In this chapter we’ll look at words we use to link parts of sentences together, words such as “and” and “because.” They’re called connectors or conjunctions in the grammar trade, and most of them aren’t too hard to handle. You can use connectors such as “and” and “or” to establish a simple link, such as, I cleaned out the bathroom and threw out the trash this afternoon. Here “and” is just a time-saver: It allows you to list everything you did this afternoon without having to stop and say two different sentences. But other connectors such as “because” and “therefore” have a more excitingjob: They make a logical link between two thoughts: I deserve an extra slice of pie because I cleaned out the bathroom and threw out the trash this afternoon. Here the connector lets people know you’re about to give a reason for what you’re doing (not necessarily a good reason, but that’s not the connector’s fault).

Most connectors are cooperative little words that work hard in their sentences and don’t make trouble. But two kinds of connectors can sometimes get confusing: two-part connectors we call “bookend expressions,” and imprecise connectors that just don’t get the right idea across. Let’s take them one at a time.

This section could properly be called “Problems With Correlative Conjunctions,” but then you might have skipped it out of terror, and it’s not really that tricky. Correlative conjunctions are simply pairs of words that join together other phrases. For example, the sentence Either you take your feet off the table or I’ll take them off for you features a famous pair, “either/ or.” The difficulties people have with these connectors tend to be of two types. Type one: leaving out the second half of the conjunction. Type two: choosing a second half that is not the proper mate for the first half. Thinking of correlative conjunctions as bookends is helpful because these expressions, properly paired, give a kind of order and structure to the string of words in a sentence. And if you leave one off, or try to partner a bookend with something weaker than its true mate, things get sloppy fast, and before you know it, you have a spill. The following sections contain the most common errors made with bookend expressions.

Here’s Why: Whenever you use “not only” to introduce one part of a two-part idea, you need to complete the thought by introducing the second part with “but” or “but also.” Simple. Here are more correct examples of this pair of bookends in action:

Here’s Why: You need both “hands” to be organized and tidy in sentences such as these. The whole idea is to compare two opposite points, as we’re trying to do here with the attractive, but boring, Mitch. So the minute you hear on the one hand coming out of your mouth, get ready to introduce the flip side with on the other hand. You can drop the second “hand,” and say on the one hand...on the other, but you don’t get to substitute entirely new phrases such as “but then” or “only then” or “except that.” A few more correct examples are:

One final note on this expression: You can only use it to compare two things, because you only have two hands! So unless you belong to an alien race of three-handed Martians, don’t say On the one hand, we could go to the beach; on the other hand, we could go to the mall; on the other hand, we could just stay home and play canasta. Instead, sort out your alternatives so you’re only using two hands: On the one hand, we could go to the beach or the mall, but on the other hand, we could just stay home and play canasta.

Here’s Why: Most people remember to follow “either” with “or,” but sometimes we throw in other words that add nothing and just muck up the sentence. So avoid “or else” and “or maybe” and such phrases when you’re using “either/or.”

Here’s Why: You never get to have a “neither” without a “nor” when your intention is to compare two things, as it is in this sentence. You can use “neither” as a pronoun, as in He invited neither of them. But if you were to revise that sentence to use “neither” as a conjunction, you’d need “nor” as follows: He invited neither John nor Sarah.

Here’s Why: When you use “as” to begin this type of comparison, you need another “as” to follow up, not another word such as “that.” Here are some more examples:

Here’s Why: Once you say, “the reason,” you’ve told your listeners that you’re talking about a cause-and-effect relationship between two things. All that’s left for you is to say that the reason was this or that. Saying the reason was because is redundant—“because” is just another way of saying, “the reason.” Additional correct examples that illustrate the difference between constructions with “the reason” and “because”:

These errors include connectors that just don’t say quite what we want them to say. They’re not grammatically incorrect, but they’re fuzzy, and they make our speech sound less clear and direct than it should be. The following are some of the most common fuzzballs of the bunch.

Here’s Why: “Where” can be a lot of things—an adverb, a conjunction, or a noun—but one role it should not play in standard English is that of introducing a noun clause the way it does in the example. When you’re defining or naming something, as we are in this example, “where” is a no-no.

Here’s Why: Ah, business jargon. “Per” may make you feel like you’re really saying something important, but unfortunately, it’s the fuzziest of fuzzy connectors. The appropriate use of “per” is restricted to the prepositional, in a description of ratios such as 30 miles per gallon. In business situations, people often throw it in as a kind of an all-purpose connector. It can mean “according to” (Per the report, the project is five days ahead of schedule) or it can mean “to comply with” (We have changed the procedures per your instructions). The problem here is that no one will know quite what you mean—or worse, they’ll assume you mean one thing when, in fact, you mean quite another.

Also—to those in the know—using “per” can make you look as if you’re trying too hard—using a fancy (but imprecise) word where another one would be more appropriate. Avoid “per”!

Here’s Why: The use of “plus” to join two clauses as a replacement for “and” is nonstandard. You may say, two plus two is four. You may even say, The effects of the heat plus the humidity were too much for her, because you’re staying inside one clause to join two nouns together. But not if you’re assembling entire clauses, and you mean “besides,” as we did in this example with the food at the restaurant.

Here’s Why: Most of the time, “as to” is just unnecessary fluff before the word “whether.” Watch how the following phrases are nicely streamlined by taking out the “as to”s:

Here’s Why: “In the event that” is a cumbersome, flowery substitute for the word “if.” So just say “if’!

Here’s Why: Again, it’s not necessary to get so complicated about a simple idea. “Owing to the fact that” are just extra words and added awkwardness, so avoid this phrase.

Here’s Why: In most circumstances, “as” is a weak substitute for “because” and “since.” One of the reasons this is true is that “as” also means “while.” In the sentence above, it is unclear whether Lisa didn’t want to interrupt vvhile Lou was reading or because he was reading—two different meanings. If you choose either “because” or “since” instead of “as,” you can’t go wrong.