# Starting a sentence with "But".



## Mary Therés

hey there,
Is there actually a rule about using But at the beginning of sentences. I remember being told in school that it should never be done ( like Basoonery's point about the Oxford Comma) but of course see it everywhere. Is there an actual grammatical rule or is it just a question of style?


----------



## papa majada

I'm pretty sure it's a rule that "But" cannot be used at the beginning of a sentence, but as you said, many people disregard it.


----------



## panjandrum

Conjunctions at the start of sentences are to be used with caution.
As a general rule of thumb, beginners in English should avoid them.
In practice, you will find that many, if not most, experienced English writers will start sentences with conjunctions.

If these forums were to ban the use of conjunctions at the start of sentences, a very large proportion of my posts would have to go.

In other words, there is a guideline for beginners that cautions against starting a sentence with but. It is not a grammatical rule.

If you studied science, you may remember being taught at first that an atom was the smallest indivisible particle of matter. Then when you learned more you discovered electrons, protons and neutrons. 

Enough knowledge for you to survive a few years. 

Then along came lots more sub-atomic particles and wave theories and cats in boxes.

English is rather like that. There are models of usage that are appropriate for each level of development. Then you discover that the model was a partial model and you learn something new - for example that is is entirely normal in English to begin a sentence with a conjunction.


----------



## Mary Therés

yeah that makes sense.  As far as I remember it was just in primary school that the teacher would insist on such models. Ta!


----------



## panjandrum

The "rule" had a purpose.

Beginning writers often keep on going without considering the structure of their sentences and introduce new concepts within sentences but never think of the risks of skating without the proper protective equipment and insist on eating their peas with honey on their knives instead of carefully polishing their glasses and making sure they use the correct spoon for each course.

Then they break up the run-on sentences with punctuation.  The result is fractured sense and dreadful sentences.  And many of the sentences begin with conjunctions simply because the word before the conjunction concluded what they thought was a sentence-worth. But do not despair. 

When you have mastered the art of using capital letters at the beginning of sentences, you too might be considered fluent enough to begin a sentence with But


----------



## Mary Therés

Cheeky! Both my punctuation and spelling tend to be pretty desperate alright but that's why I'm here


----------



## cuchuflete

Mary Therés,
Stay awhile and you'll be able to mix metaphors just as well as Panjandrum....skating over to the buffet table to get some honey and peas on my knife.

However much you may have been told of rules and their supposed sanctity, many of them are nothing but stylistic conventions, some very useful, as Panj has pointed out, and others just hand-me-downs that are ragged around the knees.


----------



## jabogitlu

I have an English-major friend that insist it's always, 100% wrong to use 'and' or 'but' at the beginning of sentences.  I've wrangled with her for YEARS!

I think everything that needs explaining has been explained; I just wanted to add my two cents in.


----------



## cuchuflete

jabogitlu said:


> I think everything that needs explaining has been explained; I just wanted to add my two cents in.



And that, as they say, is the end of that.


----------



## winklepicker

jabogitlu said:


> I have an English-major friend that insist it's always, 100% wrong to use 'and' or 'but' at the beginning of sentences. I've wrangled with her for YEARS!
> 
> I think everything that needs explaining has been explained; I just wanted to add my two cents in.


 
Tell your friend, 'Rules are for the obedience of fools and the guidance of wise men.'  

_(Bear in mind though that this quote is attributed to Douglas Bader who broke the rules on low-level aerobatics and ending up having both legs amputated... )_


----------



## cuchuflete

But don't forget that he also become a very good golfer afterwards, married the girl he wanted, had a nice career in the RAF, crashed another airplane and lived happily ever after.
Pass the peas and honey, please, Winklepicker.


----------



## winklepicker

cuchuflete said:


> Pass the peas and honey, please, Winklepicker.


 
I've done it all my life, Cuchu.


----------



## cyberpedant

For your continued edification, just google "History of English," or "English grammar."


----------



## cuchuflete

As we are being very precise and specific in our advice, why not just google "Which came first—the language or the grammarians?"


----------



## Ms Missy

I also had it drilled into my head since grammar school that it was definitely a "no no" to use either _*and*_ or* but* at the beginning of a (written) sentence.  Although I might use either or both in emails or personal correspondence, I try to avoid it on the English only forum.  

_*But*_ I'm glad that the subject came up so that members who are doing writing assignments for class will know that conjunctions at the beginning of sentences probably won't be acceptable to their English professors.


----------



## cuchuflete

> In the last but one, _him_ would no doubt have been defended by the writer, since the full form would be _he whom,_ as an attraction to the vanished _whom._ *But such attraction is not right*; if _he_ alone is felt to be uncomfortable, _whom_ should not be omitted; or, in this exalted context, it might be _he that._


emphasis added.


Take a guess as to the author of the quoted material.


It was one H.W. Fowler!

http://www.bartleby.com/116/201.html


----------



## gaer

Ms Missy said:


> I also had it drilled into my head since grammar school that it was definitely a "no no" to use either _*and*_ or* but* at the beginning of a (written) sentence. Although I might use either or both in emails or personal correspondence, I try to avoid it on the English only forum.
> 
> _*But*_ I'm glad that the subject came up so that members who are doing writing assignments for class will know that conjunctions at the beginning of sentences probably won't be acceptable to their English professors.


 
A Christmas Carol

Do a search for "But". Make sure you mark "match case". I believer there are nearly ten sentences starting with but, and that's only considering the narrative.

The Picture of Dorian Gray

At least three "but's" in the first chapter. (Click on chapter one.)

Gullivers-Travels

Nice in the first chapter.

I wonder what these gentlemen were taught in school? Surely such "poor" writing could not have been acceptable to their English teachers. 

Gaer


----------



## jaxineau

But shouldn't be use as the start of the sentence; it makes a fragment. But denotes a subordinate clause and needs a main clause to explain its meaning.

However, it is possible to use but that way as a style method; it is a way to put emphasis on a subject.


----------



## Barnaby

jaxineau said:


> But shouldn't be use as the start of the sentence; it makes a fragment. But denotes a subordinate clause and needs a main clause to explain its meaning.
> 
> However, it is possible to use but that way as a style method; it is a way to put emphasis on a subject.



Okay, so what exactly is the difference between "but" and "although" or even "yet" or "nevertheless?" (Okay, sometimes there is a difference.) Pan is essentially right about why the rule is there, but I'll agree that it's perfectly acceptable to use "but" once you know the language (and the difference). The difference between the above is sometimes an artificial grammatical distinction and "but" is at times the most direct and best word to use. Plain talk, as opposed to high falutin'. (Next thread?)

That said, I'll tell you a story. A couple of years ago I took the GRE's. I got a perfect score on the verbal. ( I guessed at least once and got lucky--though I don't consider it luck so much as good logic.) They had just instituted a written element. Essays. (Now, [But. But "but" wouldn't work as well as "now" here. Close, but no cigar] I could write that just as well by saying: They had just introduced a written element: essays.) I wrote elegant, nuanced arguments, and got a sub-par score. I started a sentence or two with "but." Might have had a sentence fragment or two in there for effect.

I suspect I received a poor score due to grammar robots.

That's life.
Can't deny it.
Lack of judgement on my part.

Barnaby


----------



## clairanne

hi

I hate to see " But" at the start of a sentence and tend to use "however" instead.  I am still dogged by the very fierce English Teacher I had for my "O" levels at school and every time I write "But" I can hear her terrifying tones.( She wouldn't let us use a knife like a pen either, so that is another of my pet hates) Oh the baggage we pick up as children!!!


----------



## cuchuflete

Send that fierce English Teacher a pen, some honey and peas, and a copy of Fowler's Modern English Usage, together with instructions to find every sentence Henry Fowler began with but.
There is one example a few posts above this one.  Her discomfort should help attone for that she has caused you.


----------



## cuchuflete

jaxineau said:


> But shouldn't be use as the start of the sentence; it makes a fragment. But denotes a subordinate clause and needs a main clause to explain its meaning.
> 
> However, it is possible to use but that way as a style method; it is a way to put emphasis on a subject.



You have had rules and pseudo-rules drilled into you. But there is hope!  You seem to at least accept that there are stylistic grounds on which to base the use of but at the start of a sentence.  It doesn't necessarily make a fragment.


----------



## gaer

clairanne said:


> hi
> 
> I hate to see " But" at the start of a sentence and tend to use "however" instead. I am still dogged by the very fierce English Teacher I had for my "O" levels at school and every time I write "But" I can hear her terrifying tones.( She wouldn't let us use a knife like a pen either, so that is another of my pet hates) Oh the baggage we pick up as children!!!


Have you look at the links I posted? I wonder if anyone has.  

Are you saying that you hate to see "but" at the beginning of a sentence by Dickens? Or by Oscar Wilde?

And doesn't that make you wonder if you have ever noticed what is really used by great authors?

The fact is that we are often so brain-washed by pedantic nit-wits that it blinds us to what is actually used by people who are masters of the English language. 

Gaer


----------



## panjandrum

The thing is, gaer, that well used Buts are completely transparent.
Carelessly used Buts stick out like sore thumbs.


----------



## gaer

Macbeth:

But I am faint, my gashes cry for help.
But screw your courage to the sticking-place,
But wherefore could not I pronounce 'Amen'?
But let the frame of things disjoint, both the
worlds suffer,

What a pity. If only Shakespeare had had proper instruction, he might have been a good writer. 

Gaer


----------



## gaer

panjandrum said:


> The thing is, gaer, that well used Buts are completely transparent.
> Carelessly used Buts stick out like sore thumbs.


You have a good point. Apparently all the authors I mentioned in previous links were so subtle about their "rule-breaking" that few people have "caught" them _breaking_ the "rules". 

Gaer


----------



## jaxineau

Barnaby said:


> Okay, so what exactly is the difference between "but" and "although" or even "yet" or "nevertheless?" (Okay, sometimes there is a difference.) Pan is essentially right about why the rule is there, but I'll agree that it's perfectly acceptable to use "but" once you know the language (and the difference). The difference between the above is sometimes an artificial grammatical distinction and "but" is at times the most direct and best word to use. Plain talk, as opposed to high falutin'. (Next thread?)
> 
> That said, I'll tell you a story. A couple of years ago I took the GRE's. I got a perfect score on the verbal. ( I guessed at least once and got lucky--though I don't consider it luck so much as good logic.) They had just instituted a written element. Essays. (Now, [But. But "but" wouldn't work as well as "now" here. Close, but no cigar] I could write that just as well by saying: They had just introduced a written element: essays.) I wrote elegant, nuanced arguments, and got a sub-par score. I started a sentence or two with "but." Might have had a sentence fragment or two in there for effect.
> 
> I suspect I received a poor score due to grammar robots.
> 
> That's life.
> Can't deny it.
> Lack of judgement on my part.
> 
> Barnaby


 
1. It is important to master the language; however, it is not the only element one needs to use BUT as the beginning of the sentence. The understanding of the meaning behind the sentence and the reason for using it is equally important. Whenever I use BUT as the beginning of a sentence for school, even though the sentiment may be right, it is always rejected with the reason of being a FRAGMENT. It is better to be that way I think. This is so that when one is developing one's style, it can be based on the correct grammar.

2. But, yet, although and nevertheless maybe similar meaning-wise sometimes; however, the uses in a sentence are different. But, yet and although are conjunctions. But and yet are used to denote a turning point in a sentence. Thus, I think it makes more sense to be used after the main clause, separated by a comma. Although denotes an adverb clause and is commonly used in the reversed position, where the subordinate clause goes first, followed by a comma and the main clause. However, when although is after the main clause, the comma is not used. Nevertheless is a conjunctive adverb. It has be to separated from the main clause by a semicolon or a period. 

3. I don't understand why you quoted me when your posting is talking about Panj's explanation. Your posting also mentioned your GRE story, but I do not understand what you are trying to convey. Moreover, I suspect a underlying sarcasm.

4. I would rephrase the sentence for the newly implemented essay. _Although they had just instituted a written element, I still got a perfect score on the verbal._


----------



## jaxineau

cuchuflete said:


> You have had rules and pseudo-rules drilled into you. But there is hope! You seem to at least accept that there are stylistic grounds on which to base the use of but at the start of a sentence. It doesn't necessarily make a fragment.


 
I am just stating the rule.
There is no more to it.
I accept fully the stylistic component of the language.
I use but fragments way too much.
But I don't know.
Maybe I am wrong.
But wait, it is good to use but to express one's sentiment in different ways.
I like to give sudden changes in my writings to catch the reader.
But not everyone agrees with me.


----------



## gaer

jaxineau said:


> I am just stating the rule.


No. You are stating "a" rule.


> There is no more to it.


Yes, there is.


> I accept fully the stylistic component of the language.


If you are talking about "English", then it should be "the English language". If you mean "language" in general, then there is no need for an article there.


> I use but fragments "but fagments" way too much.
> But I don't know.
> Maybe I am wrong.
> But wait, it is good to use but "but" to express one's sentiment in different ways.
> I like to give make sudden changes in my writings writing to catch the reader.
> But not everyone agrees with me.


What is your point?
Anyone can write several short sentences.
I can too.
It's highly unusual.
Normally it doesn't work.
Not very well.
You do not need to use "but".
The monotony is boring without that little word. 

Gaer


----------



## jaxineau

gaer said:


> No. You are stating "a" rule.


I am state the rule for but.



gaer said:


> Yes, there is.


No. There isn't more to my stating the rule.



gaer said:


> If you are talking about "English", then it should be "the English language". If you mean "language" in general, then there is no need for an article there.


What forum are we in here?



gaer said:


> What is your point?
> Anyone can write several short sentences.
> I can too.
> It's highly unusual.
> Normally it doesn't work.
> Not very well.
> You do not need to use "but".
> The monotony is boring without that little word.
> 
> Gaer


 
I am not talking to you nor am I replying to your postings in that posting.
Short sentences are effective in conveying brief ideas.
It is not highly unusual.
Even your short sentences give complete meaning and clearly state your point view.

I use _but_ fragments way too much is another use of but. Being an experienced English speaker you should know that.
I like to _give_ sudden changes [to my stories] in my writings _(as in all the things I have written)_.
These are all legitimate uses.


----------



## panjandrum

I think the progress of this thread demonstrates with exquisite precision the way in which sentences beginning with conjunctions can be a transparent and elegant part of an intelligent discourse.
And that the guidelines suggesting avoidance of this practice are well-advised.


----------



## Forero

But of course.


----------



## Rover_KE

It's fine when _but_ means _however_ and _and_ means _furthermore_.


----------



## Forero

Welcome to the forum, Rover.

Do you mean all the _But_ sentences so far in this thread are fine except possibly "But of course"?


----------



## cyberpedant

"But denotes a subordinate clause and needs a main clause to explain its meaning."
Not (always) so, I'm afraid. "But," like "and," is often a _coordinating_ conjunction, joining two fully fledged main clauses. E.g., "Prescriptive grammarians are found in front of many classrooms, but most of them are egregiously wrong." If you substitute a period for the "but," you have two perfectly complete sentences.
See http://www.chompchomp.com/terms/coordinatingconjunction.htm


----------



## Ms Missy

_*So *_is the original question now resolved????


----------



## ewie

Yes, it is.

Yes, there is a rule _(everyone is free to ignore rules)_.
And/But yes, it is a question of style _(as demonstrated by Shakespeare, et al.)_


----------



## Jacobtm

My feeling is that academics are becoming more and more open to the idea that one can start a sentence with the word "but". But this doesn't mean that everyone thinks it's correct.

Is there any reasonable way one can defend beginning a sentence with "but" to one who thinks it's unequivocally "incorrect"?


----------



## reganse

I do it at times to break up the length of my sentences. Is that bad?


----------



## Jacobtm

I think it's good, especially when it cuts unruly sentences down.


----------



## entangledbank

Point out that they haven't the slightest idea what they're talking about. Sentence-initial 'but' always has been Standard English — it would be helpful here to have a list of uses of it by Dickens, Jane Austen, Johnson, and so on, but I haven't got one to hand. Instead, I can look up Fowler's _Modern English Usage_ under the word *but*, where he discusses a number of points of grammar about the word at great length, but none of them is about its being in initial position. He isn't even aware of this nonsense to dismiss it. But in the course of his prescriptive grammar advice he writes at one point, 'But just as _I shouldn't wonder if he didn't fall in_ is often heard'; and a little later he offers '_But Mary decided_' as a rewriting of a sentence with the word internally. The fake rule against initial position wasn't even on the radar in 1930.

Don't give any leeway at all to the ignoramuses who trot out this garbage. Don't say the rule is changing, or has relaxed. There never was such a rule.


----------



## cuchuflete

Bravo to entangleddebunker of non-rules.  We have discussed this one in a number of prior threads.  There are some ignorant pedants abroad in the land (and probably quite a few more at sea) who try to impose their groundless stylistic preferences as "rules".  
This particular "rule" is pure hokum.


The Fowler brothers ignored the matter of but at the start of a sentence because there was nothing to discuss.

More recently, it has received some well-deserved attention from Bryan Garner, in A Dictionary of Modern American Usage.

*but. A. Beginning Sentences with.  *It is a gross canard that beginning a sentence with _but_ is stylistically slipshod.  In fact, doing so is highly desirable in any number of contexts, and many stylebooks that discuss the question quite correctly say that _but_ is better than _however_ at the beginning of a sentence.

​Garner goes on to quote seven such stylebooks.  Here is one of the passages he quotes:

"Of the many myths concerning 'correct' English, one of the most persistent is the belief that it is somehow improper to begin a sentence with [_and, but, for, or,_ or_ not_].  The construction is, of course, widely used today and has been widely used for generations, for the very good reason that it is an effective means of achieving coherence between sentences and between larger units of discourse, such as paragraphs."  R.W. Pence & D. W. Emery, _A grammar of Present-Day English_​


----------

