Prescriptivists have long proscribed sentence-initial And (SIA), and sentence-initial But (SIB). However, SIA and SIB are increasingly used in newspapers and style guides have softened strictures against their use. Moreover, SIA and SIB are amongst the most frequently occurring sentence-initial connectives within their respective semantic groups of additives and contrastives. Given their use despite prohibitions, this paper examines the patterns of occurrence and function of SIA and SIB in academic writing. The data come from 1 million words of academic prose: 11 journals representing science, social science, and humanities. The data confirm the findings of Biber et al. (1999) that while coordinator and is more frequent in academic prose than but, SIA is much less frequent than SIB. The data also reveal a marked difference between low SIA and SIB occurrences in scientific writing and much higher occurrences in social science and humanities. Plus, SIA is the preferred additive connective compared with moreover, furthermore, and in addition, etc., and SIB is the second most preferred contrastive connective after however. SIA and SIB in academic writing function in three very similar ways: (i) to mark off a discourse unit by indicating the last item on a list, (ii) to indicate the development of an argument, and (iii) to indicate a discontinuity or shift with a previous discourse unit. Whereas the most common function of SIA is that of indicating the last item on a list, the most common use of SIB is in the development of arguments. SIA and SIB perform special functions that the alternatives of asyndetic or “zero” coordination, the use of similar discourse markers: moreover, furthermore, in addition, and however, respectively, or intrasentential coordination cannot perform. These special functions are derived from their particular semantic meanings, their role as coordinating conjunctions, and their reduced phonological prominence. These features allow SIA and SIB to preface a wider range of lexico-grammatical units such as interrogatives, stance adverbs and other discourse connectives and to create a tighter form of cohesion. It is these special features of cohesion rather than a move to colloquiality which are held to explain the occurrence of SIA and SIB in academic writing.
(2002) Introductory And as a device in poetry-making. Philological Quarterly 81.2: 139-57.
Nemo, François
(2006) Discourse particles as morphemes and as constructions. In Kerstin Fischer (ed.), Approaches to Discourse Particles. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp.375-402.
Pander Maat, Henk, and Liesbeth Degand
(2001) Scaling causal relations and connectives in terms of speaker involvement. Cognitive Linguistics 12.3: 211-245.
Quirk, Randolph, et al.
(1985) A Comprehensive Grammar Of The English Language. London: Longman. BoP
Raimes, Ann
(2002) Keys for Writers: A Brief Handbook. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Schiffrin, Deborah
(1986) Functions of “and” in discourse. Journal of Pragmatics 101: 41-66.
Schiffrin, Deborah
(1987) Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. BoP
Schiffrin, Deborah
(2006) Discourse marker research and theory: Revisiting and. In Kerstin Fischer (ed.), Approaches to Discourse Particles. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp. 315-338.
Sotirova, Violeta
(2004) Connectives in free indirect style: Continuity or shift?Language and Literature 13.3: 216-234.
Thompson, Geoff
(2005) But me some buts: A multidimensional view of conjunction. Text 25.26: 763-791. BoP
(2005) Contrast and information structure: A focus-based analysis of but. Linguistics 43.1: 207-232.
Cited by (9)
Cited by 9 other publications
Lyu, Jing, Muhammad Ilyas Chishti & Zhibin Peng
2022. Marked distinctions in syntactic complexity: A case of second language university learners’ and native speakers’ syntactic constructions. Frontiers in Psychology 13
Walková, Milada
2020. Transition markers in EAP textbooks. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 46 ► pp. 100874 ff.
Wu, Xue, Anna Mauranen & Lei Lei
2020. Syntactic complexity in English as a lingua franca academic writing. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 43 ► pp. 100798 ff.
Ebrahimi, Seyed Foad & Seyed Aqil Fakheri
2019. Features of Informality in Applied Linguistics Research Articles Published in Iranian Local Journals. Romanian Journal of English Studies 16:1 ► pp. 135 ff.
Lee, Joseph J., Tetyana Bychkovska & James D. Maxwell
2019. Breaking the rules? A corpus-based comparison of informal features in L1 and L2 undergraduate student writing. System 80 ► pp. 143 ff.
Makkonen-Craig, Henna
2017. The forbidden first word: Discourse functions and rhetorical patterns of and-prefacing in student essays. Text & Talk 37:6 ► pp. 713 ff.
Yong-Yae Park
2013. Korean College EFL Students’ Use of Contrastive Conjunctions in Argumentative Writing. English Teaching 68:2 ► pp. 55 ff.
Fetzer, Anita
2008. Theme zones in English media discourse: Forms and functions. Journal of Pragmatics 40:9 ► pp. 1543 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 15 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.