0
Jisu98 Posted 19 years ago
Grammar
conjuncion 'for' again
I asked about conjuncion 'for' a few days ago. But I have to ask one more time. Sorry!
Books say that there are 2 kinds of conjuncions. One is coordinating conjunction and the other is subordinationg one.
'And, but, yet, so,...'are coordinating conjuntions. How about conjuntion 'for'? Is it coordinating or subordinating?
In meaning, 'for' is similar to or almost same to conjunction 'because, since, as'. But 'because, since, as' are subordinating conjunctions which lead adverbial clauses. Why on earth only 'for' is classified as 'coordinating' conjunction with the meaning of 'subordinationg conjuntion?
...........................................................................................
The following example is from my book.
It's morning, for birds are singing.
Here we can't substitute 'because, since,as' for 'for', says it. Do you think so? If then, would you explain why and what you feel when you read the sentence.
Books say that there are 2 kinds of conjuncions. One is coordinating conjunction and the other is subordinationg one.
'And, but, yet, so,...'are coordinating conjuntions. How about conjuntion 'for'? Is it coordinating or subordinating?
In meaning, 'for' is similar to or almost same to conjunction 'because, since, as'. But 'because, since, as' are subordinating conjunctions which lead adverbial clauses. Why on earth only 'for' is classified as 'coordinating' conjunction with the meaning of 'subordinationg conjuntion?
...........................................................................................
The following example is from my book.
It's morning, for birds are singing.
Here we can't substitute 'because, since,as' for 'for', says it. Do you think so? If then, would you explain why and what you feel when you read the sentence.
Top answer
It's morning, for/because birds are singing -- these both work fine for me. ' For ' in this sort of use is becoming rather old-fashioned and literary. For is classed as a coordinating comjunction because it forms a more general connection with the other independent clause.
- It's morning, for/because birds are singing -- these both work fine for me.
- ' For ' in this sort of use is becoming rather old-fashioned and literary.
- For is classed as a coordinating comjunction because it forms a more general connection with the other independent clause.
- Many words and phrases have similar meanings but different classifications: I have to care for / to take care of my mother .
- The old Webster's has a good explanation of ' for 's use: "( conj.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
2 Answers
0
It's morning, for/because birds are singing -- these both work fine for me. 'For' in this sort of use is becoming rather old-fashioned and literary. For is classed as a coordinating comjunction because it forms a more general connection with the other independent clause. Many words and phrases have similar meanings b
00
Related Questions