20

Is it grammatically correct to sequence paragraphs using First, Second, Third, and Finally?

If not, is there a good word that replaces Finally? Starting a paragraph with Final doesn't sound correct. I could change all of the other words (e.g., First becomes Firstly), but I prefer the shorter versions. Last is the best replacement I can come up with, but it doesn't sound as fluid as Finally.

Forgive me for my painful-to-read example paragraphs. I'm not the most creative human being.

First, I grabbed a spoon.

Second, I ate the cereal.

Third, I drank the milk.

Finally, I tossed the bowl in the dish washer.

Mari-Lou A
  • 91,183
Rainbolt
  • 1,128
  • 1
    I get the feeling many speakers (Americans in particular) don't much like firstly, secondly,... lastly, but if you're determined not to simply number the paragraphs *1, 2, 3, 4*** that might be the most consistent approach. – FumbleFingers Jun 03 '14 at 20:02
  • @FumbleFingers This article might help explain why some people prefer the short version. I have to question whether the preference is more prominent among Americans, but I can't find any useful information that points either way. – Rainbolt Jun 03 '14 at 20:13
  • When I posted that comment half-an-hour ago, it really was just a feeling I had, based on comments some (mainly American) users have posted here on ELU in the past. But since you've questioned it, I just checked this NGram, which seems to support what I said. Toggle between US/UK corpuses, note both the shape of the charts and the left-hand "prevalence" scales, and I think you'll agree with me. – FumbleFingers Jun 03 '14 at 20:36
  • 1
    But here's some advice you may find useful. – FumbleFingers Jun 03 '14 at 20:47
  • @FumbleFingers The difference in scales has me mostly convinced. It could be that British English writers are more prone to numbering their paragraphs than American English writers, but I find that unlikely. Thanks for the comparison. – Rainbolt Jun 03 '14 at 20:56
  • 1
    I didn't think of that "explanation" - the mere fact that you did suggests you could get to be pretty good at mining NGrams/Google Books for information. On the other hand, I already knew the answer I "wanted", which is often a handicap in such contexts. – FumbleFingers Jun 03 '14 at 21:00
  • @FumbleFingers Your compliment is very much appreciated! – Rainbolt Jun 03 '14 at 21:04

4 Answers4

24

Yes, first, second...finally is fine, as is ...lastly. And firstly, secondly...finally/lastly is also fine. I would probably refrain from using ?last or *final.

Note that the (most) traditional sequence is first, secondly, thirdly...lastly; don't be afraid of "inconsistencies" in idiom! See my earlier answer on ELL and Fowler's Modern English Usage (3rd edition).

The Oxford English Dictionary on firstly:

Used only in enumerating heads, topics, etc. in discourse; and many writers prefer first, even though closely followed by secondly, thirdly, etc.

Burchfield in Fowler's Modern English Usage on first:

enter image description here

Cerberus - Reinstate Monica
  • 61,585
  • @Rusher: Firstly, I think we have to accept that you really are just a failure at operating Google's ngram. Obviously there are many other contexts besides numbering "bullet points" where only *first* can be used in the first place (there's one, for example). Mind you, even if you'd composed a truly representative NGram, I'm sure the *-ly* versions would be relatively uncommon. Nevertheless, I suspect Cerberus's "traditional" is reasonably accurate here. – FumbleFingers Jun 03 '14 at 20:45
  • @Rusher: ... *Secondly,* (! :) When I started writing, I did actually intend to make at least one or two more points - but there's a limit to what you can cram into a comment here. Also don't conflate *my* "feelings" and "suspicions" with *Cerberus's* text. He almost certainly has far more "formal knowledge" in such matters than me. – FumbleFingers Jun 03 '14 at 21:05
  • @Rusher: Perhaps the quotations I have added to my answer will convince you that it is indeed true. Statistics rarely help when you're researching style. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Jun 04 '14 at 03:47
  • @Rusher: No apology needed. I did not give any references for that bit about first, secondly, thirdly at first because it was only a note, but I guess it is better now. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Jun 04 '14 at 17:26
  • First, since the question is really about rhetoric rather than grammar, I would say that you absolutely should worry about inconsistencies. Parallelism is one of the easiest ways to make content easier to read and absorb. And B, (see? it's jarring.) I disagree with your advice not to use "last". It's just as fine to use "last" as it is to use "first". – G. Ann - SonarSource Team Jul 22 '16 at 17:47
  • @G.Ann-SonarSourceTeam: Inconsistencies in idiom. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Jul 22 '16 at 18:13
  • @Cerberus Isn't this a cross-post? https://ell.stackexchange.com/questions/886/firstly-secondly-or-first-second – M-- Sep 02 '17 at 19:58
  • @Masoud: Similar answers were posted on both sites, but the questions were asked by different people. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica Sep 02 '17 at 22:11
  • De Quincey was expressing a personal opinion that should not be taken seriously and certainly not as an authority: his comment should not have made it into Fowlers. Nor should CEGL have used the anonymous "some people find it..." as it also implies that some people do not find it objectionable and is thus worthless. ++ The OED gives the use predating De Quincey by some 200 Years:- a1475 (▸?a1430) J. Lydgate tr. G. Deguileville Pilgrimage Life Man (Vitell.) l. 21575 Expowne fyrst-lyk my desyr. -- ?1533 G. Du Wes Introductorie for to lerne Frenche sig. Eiv Fyrstly, premierment. – Greybeard May 06 '20 at 20:01
  • @Greybeard: I'm not sure what point you are making here. It is a widely held opinion with ample supporting evidence. You or various other people may have a different opinion, which is fine. Just be aware of it. – Cerberus - Reinstate Monica May 07 '20 at 18:40
15

If you feel awkward starting paragraphs with firstly, secondly etc. consider the following expressions as suitable equivalents.

  • Initially / To begin with OR to start with (less formal) = First(ly)
  • Then / next / after that / afterwards = later
  • In addition / additionally = Second(ly)
  • Furthermore / moreover OR What's more (less formal) = Third(ly)
  • In conclusion / lastly OR in the end (less formal)= Finally

To start with, I grabbed a spoon.
Then I took a bowl and filled it with cereal
Next, I poured some milk into my bowl.
Afterwards I began to eat my cereal and when I'd finished, I drank the milk.
In the end, I tossed the bowl in the dishwasher.

Mari-Lou A
  • 91,183
  • Should I use comma after each of them? @Mari-Lou A – alper May 15 '18 at 17:58
  • For example, could I use comma after afterwards on your given example? @Mari-Lou A – alper May 15 '18 at 18:21
  • 1
    @Alper you usually use a comma after these words if they begin a sentence, but with "then" and "afterwards" (UK) or "afterward" (US) you need to be more careful. Look them up in a good dictionary that gives examples. The comma could go between afterwards and I began but I don't think it's essential. – Mari-Lou A May 15 '18 at 18:22
  • I think this is the right approach, but maybe you need to be more explicit about the fact that a numerical sequence isn't always called for. – Spencer Oct 07 '18 at 15:50
  • @Mari-Lou A can we use "second" or "next" instead of second(ly) whether we have two items or more? – A-friend May 06 '20 at 16:42
  • 1
    @A-friend you need to mention at least two things in order to use "second(ly)" or "next", so the answer to your question is "yes". – Mari-Lou A May 07 '20 at 07:15
2

The following seem to fit into your example:

  • Lastly...
  • Last...
  • And in the end...
  • To finish...
tobyink
  • 2,495
0

I have a feeling that what bothers you about "First, Second, Third, and Finally" may be an apparent lack of parallel structure: The first 3 items don't end it "ly" and the first three seem on the surface to be nouns or adjectives while the last is an adverb.

But don't pay too much attention to surface form alone. If you check a quality dictionary, you'll find that all four words can be used as adverbs. So there is no lack of parallel structure.

For example, in my print volume of Random House Webster's College Dictionary (2001), there are these definitions:

first. Definition #9. adv. In the first place; firstly.

second. Definition #21. adv. In the second place; secondly.

third. Definition #11. adv. In the third place; thirdly.

If you're writing poetry, then you may want to pay more attention to the structural forms of the words in addition to the part of speech. But for ordinary prose, matching the "grammatical form" (as opposed to the surface form) is perfectly fine:

Every element of a parallel series must be a functional match...and serve the same grammatical function. (Chicago Manual of Style, 16th edition (print) section 5.212, p. 259, emphasis added)

Express parallel ideas in parallel form. Adjectives should be paralleled by adjectives, nouns by nouns, infinitives by infinitives, subordinate clauses by subordinate clauses, etc. (The Gregg Reference Manual, 6th edition (print), section 1081, p. 215)

Syntax Junkie
  • 2,162