Geoff,
My apologies for making my point seem like a disagreement. It
wasn't intended that way, but I can see why that reading was likely.
Starting a sentence with because can be awkward. Agreed. The reverse
is equally true. It can be awkward NOT to start a sentence with because.
I think I gave an example that works, at least for me. "Because you were
late, we lost everything." There are almost an infinite number of
examples for subordinate clauses, including those beginning with
"because," in sentence opening position. "When it rains, it pours." "It
pours when it rains" doesn't have that power. "For lack of a nail, we
lost the horse. For lack of a horse, we lost the war." Reversed, it
loses its power. (These are prepositional phrases, but they work in the
same way.) I have no idea why "because" was ever singled out for
prohibition. I suspect it's because of the tendency toward sentence
fragments, but I don't think even that is grounded in any kind of research.
This reminds me of the "rule" against the passive. Students
sometimes write very awkward sentences, and when you ask about it, they
say the computer told them their original (passive) version was "wrong."
The point I was trying to make, no doubt awkwardly, is that opening a
sentence with a subordinate clause, including those headed by "because,"
is often highly congruent with the author's purposes. Awkwardness is,
almost by definition, conflicting messages between meaning and form.
Peace. You have been making some nice contributions to this
discussion. I was trying to add to that.
Craig
On 4/13/2011 12:32 PM, Geoffrey Layton wrote:
> Craig -
>
> The reverse of what is equally true? What are you arguing here -
> that the rhetorical meaning of a sentence can change depending on
> whether "because" starts the sentence? That is totally off the
> point. Re-read my post - nowhere did I argue against starting a
> sentence with "because" - I know the rhetorical choices involved. But
> you merely buttress this well-established point. That wasn't the
> point. Instead, go back in your treasure trove and come up with
> examples of what Edmonds was suggesting - namely, that there are
> awkward examples of starting sentences with "because" - you have many
> more resources than I do! Instead of flaying a dead horse, let's
> advance the conversation!
>
> You point out that "awkwardness depends on context" - this is what I
> was trying to point out, and perhaps what Edmonds was trying to point
> out - let's address that point! When is it awkward to start a sentence
> with "because"?
>
> Geoff Layton
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 12:14:35 -0400
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Punctuation Question
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> Geoff, and all,
> The reverse is equally true. Consider "Because you were late, we
> lost everything" as opposed to "We lost everything because you were
> late." Since losing everything seems a more important piece of
> information, the first seems smoother (more congruent with meaning) to
> my ear. It also allows for two pints of emphasis.
> Introductory word groups of all kinds (anything other than the
> main clause grammatical subject) are recognized as *marked theme* in
> systemic functional grammar. They are intonationally marked in speech.
> They function as a stepping off point for the mesage structure of the
> sentence. It is not a trivial choice. Awkwardness would depend on
> context, not on some arbitrary formal rule.
> Unfortunately, English teachers tend to rely on hearing as an
> alternative to grammar. Saying you should put commas where you hear
> the pause is about as useful as "a sentence is a complete thought,"
> dangerous because it oversimplifies. Intonation is a grammatical
> system, and paying attention to it leads us into the heart of
> syntax--more appropriately, into the heart of the grammar-meaning
> connection.
> We don't just punctuate sentences--we construct them. The
> punctuation should work in harmony with those choices. Most students
> don't get very far on hearing alone. It is also one thing to know how
> you would say it, another to anticipate how a reader would hear it on
> the basis of what you have provided (or failed to provide) as clues.
>
> Craig
>
>
> On 4/13/2011 11:49 AM, Geoffrey Layton wrote:
>
> TJ - Not to quibble, but I think the emphasis was on "awkward,"
> not "incorrect," and starting a sentence with because can be
> considered awkward depending on the useage.
>
> Geoff Layton
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Date: Wed, 13 Apr 2011 10:38:37 -0500
> From: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Punctuation Question
> To: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>
> Crystal,
> Your encouragement of your students is a matter of choice, but I
> don't see that beginning a
> sentence with "Because" is incorrect.
>
> tj
>
>
> On Wednesday 04/13/2011 at 10:01 am, Crystal Edmonds wrote:
>
> The subordinating conjunction "because" is used to link the
> dependent clause to the independent clause. I encourage my
> students to place such subordinate clauses at the end of the
> sentence so that there are no errors in comma usage. However,
> many students want to begin a sentence with "because". While
> it is not incorrect, the sentence structure does appear awkward.
> Using "for" illustrates students' sentence variety. That is
> important for me.
> C. Edmonds, Chair
> Associate in Arts
> English and Humanities
> Robeson Community College
> PO Box 1420
> Lumberton, NC 28359
> (910) 272-3700 ext. 3362
> (910) 272-3328 (fax)
> [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>
> *RCC 4 R.E.A.L.*/Reading Engages Active Learning/
>
> A Quality Enhancement Plan at Robeson Community College
>
> >>> On 4/13/2011 at 8:52 AM, in message
> <[log in to unmask]> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>,
> "Katz, Seth" <[log in to unmask]>
> <mailto:[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Traditional lists of coordinating conjunctions included "for"
> (hence the "F" in the acronym "FANBOYS" for remembering the
> list of coordinating conjunctions); but it seems to me that
> the use of "for" as a coordinating conjunction in English has
> largely been succeeded by the use of "because."
>
> I find I'm not sure here what the distinction is between a
> coordinating conjunction and a subordinating conjunction. Help?
>
> Dr. Seth Katz
> Assistant Professor
> Department of English
> Bradley University
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar on behalf
> of T. J. Ray
> Sent: Wed 4/13/2011 6:16 AM
> To: [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Punctuation Question
>
>
> I believe you're right in thinking he feels this is a
> coordinate conjunction. My understanding is that
> "because" clauses are dependent and hence should not be
> preceded with a comma. I just
> wanted a number of opinions before I bring it to the
> committee's attention, folks who evidently
> don't see a problem with it as no one had marked any of these
> before I saw the MSS.
>
> Thanks for your time.
>
>
>
> On Wednesday 04/13/2011 at 5:43 am, "Dixon, Jack" wrote:
>
> Focusing on the obvious, I suspect the writer believes that
> "because" functions as a coordinating conjunction rather than
> a subordinating. Does the student punctuate most subordinating
> clauses that follow the independent clause this way, or do he
> make this mistake with "because" only?
>
> I seem to remember that Martha Kolln in _Rhetorical Grammar_
> addresses the few instances when terminal subord. clauses are
> set off with commas.
>
> ________________________________________
> From: Assembly for the Teaching of English Grammar To join or
> leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list" Visit ATEG's web site at
> http://ateg.org/
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's
> web interface at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join
> or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/