“Conjunctions” or “The Marriage of Thoughts” Pt. 2

I would like to start part 2 of my conjunctions blog post by revisiting one of the examples in part 1.

If you recall, I gave an example from English Grammar for Dummies by Geraldine Woods and showed how modern authors would “fix” a run-on sentence. Here is that portion of my previous post.

“‘I played with the clay and I went to the zoo and Mommy said I have to take a nap and … ‘”

Now, look at this “fix” which is used almost obsessively in modern writing.

‘I played with the clay. And I went to the zoo. And Mommy said I have to take a nap. And … ‘”

In part one, I mentioned that this is still a run-on sentence, only with longer pauses between the “and’s,” but there is something else of which we as authors might want to make note. The first run-on sentence sounds very childish. This is actually the author, Geraldine Woods, giving an example of a toddler speaking. If this is how we view run-on sentences, it only stands to reason that only adding longer pauses in said run-on sentences would be just as childish, possibly more so.

Why would it be more childish? I mentioned, in the last post, a scenario where a child insists that they are not jumping on the bed simply because they pause between each jump. That sort of frail attempt at splitting hairs is usually considered immature, at best.

The question now becomes whether or not we want our writing to sound like a child wrote it. Another question is whether or not readers will respect our writing if we sound like five-year-olds, or worse, misbehaving five-year-olds.

The question I would like to pose is this: what if we simply use fewer conjunctions? In all honesty, conjunctions are used much more than necessary. They are now used as a crutch to avoid learning how to reword sentences because that takes too much thought and effort. What writers don’t consider is that, many times, rewording can reveal a much stronger sentence.

As we consider rewording sentences, let’s take a look at some passages I found in other sources.

“She thought of all these things as she got washed. She thought of the good friends she had made here, the kind and warm people who had become her world.”

“And still she couldn’t shake the fear and loneliness from the dream.” Etc.

First things first. In this case, the author didn’t even use the best conjunction for this situation. Considering that the first sentence of the new paragraph is a contradiction of the previous paragraph “and” doesn’t really apply unless the thought was continued in the same paragraph. “She thought of the good friends she had made here, the kind and warm people who had become her world, and still she couldn’t shake off the fear and loneliness from the dream.”

Listen to the added power of the thought when “but” is used in contradiction. “She thought of the good friends she had made here, the kind and warm people who had become her world, but she still couldn’t shake off the fear and loneliness from the dream.”

There is the added problem of breaking that sentence apart to make the next paragraph, but that is a discussion for another post.

Returning to the point at hand, since there is a push to make almost all sentences short in order to avoid run-on’s, which is another pet peeve of mine,

we could simply drop the ‘and’ in the sentence the author wanted in the first place.

“She thought of the good friends she had made here, the kind and warm people who had become her world. Still, she couldn’t shake off the fear and loneliness from the dream.”

In this case, the ‘still’ substitutes for, and more than does the work of, the ‘and.’ We see that the second sentence can stand alone and alone it holds great strength. The ‘still’ does give reference to the previous sentence. “Even though she tried everything she could think of, still she couldn’t shake off the fear … ”

I will mention, however, that the ‘but’ does add power to the combined sentences simply because it gives a distinct contrast. “She had so much to make her feel like she belonged, but she couldn’t shake the fear and loneliness.”

Here is another example, this time from a website.

“If you want to be successful at pretty much anything you just need to find what works … then do more of that. And affiliate marketing is no different.”

As you can see, the case here is the same. The “and” isn’t even necessary. It’s an extra word that adds nothing to the sentence or even the paragraph. “If you want to be successful at pretty much anything you just need to find what works… then do more of that. Affiliate marketing is no different.” This wording is more powerful. The “and” at the beginning of the sentence only took away the power like a significant pause to prepare the audience for the punchline of a joke.

There are several other issues with using conjunctions at the beginning of sentences that really have less to do with grammar than with potential reader impression.

Let us take a view of this from a spin-off of the toddler example. A couple of the things that cause a child’s distinctive speech pattern are a short attention span and an abundance of energy that demands a steady stream of words even if words run short.

Now, let us assume we are writers of fiction. We want to draw our readers in by making them trust the narrator, us. What happens if we write with “and” and “but” etc. strung together, even if we do use periods? We begin to have the same speech patterns as a child, aka those which are characterized by a short attention span and a need to avoid pauses lest someone interrupt. Why would the reader want to follow the lead of a narrator that reads like an attention hungry child? How can the reader trust a narrator who chases scattered thoughts this way and that?

“This happened to my main protagonist. Oh, and this also. And wait, they did this. And then someone else did that. And guess what? This also happened!”

Do you really trust such a narrator to give you an accurate description of what happened in the story?

Next question: would you trust someone who thinks and therefore writes like this to teach you anything? I told you I would come back around to non-fiction writers. In the example earlier, I quoted from a website which was supposed to provide instruction on how to make money with affiliate marketing. Does this sound like someone reliable as a teacher? This person might be a fine teacher, but the fact that they are either unable or unwilling to formulate their thoughts in a manner that is clear and concise does not instill confidence.

I would like to point out that we are discussing the written word and not the spoken word. There used to be a saying that one should think before they speak, but that is no longer the way things are done. With the written word, the author has time to put their thoughts down in their chosen media and arrange them. There should be, therefore, no excuse for not taking the time to write out your words well.

I further want to point out that I am not discussing a mistake here and there. I am discussing a trend that actually insults the reader because it declares them unworthy of the writer’s time. There is a story about a woman (back when letters were written longhand) who wrote at the end of a long missive that, if she had more time, she would have written a shorter letter. This statement was accurate because it takes less time to simply jot down every thought that passes through your mind without filter than it does to arrange words for clarity and flow.

This brings me to the exception I mentioned in part 1. This exception is in dialogue. People, when talking to each other, do tend to speak as the words come to mind with little thought, if any, of whether they are using their words well. As much as I would love to hear people formulate their words a little more before sending them out into the world, I understand that in order for dialogue to sound natural it has to be written in a way people would normally speak.

Besides this, let us consider the times when one person voices a sentence and the next person adds on to that sentence.

Jane could barely contain herself, ‘I love that band! The performance is so powerful.’

“And the lead guitarist flirting with you has nothing to do with it.” Kathy added, with a good-natured scoff.

Obviously, this is something that just sounds natural. With this in mind, dialogue is a valid exception to the conjunction rule.

My fellow writers, please take the time to show your audience that you value them and their time. You will stand out from a crowd dominated by the seemingly non-edited, free flow writing that is now considered normal. Free flow writing is to get the words out of your head so you can then work them around into either persuasive paragraphs or an engaging work of art. Giving your readers anything less is a slap in the face. Please, uphold the writer’s respect for their own art, and their readers so that the reader can give that respect back in turn. This way we can all begin again to enjoy the wonder.

---

If you enjoyed this post, please, share this site with others, and like this page. If you want to receive further posts directly to your email before they are posted on my site, subscribe. Feel free to leave a comment or make use of the Contact page.