![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Jul. 27th, 2009 04:41 pmI've set myself to re-learning the word 'and' and its uses. An editor commented I used 'and' too much at the beginning of sentences and it got me thinking, you see. I'm only partway through my re-learning of the word, despite having deleted about a hundred uses from a novel.
Already I've discovered that I overuse 'and' at the beginning of a sentence. I also discovered that I'm not alone. Every writer I've read this last fortnight (all books published in 2008 or 2008, so it might be a current language fad) have used 'and' to replace a bunch of words: moreover, however, therefore, thus, then and others. One time in ten we actually use it to indicate a strong follow-on from the previous sentence where no extra meaning is needed. More often than not, it's just simply put at the beginning of the sentence. It's there because it's there, rather than because it's functional. In too many instances, it dilutes meaning and sometimes warps the rhythm. Compare "And he jumped." with "He jumped." - they ought not be interchangeable.
If I never used 'and' at the beginning of sentences again, I would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. That tenth instance - where 'and' adds both meaning and rhythm to the sentence and the paragraph - is magic on the page. For the next few months, though, I shall take a bit more care in how I start sentences: I shall recover from the "And she did this. And then she did that." habit.
Already I've discovered that I overuse 'and' at the beginning of a sentence. I also discovered that I'm not alone. Every writer I've read this last fortnight (all books published in 2008 or 2008, so it might be a current language fad) have used 'and' to replace a bunch of words: moreover, however, therefore, thus, then and others. One time in ten we actually use it to indicate a strong follow-on from the previous sentence where no extra meaning is needed. More often than not, it's just simply put at the beginning of the sentence. It's there because it's there, rather than because it's functional. In too many instances, it dilutes meaning and sometimes warps the rhythm. Compare "And he jumped." with "He jumped." - they ought not be interchangeable.
If I never used 'and' at the beginning of sentences again, I would be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. That tenth instance - where 'and' adds both meaning and rhythm to the sentence and the paragraph - is magic on the page. For the next few months, though, I shall take a bit more care in how I start sentences: I shall recover from the "And she did this. And then she did that." habit.