Coordinating clauses
coordinate, adjective (/kəʊˈɔːdɪnət/: equal in rank or importance.This lesson is about how to join together clauses which are of equal importance. |
There are tasks to do in this lesson. When you see the word Task, stop for a moment and do the exercise. You will learn more that way.
Basically, there are two ways to join sentences together in English (and most languages):
|
|
Here, we focus on the first type only. There is a separate lesson about subordinating clauses.
The coordinatorsIn English, but not in all languages, there are:
|
In this lesson, we will mostly be looking at the first four of these because they are the most important and the most common. At the end, we will look quickly at the other four.
Coordination with and |
You may think this is too simple for you but you may be
surprised. As we go along, ask yourself the questions:
Can I do this in my language?
Does the word mean the same in my language?
You will sometimes hear that clauses connected with and can be
changed around with no change in meaning.
For example:
It is raining and it is cold
can be:
It is cold and it is raining
In fact, it is quite unusual for there to be no change in meaning
and sometimes, if you turn the clauses round, you make a nonsense
sentence.
Task 1: A) Which one of these sentences is good English and which one is nonsense? B) Why? C) Can you reverse the clauses and still have a sensible sentence? Sentence 1: He came to party and Mars is the fourth planet from the sun Sentence 2: He came to the party and Mary was not pleased to see him When you have an answer, click here. |
Sentence 1. is nonsense because the two ideas must have
something in common. There is no connection between
the party and Mars so the ideas can't be put
together.
Can you reverse the clauses and make:
Mary was not pleased to see him and he came to the party
No, because he came to the party before Mary was
not pleased.
Task 2: A) Which one of these sentences is good English and which one is nonsense? B) Why? Sentence 1: He saw the accident and called the police Sentence 2: He called the police and saw the accident When you have an answer, click here. |
Sentence 2. is nonsense because the reason he
called the police was that he saw the accident. It is silly to
say that he called the police before he saw the accident.
In many languages, we must use a word that means so or
because to join these ideas. What does your language do?
Task 3: A) Which one of these sentences is good English and which one is nonsense? B) Why? Sentence 1: John went to the station and caught the train Sentence 2: John caught the train and went to the station When you have an answer, click here. |
Sentence 2. is nonsense because one action follows another
one in time. Normally you have to go to the station
before you can catch a train!
In many languages, we must use a word like then to link the
ideas.
What does your language do?
Task 4: A) Can you use and to join these ideas in your language? B) Can you reverse the clauses and still have a sensible sentence? John refused to take the job and that's quite right When you have an answer, click here. |
English speakers
often connect a fact with how they feel about it by using and.
In other words, they say what the matter is and then they
add a comment on it.
Many languages cannot do this. Can yours?
Reversing the clauses makes a nonsense sentence:
That's quite right and John refused to take the job.
Task5: A) Can you use and to join these ideas in your language? B) Can you reverse the clauses and still have a sensible sentence? Help me with this work and I'll buy you a coffee When you have an answer, click here. |
English speakers
often use and instead of making a conditional
sentence with if.
We can say:
If you help me with this, I'll buy you a coffee
But, especially when we are speaking, we simply connect the clauses
with and and it's obvious what we mean.
A lot of languages can't do that and must use a word like if.
What does your language do?
We have five rules now. Here they are for you to check.
- The two ideas must be logically connected. They must have something in common.
- We can use and to connect a cause and a result.
- We can use and to show the ordering of events in time.
- We can use and to make a comment on something.
- We can use and to mean if.
Coordination with or |
|
Do I go right or left? |
Again, you may think this is too simple for you but you may be
surprised. As we go along, ask yourself the same questions:
Can I do this in my language?
Does the word mean the same in my language?
Again, you may be told that reversing the clauses makes no
difference to the meaning. Sometimes, that's true but English speakers will often
choose to put what they prefer first.
Sometimes, you make nonsense if you
reverse the clauses.
Task 6: A) Which one of these sentences is good English and which one is nonsense? B) Why? C) Can you reverse the clauses and still have a sensible sentence? Sentence 1: She can fly or she can take the train Sentence 2: She can fly or she has done the shopping When you have an answer, click here. |
With
the coordinator or, it is even more important that the
ideas are logically connected.
Sentence 2. is nonsense because shopping and flying are not
connected but flying and taking the train are connected because they
are both types of transport.
In sentence 1., we can reverse the clauses and the meaning does not
change because the ideas are equal:
She can take the train or she can fly.
Task 7: A) Can you use or to join these ideas in your language? B) Can you reverse the clauses and still have a sensible sentence? Sentence 1: She enjoyed the film or she wouldn't have stayed to the end. Sentence 2: Give me your money or I'll shoot you! When you have an answer, click here. |
We can
also use the coordinator or to take the place of a
conditional if-sentence.
Both sentences are fine.
Sentence 1. means: If she hadn't enjoyed the film, she wouldn't
have stayed to the end
Sentence 2. means: If you don't give me your money, I'll shoot
you
When we use or to take the place of if, we cannot reverse the
clauses because that makes nonsense:
*She wouldn't have stayed to the end or she enjoyed the film
*I'll shoot you or give me your money
Many languages cannot use or in this way. Can yours?
There are only two rules for using or:
- The ideas must be logically connected.
- We can use it instead of making a conditional sentence with if.
Coordination with but |
|
.... but I have a question |
You have probably learned that but is used to state a contrast
between two things as in, for example:
I want to stay at home but she wants to go
out
That is a very common way to use but.
There is another way.
Task 8: A) Can you say what but means in this sentence? B) Can you use but like that in your language? He didn't spend the summer lying on the beach but worked hard to pass his examinations When you have an answer, click here. |
Here
there is no contrast: not lying on the beach and working hard are
the same ideas.
In this sentence, but is used to confirm the first idea.
In other words it says the same thing and there is no contrast.
In many languages, that it not the way we can use the word.
Can you do that in your language?
Coordination with so |
|
.... so I took a taxi |
You may have learned that so and because are very similar. They are similar in meaning but different in grammar.
Task 9: A) Can you move the parts of these sentences in black to the beginning? Sentence 1.: My car broke down so I took a taxi Sentence 2.: I took a taxi because my car broke down B) Can you move the part of this sentence in black to the end? Sentence 3: Because I want to be at work early, I'm getting up at 6 When you have an answer, click here. |
We can
have:
Because my car broke down, I took a taxi
but
So I took a taxi my car broke down
is nonsense.
and we can have
I'm getting up at 6 because I want to be at
work early
The difference is that so is a coordinator and because
is a subordinator.
The coordinator so must stand between the two ideas it
connects and the ideas are equal.
The subordinator because moves with its clause and is a
subordinator because the idea it comes with cannot be understood
when it stands alone.
The other 4 coordinators |
The other four coordinators are much less common so there are no tasks in this part, just some information for you.
- FOR
-
This coordinator sometimes means something like because but the grammar is different:
We can say:
He went to Blackpool for that is where his mother lives
and
He went to Blackpool because that is where his mother lives
and the meaning is similar, although the sentence with for is very formal.
The difference is that we can say:
Because that is where is mother lives, he went to Blackpool
but we cannot say
*For that is where his mother lives he went to Blackpool.
The word for is a coordinator and must come between the clauses. It cannot move about! - YET
- This coordinator means something like but and is more
formal:
We can say:
He worked hard but didn't get the new job
and
He worked hard yet didn't get the new job
and the meaning is very similar.
Both these words must come between the clauses so we cannot have:
*But he worked hard he didn't get the new job
or
*Yet he worked hard he didn't get the new job
BOTH of those are wrong because both but and yet are coordinators and stand between the ideas. - NOR
-
This coordinator works a little like or but for two negative ideas. For example:
He didn't eat the food, nor did he drink the coffee
which means:
He didn't eat the food and he didn't drink the coffee
We also use this coordinator with words like hardly, never, no-one etc. which are negative adverbs and pronouns. For example:
He hardly saw his friends nor did he talk to his family
The word is not very common and you can always make the sentence a different way to give the same meaning.
Notice that you must make a question form after nor. Saying or writing:
*He didn't eat the food nor he drank the wine
is wrong! We must say:
He didn't eat the food, nor did he drink the wine - SO THAT
-
This is an unusual one because it has two meanings:
Meaning 1: the result of something. For example:
It snowed hard all night so that he couldn't get out of the house
In this sentence, the fact that he could not leave the house is the result of the snow.
You can always replace so that with so:
It snowed hard all night so he couldn't get out of the house
Meaning 2: the reason for something. For example:
I worked late last night so that I didn't have to go to work early this morning
In this meaning, so that is not a coordinator because we can move it to the front and have:
So that I didn't have to go to work early this morning, I worked late last night
It is a subordinator in this sentence and we will look at it again in the lesson on subordination.
Leaving words out |
Task 10: Look at these sentences and decide which words have been left out of the second part. For example, in: John came home and went to bed We have left out John in the second part because we know it is the same person. Which words have been left out in these sentences? Click here when you have your answer. |
- Mary came to the meeting and said the work was finished
- I can tell you or your father
I can tell you and your father - I have been to Paris and seen the Mona Lisa
- He wanted the car but couldn't afford it
- I watched carefully so learnt how to do it
- Mary came to the meeting and (Mary) said the work was finished
In this sentence, we have left out the subject, Mary, in the second part because it is the same person who came to the meeting.
We can only do this if the subject of the verb is the same. - I can tell you or (I can tell) your father
I can tell you and (I can tell) your father
In both these sentences we have left out the subject, I, and the verb phrase, can tell, in the second part. We can do this if the verb phrase (the verb, tell, and the auxiliary, can) and the subject are the same for both parts. - I have been to Paris and (I
have) seen the Mona Lisa
In this sentence, we have left out the subject and the auxiliary verb, I have. The verb has changed but the subject and the tense are the same so we don't need them.
If the verb changes but the tense remains the same, we can leave out the auxiliary verb. - He wanted the car but (he) couldn't afford it
In this sentence, we have left out the subject again because it is the same for both verbs but the verbs and the auxiliary are different. - I watched carefully so (I) learnt how to do it
In this sentence, we have left out the subject again because it is the same for both verbs.
With coordinators, these are the rules:
- We can leave out the subject if it is the same
- We can leave out the auxiliary verb if it is the same for both verbs but the verbs are different in each part
- We can leave out the whole verb phrase if it is the same verb and the same auxiliary in both parts
With subordinators, we can't do this so:
*Because he was in London, came to see me
is wrong and must be:
Because he was in London he came to see me
How does it work in your language?
Getting more practice |
Look again at any writing you have done in English and try to find three things:
- Times when you have made two short sentences and one longer sentence with a coordinator would be better. When you find it, make it better.
- Times when you have used the coordinators wrongly. Remember, real coordinators must come between the ideas.
- Times when you have included the subject twice but it is the same for both verbs. You can usually take it out.
- Take a short test in this area.