Talk:Conjunctive adverb/Archive 1

Untitled (March 2009)
The list of "common" conjunctive adverbs appears to have many that are not so common. Would it make sense to give usage notes, or some other way of indicating which are preferred? Wikinetman (talk) 15:42, 12 March 2009 (UTC)

Untitled (February 2010)
The examples seem a bit baroque. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.120.141.88 (talk) 18:51, 7 August 2009 (UTC) were pretty good eh?Italic text —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.139.237.193 (talk) 14:43, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Where is the conjuncitve adverb?
"Penny Lou wanted to watch a romantic movie but her friends wanted to watch horror. " is the last example. I can't see a conjunctive adverb in it; neither can I see how it, alternatively, is paired with the preceding example. Kdammers (talk) 17:38, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

Prepositional phrases (and more problems)
There is a bit of a weird set of common conjunctive adverbs in the list. Many are propositional phrases that act in place of what can usually be conjunctive adverbs; preposition phrases tend to modify verbs anyway, so it has a similar function, but it should be specified in the article if I'm right that it's not technically an adverb.

There are other problems with the example sentences... "He can leap tall buildings in a single bound. Furthermore, Dwight Schrute is a hog." Isn't "furthermore" modifying "leap?" By that logic, the adverb must be in the same sentence as that first clause's very that it's modifying. You can't start a sentence with a conjunctive adverb. There are multiple of these examples.

Also: "He went to the store. He did not buy anything." There is no conjunctive adjective!

I'm not sure about this, but another example of a conjunctive adverb is "just as." Isn't that two adverbs, so an adverb phrase? Is there such a thing as a conjunctive adverb phrase? If not, why? There is plenty of area to be expanded upon in this articles at least covering the above conflicts. Mechanic1c (talk) 19:25, 20 March 2014 (UTC)

Although

If you can't start a sentence with a conjunctive adverb, then "although" shouldn't be in the list; nor does it fit the rules for what the article calls correct punctuation:

He went to the store, although he didn't want to go. Vitonis (talk) 18:57, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Punctuation: Placement
I tried to add a new sub-heading (placement) under the punctuation section following the instructions on Help:Section, but it's not working. I might be doing something wrong. Curiously, here it's working. How shall I proceed? Roalcantara (talk) 01:41, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

It should be noted that using comma to set off a conjunctive adverb helps to distinguish it from the adverb class, which will be modifying some word in its clause rather than the other clause's predicate. Furthermore, using only the comma (no semicolon) before the word signifies a coordinating conjunction usage, eg, although=but as in sentence.yourdictionary.com/although samples.

I think that pointing out that authors don't always follow rules of grammar should surprise anybody. See ee. cummings (SIC) poetry. Rdbooker1 (talk) 03:40, 7 February 2016 (UTC)rdbooker1

Part of speech problem
This article needs info on why these words are adverbs and not conjunctions. Georgia guy (talk) 16:13, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Since the Wiktionary entry for conjunctive lists as an adjective sense, "Relating to a conjunction", this is probably a valid point. From the adverb article, an important function for an adverb is that it modifies something, so a conjunctive adverb is an adverb. From a careful reading of the conjunction article, modification is never mentioned. Blurring the distinction are words like however and yet, which are listed both as conjunctive adverbs and as conjunctions. Furthermore, subordinating conjunctions like when and where are listed both as conjunctions and as adverbs. Fortunately, in all cases I have researched in Wiktionary, it has turned out that the senses corresponding with each usage are distinct.

This seems to me to be a high level of detail. I kind of like the articles' approach of just describing what the topic is while omitting what it is not.Rdbooker1 (talk) 02:18, 16 February 2016 (UTC)rdbooker1

Table width
Was 20em, changed to 8em. Testing on four systems { Chromium, Firefox} × { Linux/BSD, OS X} shows that only "on the other hand" tends to wrap, and generally the table looks compact, but not crushed. I really don't understand why 8em is giving such ample columns. 20em looks correct; 8em produces better results (in my limited testing).

Note: this didn't help me.

&mdash; MaxEnt 00:33, 12 March 2017 (UTC)