one, they directly precede the optional to be (see 299. Infinitives after a Passive Verb, #3).

Grammar errors are likely in this area because many verbs with a complement-like noun after their object either require mention of to be or forbid it – they do not allow a choice. Verbs requiring to be – cause verbs, for example, like ENABLE, or commanding ones like ORDER – are extensively illustrated within this blog in 208. Verbs with an Object + Infinitive.

Verbs that never allow to be before their object complement are of two kinds. One kind – CALL, LEAVE, MAKE and NAME, for example – allows no other word at all (excepting lone be on rare occasions after MAKE: see 271. Tricky Grammar Contrasts 3, #3). CALL and MAKE are especially prone to incorrect additions (see 140. Words with Unexpected Grammar 2, #g and #h). The other verb kind requires as instead of to be. Examples are CATEGORISE, CRITICISE, DEFINE, DESCRIBE and PRAISE (see 279. Grammatical Properties of Citation Verbs, #4).

Also worth mentioning are verbs that require a choice to be made between to be and as, such as CHOOSE:

(n) The country will choose someone new as (or to be) President.

The need to include as when to be is absent means that to be cannot be described as “omissible”. Other verbs requiring the same choice include ACKNOWLEDGE, ESTABLISH, PORTRAY, TAKE and VISUALISE. For further examples, see 92. Verbs with an Object + “As”.

.

AFTER PERCEPTION VERBS

The verbs FEEL, HEAR, LISTEN TO, NOTICE, OBSERVE, SEE, SENSE, SMELL and WATCH need a noun (or equivalent) straight after them as their object, which may or may not be the subject of a second verb (see 208. Verbs with an Object + Infinitive, #12). The second verb may have either the base form (as a “bare infinitive” – see 148. Infinitive Verbs without “to”) or -ing. BE is omissible from passive bare infinitives expressing an instantaneous event, like this:

(o) Many people saw John Kennedy (be) shot in Dallas.

Dropping BE in such cases may be more common than keeping it. When it is present, being seems more likely than be. Note that a to infinitive is actually possible after SEE and FEEL, but makes the meaning more like “believe”.

.

AFTER “WHAT(SO)EVER THE…”

Outside questions, whatever (sometimes with -so-) combines with a verb and its subject to form a noun-like or adverb-like sentence part (see 272. Uses of “Ever“, #6). If the subject in the adverb-like use has the, any following BE is omissible:

(p) Try everything, what(so)ever the cost (is).

This use is adverb-like (indicating unimportance: see 199. Importance and Unimportance, #8) because it is not the subject or object of the main verb try.

191. Exotic Grammar Structures 3

.

Some English grammar structures are unlikely to be described in language coursebooks

THE NATURE OF “EXOTIC” STRUCTURES

Grammar descriptions for learners of English do not include every structure in the language. Some structures may be left out because they have not been clearly identified by grammarians. Many others are absent because they are quite rare in English: coursebooks tend not to have enough space for everything and give priority to the more common structures in the belief that those will help learners the most to communicate

However, structures that are not commonly found in language-learning coursebooks can still be useful to know, especially for English users with a more advanced competence, who are the target audience of this blog. It is in this belief that the present post is offered. Five structures are described below. Further Guinlist posts on the same topic can be accessed from 88. Exotic Grammar Structures 1.

.

LIST OF EXOTIC STRUCTURES

1. “Albeit” instead of “Although”

Although is a conjunction that suggests there is something contradictory between two parts of its sentence. Consider this example from 40. Conjunctions versus Connectors:

(a) Although chickens have wings, they cannot fly.

Although here says it is surprising chickens cannot fly given that they have wings.

Albeit is a conjunction like although and expresses the same basic meaning (it may indeed just be an abbreviation of although it be). It can quite often replace although, but it seems to do so much more commonly in some situations than others.

Computer (concordance) searches suggest that most uses of albeit involve words – particularly verbs – that have been left unmentioned because their meaning is obvious (see 36. Words Left Out to Avoid Repetition). Words with obvious meaning cannot always be dropped in English (see 8. Object-Dropping Errors and 158. Abbreviated Sentences), but they commonly can with conjunctions (see 174. Eight Things to Know about Conjunctions, #6), e.g.:

(b) Although/Albeit (it is) unhealthy, fast food is convenient and tasty.

Dropping it is here means the next word after albeit is an adjective (unhealthy). Other common possibilities in this position include -ing verbs (indicating the “present continuous” tense), preposition phrases, and even adverbs, like this:

(c) Funding cuts have caused great suffering, albeit (they have caused great suffering) indirectly.

My intuition is that albeit is particularly likely instead of although directly before adverbs.

When no words can be omitted, albeit is still sometimes preferred to although. This may particularly happen when the choice has to be made in the middle of a sentence, rather than at the start. Consider again sentence (a) above. Replacing although there with albeit feels a little strange. On the other hand, reordering (a) so that albeit is in the middle seems less strange:

(d) Chickens cannot fly, albeit they have wings.

The reason for this difference may be that albeit has a special property that most other conjunctions lack: it nearly always introduces information already known to the reader, i.e. not a main point in its sentence. Other conjunctions that can go before or between two verbs, like although, seem to introduce familiar information more at the start of a sentence than in the middle (see 37. Subordination). This means that at the start a sentence without any omitted words albeit has no advantage over although, but in the middle albeit can be useful for saying something familiar.

.

2. “Let alone”

These two words together form a conjunction (see 230. Multi-Word Conjunctions, #2). They say that something mentioned after them is very unlikely to happen or exist because it depends on something else – mentioned just before – which is already difficult or impossible:

(e) Tax increases hardly reduce smoking, let alone stop it.

We understand here that tax increases cannot stop smoking because they do not even reduce it by very much. The wording before let alone expresses the idea of difficulty by means of the negative word hardly. This is not the only negative possibility: most of the numerous negative expressions in English (see 310. Aspects of Negation) have a similar use. The negativity of let alone – to some extent what I call “hidden” (see 7. Hidden Negatives) – comes from the negative before it. The message after let alone is usually the main one in the sentence.

Here is another example, with the let alone part incomplete. How might it be finished?

(f) Animals cannot make words, let alone…

A suitable continuation might name something that cannot be achieved because it depends on word-making, such as compose sentences.

The word(s) after let alone always include or imply a verb. The verb has to be included when it is different from the one before, but it must have the same form. For example, stop in (e) is different from reduce, but is similarly in the present simple plural form; and compose in (f) is different from make, but is similarly in the “bare infinitive” form necessitated by cannot (see 148. Infinitive Verbs without “to”). Auxiliary verbs like can(not) are not usually repeated after let alone. Other verb forms possible there include -ing (after an earlier verb in a “continuous” tense) and “past participles” (after verbs in the “perfect” tenses or the passive form).

The verb after let alone is not mentioned at all when it is the same as the one before, e.g.:

(g) Most planets are not suitable for life, let alone (are suitable for) humans.

As this shows, one can leave out not just a repeated verb, but also any other repeated words (suitable for above).

.

3. “As if”

These words are another pair that act together as a single conjunction. Usable within two main types of construction, they indicate a rather subtle kind of similarity. Compare:

(h) Animals act as if they are/were machines.

(i) The building looks as if an earthquake has/had hit it.

In (h), the as if part illustrates adverb-like statements, combining with a verb (act) to indicate “how” (see 120. Six Things to Know about Adverbs, #1). In (i), it illustrates complement statements necessitated by a complement-taking verb like LOOK, BE or SEEM. In the first case, as if could be paraphrased as “similarly to how they would…if…”; in the second case as if means “similar to the state that would exist if…”.

When the main verb of an as if sentence is not in a past tense, the verb after as if can usually vary its tense to show reality or unreality of the action or state that it is expressing, with past tenses showing unreality (see 319. Superficiality, #5). Thus, in (h) are machines allows for the possibility that animals really are machines, while were machines says that they are not; while in (i), has hit suggests that an earthquake may really have happened, while had hit says it did not.

Other places where “unreal” events or situations may be found include after if (see 118. Problems with Conditional “if”, #6), after wish that… (see 254. Tricky Word Contrasts 10, #6), and in questions starting What if…? (see 274. Questions with a Hidden Meaning, #2).

Sentences like (h) would be not so different in meaning if the as if part was replaced by like + noun (…act like machines). Like would imply that the two compared ideas were separate things – that animals and machines in (h) were not the same, just as as if + past tense does (see “As”, “Like” and “Such As”). If there is a difference in this situation, it is that like can mean a partial similarity, whereas as if + past always indicates a complete one.

.

4. “Go so far as to…”

This is a useful expression for marking an action as extreme. The to needs to be followed by a verb in the base (infinitive) form, not –ing:

(j) Few language learners go so far as to MEMORISE a dictionary.

A common usage is in literature reviews before a “citation” verb (see 76. Tenses of Citation Verbs), such as argue, claim or say (e.g. X goes so far as to argue that…). Doubt is cast as a result on the reported point (see 152. Agreeing and Disagreeing in Formal Contexts).

Quite often go is preceded by even, do(es) not or only. Even makes the extremeness of the accompanying idea sound even greater. Only and do(es) not, by contrast, reduce it. Only can also suggest not going far enough.

.

5. Apposition Involving a Statement

Apposition is usually a combination of two nouns or noun equivalents that refer to the same idea, in order to make it more fully appreciated (see 77. Apposition). Consider this:

(k) Mount Kilimanjaro, an extinct volcano, is the highest peak in Africa.

It is clear that the two underlined noun expressions here refer to the same mountain.

Apposition involving a statement is a rare kind where the first of the two noun expressions is replaced by a verb-based statement, like this:

(l) Clearing forests reduces rainfall, a change that affects agriculture.

Here, a change… refers not to the noun before it (rainfall), but to the entire statement made with the verb reduces. Sometimes, the end of such statements will not be a noun at all.

Apposition involving a statement is the type of apposition where the first half names an idea and the second describes it. This is the kind in (k) above as well as in (l).

The second half of apposition involving a statement can be just a noun, but is usually a longer noun phrase. In (l), the noun change is expanded into a phrase by means of the relative pronoun that after it – a common means of expanding the second half of apposition sentences like (l), but not the only possibility (see 252. Descriptive Wording after Nouns 1).

An alternative to a noun + that in apposition sentences like (l) is which by itself, removing the apposition altogether (see 200. Special Uses of Relative Clauses, #2). Another possibility is a full stop instead of the comma before the noun, followed by this and the noun without the relative pronoun: … . This change affects… (see 28. Pronoun Errors #2).

183. Statements between Commas

.

Statements between two commas either mark the rest of their sentence as indirect speech or comment on it

KEY CHARACTERISTICS

Two commas, or a comma and a full stop, are a familiar means of adding words to an already grammatical sentence (see 50. Right and Wrong Comma Places). They resemble paired brackets or dashes, but are weaker. The name commonly given to the words surrounded by any of these punctuation types is a “parenthesis”.

Parentheses are grammatically very varied, ranging from a single word to a sentence or more (see 294. Parentheses). Here, though, I wish to concentrate on the kind containing a verb with its subject, often without any further words. It is the presence of a verb that explains the word “statements” in the title above.

The verb in a parenthesis will not be the only one in the sentence – it cannot be if the parenthesis is outside the main sentence structure. Normally, when a sentence has two verbs, a “joining device” must also be present – otherwise the new verb makes a new sentence (see 30. When to Write a Full Stop). However, statements between commas only occasionally need a joining device – most usually when they form “non-defining relative clauses” with who, which etc. (see 34. Relative Pronouns and Commas). Here is a typical use without a joining device (verbs in capitals):

(a) Too much money, one COULD ARGUE, IS COMING into sport.

Here, the parenthesis is in the middle of the sentence, but it could also go at the end, the full stop replacing the second comma.  In a few cases (though not here) it could also go at the start, with a comma after.

The parenthesis in (a) shows the rest of its sentence to be indirect speech. Others act very like adverbs. In the following sections I wish to look in detail at these two uses.

.

COMMA STATEMENTS WITH INDIRECT SPEECH

1. General Features

The comma statement in (a) can be recognised as a marker of indirect speech partly from the kind of verb in it (argue), a typical indirect speech one (see 150. Verb Choices with Reported Speech), and partly because the sentence meaning is unchanged if the parenthetical words are moved to the start and combined with the main part of the sentence in a typical indirect speech structure (one could argue that… – see 127. When to Use Indirect Speech).

It should be noted, however, that “indirect speech” has a very broad meaning here, since it includes cases where the “speaker” is not human, but rather something speaking on behalf of a human, such as a diagram or table (e.g. as Table 3 indicates – see 104. Naming Data Sources with “as”). Note also that when the indirect speech alongside a comma statement is a question, it keeps most of the features of direct questions, just dropping quotation marks and sometimes changing a tense:

(b) Who was responsible, everyone wondered, for these atrocities?

If the words in this parenthesis start the sentence, the commas must disappear and the question must acquire all of the features of indirect questions, including an absent question mark (see 57. Indirect Questions in Formal Writing).

.

2. Uses

The uses of indirect speech formed with a comma statement are broadly the same as those of indirect speech formed in the ordinary way. The common reporting use is illustrated in sentence (b), a report of something said or thought by everyone. A typical non-reporting use – indicating the character of a statement – is in sentence (a), where one could argue tells us that the writer is giving an opinion rather than a fact (see 127. When to Use Indirect Speech).

In the following example, there is again no report:

(c) Whereabouts, could you tell me, is the library?

Here, the effect of converting the question into an indirect one is greater politeness (see 219. Wording next to Indirect Questions). One alternative to could you tell me is may I ask.

Indirect speech created by a comma statement is probably not as common as the ordinary kind. I would suggest the following reasons for preferring it.

A major special use seems to be to give more prominence to the indirect speech – to focus on it rather than its reporting. This is suggested by the different grammatical form of the indirect speech compared to the ordinary kind. Ordinary indirect speech is what grammarians call “subordinated”: forming a part of a statement made by the words around it – usually the object (see 37. Subordination). The subordination is indicated by special link words (“subordinators”): that with statements, question words like whether with questions, and infinitive verbs with commands.

Indirect speech signalled by a parenthetical statement, by contrast, is not subordinated – no subordinators are visible or understood. Moreover, although the parenthetical statement may also not be subordinated, it sometimes is, usually by means of the conjunction as. This word could be added in (a), but not in (b) or (c), perhaps because they are indirect questions. However, even where the parenthesis lacks a subordinator, the absence of one with the indirect speech still makes that much more prominent than it would be in the ordinary form.

A second possible reason for preferring to signal indirect speech with a parenthesis is to mark a statement as a continuation of a preceding report:

(d) Jones (2017, p. 62) argues for higher taxes. A remorseless, decades-long push for lower taxes, Jones writes, has brought the current level of taxation to an unacceptably low level.

This kind of multi-sentence reporting is also possible with a non-parenthetical passive reporting verb (is said by Jones…) combined with the infinitive form of the verb in the report (… to have brought…) – see 299. Infinitives after a Passive Verb, #2. Sometimes, there is even no second mention at all of the original speaker (see 207. Exotic Grammar Structures 4, #4).

Thirdly, a parenthetical statement might be useful when a speaker has begun to say something without making it indirect and then realises that an indirect form might be more advisable. Parenthetical statements are useful in this situation because of their ability to be added late in a sentence. They would be particularly utilised in speech – e.g. (c) above – where unplanned word ordering is more usual.

.

3. Role of “as”

Clear explanations of when and why as might suitably begin a comma statement are hard to find. One definite situation that rules it out is when the report verb is one like CRITICISE, DENY or DEFINE, which grammatically rule it out (see 279. Grammatical Differences between Citation Verbs, #4).

Before a suitable verb, as usually seems to accompany indirect speech of the reported kind (a rare exception being in the fixed semi-apologetic expression as it were: see 247. Exotic Grammar Structures 6, #5). Certainly, as is not possible in such non-reporting parentheses as one could argue in (a) and the formulaic I have to say.

The reporting use generally seems to suggest the writer’s agreement. This might explain the frequent use of as parentheses for referencing an argument-supporting point borrowed from another writer (see Ways of Arguing 1), and for introducing a comment on a neighbouring data source (diagram, table, graph etc: see 104. Naming Data Sources with “As”): when you say what you see, you usually agree with it!

Two as expressions that seem particularly common in these contexts are as…puts it for quoting (see 190. Special Uses of “it”, #4) and as mentioned above for “good” repetition of an earlier point (see 24. Good and Bad Repetition).

A common grammar error to avoid with this kind of as, alongside the use with an unsuitable verb, is use with a later that (see 133. Confusions of Similar Structures 1, #4).

.

4. Form Variation

Comma statements often invite use of I, we or you – undesirable words in formal writing (see 46. How to Avoid “I”, “We” and “You”). For their avoidance after as, see 104. Naming Data Sources with “As”. Elsewhere, one can use one or it. Sentence (a) above illustrates a phrase with one that can replace I think. To use it, the verb must normally be passive, e.g. it can be argued… in (a) (see 107. The Language of Opinions). However, some verbs rule out the passive. How might it be used in the following?

(e) Nobody else, we believe, has tried this method before.

One could here use it seems (likely) or the indications are or just the parenthetical adverb apparently.

.

OTHER COMMA STATEMENTS

Where comma statements do not signal indirect speech, their verb usually expresses speaking or thinking by the sentence author, and has the -ing (participle) form (see 320. Special Participle Uses, #5), e.g.:

(f) Speaking as economists, we have to disagree.

Such verbs often lack an object noun, but then need an as phrase (as economists) or adverb, e.g. honestly. Common verbs besides speaking include arguing, reasoning, thinking and writing. Two frequent verbs that need an object are considering and ignoring.

Participle-based comma statements beginning a sentence look like ordinary participles there. They differ, though, in being more usable before a main verb whose subject is not the same as their own, like inflation in the following:

(g) Speaking honestly, inflation has to be controlled.

For details of why ordinary participles often cannot be used like this, see 75. How to Avoid “Dangling” Participles.

Participle-based comma statements also resemble what I call “communication-describing” adverbs like bluntly, which say how their user is speaking (see 121. Sentence-Spanning Adverbs #2). Indeed, some of the adverbs that can accompany speaking etc. – e.g. bluntly, clearly, frankly, honestly, plainly – are also usable alone.

Occasionally, the verb in a comma statement like (f) or (g) is an infinitive (with to) rather than participle:

(h) Modern sport is, to put it mildly, all about money.

It is seemingly particular verbs that accompany to. PUT (+ it + adverb) is common, another example being to put it another way (see 286. Repeating in Different Words, #6). However, putting is also possible, or the passive participle put without to, -ing or it – put mildly above.

To also accompanies lone verbs indicating a link with a neighbouring sentence – e.g. to finish, to begin with (see 168. Ways of Arguing 2) and (informally) to start with. Some combinations are frequent enough to become “connectors” (see 259. Multi-Word Connectors).

To be is possible with a speaker-describing adjective like blunt, critical, exact, fair, frank, honest, plain, precise, sure and truthful. To mention and to state are possible with a following object, e.g. to mention no names, to mention/ state the obvious.

A few other verbs have to only in fixed expressions, some again classifiable as “connectors”, e.g. to cut a long story short, to cap it all, to make things worse (see 260. Formal Written Uses of “Thing”, #7), to say the least, to name but/just a few and to tell the truth.

179. Deeper Meanings of “If”

.

Saying that “if” introduces a condition is not a precise enough description of its meaning

THE COMPLEXITY OF “IF”

Most people who have studied English grammar know that if is a tricky word. It has the two familiar but very different uses in conditional statements and indirect questions, and there is also a special use in comparisons (see 247. Exotic Grammar Structures 6, #2). It is, as a result, a good example of words that I have elsewhere called Multi-Use.

The complications continue even if we just concentrate on the conditional use. We find it involves some quite complicated verb tense rules (see 118. Problems with Conditional “if”), and that if has to be distinguished from other “conditional” conjunctions like on condition that, provided that and assuming that. Even its own meaning is a challenge to describe. As with other conjunctions, it is best expressed as a relation between two parts of the same sentence (see 174. Eight Things to Know about Conjunctions). Most coursebooks say little more about this relation than that the if part names “a condition” for the event or state expressed by the other part.

The problem with this is that the word “condition” is vague: it means different things in different sentences – just as words attempting to sum up the meaning of other conjunctions do (see, for example, the discussion of but in 20. Problem Connectors, #3). Even the alternative term “hypothetical cause”, which I use in the above-mentioned post on if, has similar vagueness.

I feel that this problem has to be addressed because proper understanding might assist the learning of the different types of conditional sentence that feature in most standard English courses. It might also help to prevent grammatical errors. I do not know for sure whether all of the different meanings of conditional if are possessed by the equivalent word in all languages, but I would be surprised if they were. And if they are not, errors become likely.

Below are my ideas on subclasses of “conditions” that I believe can be expressed by if in English. A key factor is the likelihood of the condition being met. This is not particularly linked to the tense of conditional verbs.

.

LIKELY CONDITIONS

No conditions are certain to be met – the uncertainty of their occurrence is indeed fundamental: if they were certain to occur they would not be conditions at all and would have to be linked to their outcomes by conjunctions like when or since rather than if. However, some conditions are more certain to be met than others.

The kind of condition that seems the most likely to be met is particularly common in chains of logical reasoning. Consider these:

(a) If x equals 3, y equals 6.

(b) If the accused was elsewhere, she did not commit the crime.

In some contexts, conditions like this are a consequence of preceding logical deduction, and hence are very likely to be true. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that in these circumstances the speaker is certain of their truth and is using if instead of since merely in order to hedge – avoid sounding dangerously categorical (see 96. Avoiding Untruths 2).

Thus, if here means “if it is true that”, and is easily replaced by assuming (that), or even since or other conjunction like it (see 306. Ways of Giving a Reason, #1).

.

OPEN CONDITIONS

This kind of condition may be illustrated as follows:

(c) If the liquid turns red, the test will be positive.

(d) If payment is early, a discount will be given.

(e) If the weather was/had been bad, profits fell.

(f) If water is heated to 100C, it boils.

These all contain a condition whose fulfilment cannot be considered particularly likely or unlikely: the underlined events will sometimes happen, sometimes not (see 266. Indicating Alternatives, #3).

There are a number of interesting observations that can be made. Firstly, notice the variability of the time references. Past, present and future times are all possible. If the if verb is past, the other verb will normally lack would, though this word can be used with the meaning of “used to” (see 118. Problems with Conditional “if”, #6). For advice on choosing between past simple was in (e) and past perfect had been, see 171. Aspects of the Past Perfect Tense.

Secondly, the sentences illustrate a difference between general and specific open conditions. The condition in (c) could be either: perhaps describing the behaviour of the liquid at all times when the procedure in question is performed, perhaps describing it in a single performance at a single time. The condition in (d) too could be referring generally to payment at any time, or specifically to particular payment at a particular time. The condition in (e), on the other hand, is only general: it refers to numerous past events rather than just one. Sentence (f) also has a general condition, referring to all water at all times.

The generality of an open condition may be a basis for deciding whether when can paraphrase if. There seems to be a simple rule: general conditions allow a choice between when and if, but specific ones do not. Thus, when could replace if in all of the above sentences without much meaning change, but (c) and (d) could then only be understood as generalizations. An explanation of this rule is hard to formulate but seems to involve a change in the meaning of when in general statements, towards a smaller certainty of occurrence.

A third observation concerning the above sentences is that in (c) the test will be positive is a deduction – a thought, not an event, resulting from the fulfilment of the condition – just as it is in (a) and (b). Open conditions with this kind of consequence are quite often associated with investigations, especially laboratory tests.

Fourthly, some of the four conditions can begin with provided (that) or similar – providing (that), on condition (that), as long as (see 230. Multi-Word Conjunctions, #2) – instead of if. This seems particularly true of (d), but possible in (c) too. My grammar books say provided expresses a meaning of if that does not exist in all conditional sentences, namely “only if”, or the suggestion that no other condition is possible for the mentioned consequence (see 251. The Grammar of “Only”, #1). However, I think more is often involved than this.

I would suggest that a more important meaning of if when it is replaceable by provided that before an open condition is the suggestion of a promise. This is certainly present in (d), and could be understood in (c) too. Promises involve futures considered to be desirable (see 147. Types of Future Meaning, #2). In sentence (d), the desirable future is a discount; in (c) the possibly desirable one is will be positive.

By contrast, if an undesirable future is being mentioned, if does not seem replaceable by provided that. In sentence (e), the outcome profits fell would normally be considered undesirable. If the sentence were changed so as to speak about the future rather than the past, provided that still could not be used. 

In (f) the outcome it boils can be understood as neither desirable nor undesirable. Provided that is again possible here. I would suggest that this kind of neutral sentence is the only place where if has nothing more than the basic “if and only if” meaning of provided that. Perhaps if is preferred to provided that when this meaning does not need to be emphasised.

Finally, it is to be noted that promising is not the only special effect that can achieved by using an open condition with a future outcome. Others include offering, threatening, warning and suggesting. However, none of them seems to allow any synonym of if. A typical warning sentence might be:

(g) The device can overheat if (it is) left running too long.

.

UNLIKELY AND UNFULFILLED CONDITIONS

Conditions can express unlikely futures with were to partnered by would in the main verb, like this:

(h) If aliens were to visit Earth, great changes would occur.

Saying this in the more common future-referring way, with visit…will occur, would make a future alien visit sound much more likely (though still not “likely”). A sometimes-found less emphatic alternative to were to is the simple past tense of the verb (visited above).

Conditions labelled “unfulfilled” rather than “unlikely” express events or situations that are untrue or unreal either at the present moment (“Type 2” conditions in many English coursebooks) or in the past (“Type 3”). I do not wish here to repeat the details about them that can be easily found in coursebooks. Consider, though, this modification of sentence (b):

(i) If the accused had been elsewhere, she would not have committed the crime.

Unlike (b), this says the accused was not elsewhere: the condition is untrue and is hence “unfulfilled”.

The point I wish to make here is that the meaning of if in unfulfilled conditions is very hard to specify with more than the words “unfulfilled condition”. If seems not to be replaceable by any synonym; none of those that apply elsewhere – assuming, since, when, provided – is an alternative.