9

Multiple questions herein ask "Is it grammatically correct to begin a sentence or question with X?"

So, I'm definitively asking, are there any words for which it is absolutely not grammatically correct to begin a sentence with?

I am not looking for a list, and I'm not (effectively) looking for a class of words, though that may be evident if a specific word is presented, but only as a part of

_____ is an example, and words like _____.

I am not looking for discussion, either. I would assume the answer is No, you may grammatically start a sentence with any word. but would like to be proven incorrect.

Than any other question, this one should actually have an answer.

Also, no quotation mark tricks or the like. The word should have grammatical context and retain its own definition in place. Filling in the example also does not count for the answer. (Use, not mention).

The word should itself be grammatically acceptable. If ain't is not grammatically acceptable, then it ain't allowed as a word in this context.

SrJoven
  • 4,100
  • Like an interesting question it seems! – GEdgar Jan 19 '15 at 15:12
  • 2
    How about nother, which only appears in the phrase "a whole nother ...". – Peter Shor Jan 19 '15 at 15:15
  • 5
    Using a word-as-a-word, obviously any word may be fronted. However, strictly post-positive adjectives etc like manqué and galore otherwise seem to fit the bill. Some 'fossil words' (eg amok, ado, 'Kaboodle_) only occur at the end of a set string. – Edwin Ashworth Jan 19 '15 at 15:15
  • 7
    For any word X, it would be possible to say "X is a word that cannot grammatically begin a sentence." So, no. – Robusto Jan 19 '15 at 15:18
  • 2
    @Robusto I've already covered that. – Edwin Ashworth Jan 19 '15 at 15:20
  • 1
    @robusto Yes, true, but that's what we'd call a citation usage. – Araucaria - Him Jan 19 '15 at 15:21
  • 2
    How about a-plenty or galore? These words are usually used post-positively, that is they come after the noun phrases they modify. – Araucaria - Him Jan 19 '15 at 15:21
  • 5
    A: "There were apples galore on the table." B: "Galore? You exaggerate. There were two apples." Is B ungrammatical? – Mr. Shiny and New 安宇 Jan 19 '15 at 15:24
  • 'gotten'? Past participles seem to work in general but I can't think of a sentence where 'gotten' would work at the beginning. – Mitch Jan 19 '15 at 15:27
  • 3
    @Mitch: "Gotten gains are always ill." – Robusto Jan 19 '15 at 15:28
  • @robusto that one doesn't work so well for me, though for some reason, it's still appealing ... – Araucaria - Him Jan 19 '15 at 16:49
  • @petershor, that's got to be worth an answer! – Araucaria - Him Jan 19 '15 at 17:01
  • If, as I suspect, "nother" is an abbreviation of "another" then it could easily front a sentence. – Robusto Jan 19 '15 at 17:17
  • 1
    Possible duplicate: http://english.stackexchange.com/questions/211371/is-it-possible-to-start-a-grammatically-correct-english-sentence-with-the-word (based on the second question asked in the question body.) – ermanen Jan 19 '15 at 17:23
  • 2
    @Robusto: The way I've heard it used, "nother" is not an abbreviation of "another", but a redivision of "another" into "a nother" rather than "an other". Instead of saying "a whole other", people say "a whole nother". – Peter Shor Jan 19 '15 at 17:31
  • @ermanen if it were a duplicate, I would have used it. I don't agree, nor do I think that question's answers indicate that Than is incorrect to start a sentence with. (Also, note I used Than in the body.) – SrJoven Jan 19 '15 at 17:43
  • 1
    I think this may be off-topic because it is more towards the trivia end of the spectrum than the generally aid an understanding of the language end. – Edwin Ashworth Jan 19 '15 at 17:50
  • Re: POB, Why? There would be a real reason that a word is improper to start a sentence. If experts can't find one, then there is no reason. It's not opinion. It's a fact. – SrJoven Jan 19 '15 at 17:55
  • If contractions count, words such as could've would qualify. I imagine that a multitude of everyday words (such as imagine and multitude) would be difficult to use at the beginning of a question, unless one were allowed to use the word as a word, as in "Imagine means what?" Of course, in that case, the same exception would also work for "Could've means what?" "Nother means what?" and "Gxzsplvt means what?" For nonquestions, imagine poses no difficulty (though imagines does, except in Yoda-speak), but multitude remains a nonstarter. – Sven Yargs Jan 19 '15 at 18:27
  • @SvenYargs I'll allow questions as sentences because otherwise most interrogative words would likewise comprise an answer. It's not normal that a non-question sentence will begin with a Who What When Where Why, or How. Although, there can be arguments that What she meant to say, Who she really is, though, When it really happened can be forced into a sentence. – SrJoven Jan 19 '15 at 18:50
  • @SrJoven "Could've slipped out the back, he could." – tchrist Jan 19 '15 at 18:52
  • 1
    @edwin oh, but fun's allowed here! Btw, if you put an answer in, I'll delete mine. I think you should... :) – Araucaria - Him Jan 19 '15 at 18:55
  • 4
    @Sven Yargs: Imagine a world where a sentence like "Multitude upon multitude dashed against the walls of the fort" was considered invalid. Could've happened in this world, I suppose, but didn't. But "Imagines" - that's a good one! I prefer it to the "fragment of a compound phrase" answers, because of the requirement in the OP that it be grammatical. If "nother" and "yore" aren't grammatical outside of the compound phrase, then they don't fit the bill! – Dewi Morgan Jan 19 '15 at 19:31
  • Third person present (He/She) conjugation of verbs is a category that makes sense to be an answer. I admit I didn't expect to have the answer a category, but might accept this. Imagines a time where this might be an answer, then quickly discards it. – SrJoven Jan 19 '15 at 19:48
  • @PeterShor: Well, I think it's more likely an example of tmesis, actually, in which case the "nother" would still be part of another. – Robusto Jan 19 '15 at 19:53
  • 1
    @SrJoven But: "Imagines, she does. Daydreams, she doesn't!" – Araucaria - Him Jan 20 '15 at 01:10
  • Dang nab it, I did NOT mean to close this question. Voting to reopen, with apologies. – tchrist Jan 20 '15 at 01:34
  • Your post title is incorrect starting with "Please" and ending with a question mark. – ps2goat Jan 20 '15 at 04:40
  • @SrJoven, I actually created the account to post that 'Yore' makes sense at the start of a sentence. =) – ps2goat Jan 20 '15 at 04:46
  • Afford Such as: "Afford I could it" isn't really a sentence, is it? Would the following question be acceptable: "Afford not to buy?" – Mari-Lou A Apr 26 '15 at 11:32
  • @PeterShor The word "nother" is an informal shortening of "another", which is used primarily in informal speech and dialogue (http://www.dictionary.com/browse/nother). If informal dialogue is allowed, then "'Nother thought I just had..." would be valid. – jaxter Dec 04 '16 at 18:05
  • @Mari-LouA "Afford" has other definitions, e.g. to furnish or supply (http://www.dictionary.com/browse/afford). Therefore, "Afford me a few minutes of your time" is valid. – jaxter Dec 04 '16 at 18:07
  • I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is a riddle – Arm the good guys in America Aug 17 '18 at 20:22

8 Answers8

16

Yore.

Yore means of long ago, or former times, but it seems only ever to be used in the phrase In days of yore. Are there any other uses of this word?

Edit

Come to that, it would be hard to begin a sentence with Ago.

Mynamite
  • 7,743
  • 3
  • 25
  • 36
  • Ok, you win. Those are my favourites so far, hands down! – Araucaria - Him Jan 19 '15 at 16:52
  • 3
    @Araucaria Thanks :) Actually I'm not sure if OP hasn't answered his/her own question by beginning a sentence with 'Than' ... I'm not sure that works.... – Mynamite Jan 19 '15 at 16:59
  • 1
    But would it be ungrammatical to start a sentence, even if it were unusual to do so? I'll accept a definitive answer that words that only appear in set phrases can't start a sentence. I think that's somewhat cheating if the word can be separated from the set phrase otherwise. – SrJoven Jan 19 '15 at 19:02
  • btw, (I don't consider a word being part of multiple set phrases being separable from being a part of a set phrase). – SrJoven Jan 19 '15 at 19:14
  • 2
    'Yore' fails, I feel, since it is a fragment of a compound phrase, and would be nongrammatical in any part of the sentence outside of that compound phrase. 'Ago" is good. It's non-compound, and stands alone as a modifier to any duration. Like the post-positives, this seems to fall into the class of "words that only get appended to stuff", which can't help but be correct answers to the question. Than this, the only other class I've seen that would fit, is whatever class "imagines" fits into. Imagines, one does, that these too might be an answer. – Dewi Morgan Jan 19 '15 at 19:46
  • Countable/time nouns that require an article (an hour, a day, a week) seem to answer this question. Not hour, but hourly. Not day, but daily or daytime. – SrJoven Jan 19 '15 at 20:03
  • Yore kiddin' me. – Robusto Jan 19 '15 at 20:20
  • "Yore!", cried Ethel. "And! Us! Else! Galore!" :) – idunno Jan 19 '15 at 20:48
  • Yore sure in trouble. Or even, 'Yore in trouble for pissing the bed.' – bmargulies Jan 20 '15 at 01:04
  • Try starting out a sentence with Apiece. – tchrist Jan 20 '15 at 01:29
  • Apiece they will receive £1,000 in cash; jointly, however, they will hold Henry House and its grounds, together with responsibility for its upkeep during their lifetimes; when the last of them dies it will pass to the Heritage Trust. – StoneyB on hiatus Jan 20 '15 at 02:19
  • @StoneyB Interesting. I assume you dug that one up from somewhere in particular, BNC? – tchrist Jan 20 '15 at 02:59
  • "Yore is the subject of history books." It's a noun, so while it may not be traditionally used in this manner, it most certainly makes sense at the start of a sentence. – ps2goat Jan 20 '15 at 04:37
  • 4
    Is this answer not in itself disproving itself? "Yore means of long ago,..." is a sentence starting with Yore. – Vality Jan 20 '15 at 04:53
  • As I stated here it is not hard to start a sentence with ago. And it doesn't take great genius to come up with a sentence which starts with yore. – pazzo Jan 20 '15 at 05:41
  • Yore days are my favorite. – pazzo Jan 20 '15 at 06:05
  • @Vality definition sentences are always [intended to be] grammatical but don't comply with the usage requirement. Yore is presented in a mention state, not in a usage. That is to say, said grammatical sentence isn't using the word Yore in anything but X=Y. Find a way to use the word in place. Ago/Than/Else makes sense, though. – SrJoven Jan 20 '15 at 06:10
  • 4
    On another comment thread a couple of weeks ago, responding to a comment about the difference between "knowing your shit" and "knowing you're shit," I noted that "Etymology is a matter of knowing yore shit." But I could have recast the sentence as, "Yore shit is what etymology is all about knowing." – Sven Yargs Jan 20 '15 at 06:54
  • @tchrist No, I made it up. But I spent some time in law offices, and I'm pretty sure it's legit. (At least it convinced you, which is some sort of high bar.) – StoneyB on hiatus Jan 20 '15 at 12:01
  • I do think that a person would have to force natural English speech to undergo some painful and unnatural contortions to produce a complete sentence that started with ago. Or o'clock. – Sven Yargs Jan 21 '15 at 19:40
  • O'clock the contraction? O.O – Jim Reynolds Jan 25 '15 at 10:21
  • This question is a duplicate of 'Is there any valid rule discouraging the use of a certain word to start a sentence?' – Edwin Ashworth Jan 25 '15 at 23:01
4

The word:

  • galore

... is, so far as I know only used post-positively. This is to say, it always follows the noun it's modifying.

  • There was whisky galore.

I suppose other words such as this (I once heard a linguist describe it as a post-positive determiner!), which only post-modify nouns, would would be well-nigh impossible to start a sentence with. One such example would be the word aplenty. Here's an ungrammatical example for you:

  • *Aplenty were the treats. (ungrammatical)

Of course it is trivially true that any word can be cited at the beginning of a sentence:

  • "Aplenty" is a difficult word to start a sentence with.

But, as I said this is not important to the OP's question!

Araucaria - Him
  • 47,146
-1

An answer for myself: If a noun requires an article to be grammatically correct within a sentence, it is required at the beginning of a sentence, and the article cannot be used in post position or in absence while retaining the sense of the noun.

There may always be a way to make a given noun work, but if it is in a countable sense—one that requires an article or number—it must likewise have that article or number before the noun in the beginning of a sentence.

SrJoven
  • 4,100
  • 1
    Can you give an example? – Chase Sandmann Jan 19 '15 at 23:20
  • @chase Give me a minute. I was thinking something like an hour or so. But Hour has passed. works quite well. – SrJoven Jan 19 '15 at 23:36
  • 3
    @SrJoven: I don't think "Hour has passed" is a grammatically-correct sentence, but "Hour after hour, day after day, he found himself wishing for a new fnorble to replace his old one." – supercat Jan 19 '15 at 23:39
  • @supercat I'm willing to agree with you as it was the thought relating to this answer. The struggle is how to express the non-grammatical nature of the sentence being purely related to the first word and not as a matter of generally poor grammar. – SrJoven Jan 19 '15 at 23:48
  • What about the united states? –  Jan 20 '15 at 00:55
  • 1
    @fredsbend try again. The United States is a great place to visit. United States representatives declined to go to France. – SrJoven Jan 20 '15 at 01:14
  • Him, them, us, themselves, myself – Brian Hitchcock Jan 20 '15 at 04:00
  • Nauseam. Infinitum. Se. Rata. Dixit. Tem. Operandi. Generis. – Brian Hitchcock Jan 20 '15 at 04:15
  • Him, they'd probably go with. Them, too. Themselves are someones they'd give something to. RandomForeignWord won't count here. This is an English website. @BrianHitchcock – SrJoven Jan 20 '15 at 04:23
  • Please define what you meant by "quotation mark tricks or the like". I have seen some other tricks here, which you seem to consider "the like", but none of your tricks seem to fall into this category. – Brian Hitchcock Jan 20 '15 at 05:31
  • 1
    Seems like nouns requiring a determiner can open boldly as the topic, with the determiner coming later: 1. Cars, the ones I bought for dad, are ready for delivery. 2. Car, that is, a blue one I saw yesterday, is righteous. 3. Car, that is, the one on the lawn, needs removing. – pazzo Jan 20 '15 at 05:32
  • @Sr Joven: You could up these words in the English corpus ngram. Then try "someones". https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=someones%2Cdixit%2Crata%2Cnauseam%2Cinfinitum%2Coperandi&year_start=1800&year_end=2000&corpus=15&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Csomeones%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cdixit%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Crata%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cnauseam%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cinfinitum%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Coperandi%3B%2Cc0 – Brian Hitchcock Jan 20 '15 at 05:50
  • @BrianHitchcock I mean what is explicitly stated in the question. Any English word that is grammatically acceptable maintaining the definition of the word as context in use. As it is, it matters not that I might have misused a word in the middle of a sentence. When I say quotation mark tricks, I mean "RandomWord" is not usually one that you'd start a sentence with. – SrJoven Jan 20 '15 at 05:55
  • I asked what you meant by "the like". Now I am asking what you mean by "grammatically acceptable". Let's be clear here. And I didn't suggest that you misused a word, only that you used one that is less commonly used in English than any of my last several suggestions. – Brian Hitchcock Jan 20 '15 at 06:06
  • And how, might I ask, would a word "maintain its definition in context" if the word, by definition (that is, fitting your criteria) would NOT FIT in its context (as first word of a sentence)? – Brian Hitchcock Jan 20 '15 at 06:11
  • @BrianHitchcock I would rather not debate the point. I gave an example in the original question. If the word ain't is acceptable in normal parlance, whatever that means, as an English language and usage word, then it is a viable option. If someone comments that ain't ain't a word so it counts for answering the question, that's a violation of the spirit of the question. – SrJoven Jan 20 '15 at 06:15
  • @BrianHitchcock Abstracting a word from its definition is primarily by mentioning it rather than actually using it as defined. Foo means bar doesn't apply foo as a word that itself has meaning. It simply means the letters that comprise foo visually have a meaning that is explained in the rest of a sentence. This is different from actually using the word in context where foo is used without actually, literally, explaining what foo means as it is used. – SrJoven Jan 20 '15 at 06:19
  • @BrianHitchcock On the other hand, fitting my criteria doesn't negate the word having meaning in context. The answer to the question involves whether the word being first, and maintaining its meaning, makes an ungrammatical sentence. – SrJoven Jan 20 '15 at 06:27
-1

I don't think it is correct to start a question with 'How to...' I have seen people use this, but it just doesn't seem right to me! Please correct me if I am wrong, but I do believe that 'How to..' should only be used at the beginning of a statement, not question. E.g. How to improve my English instantly? INCORRECT / How to improve your English instantly. CORRECT

Nadia
  • 1
  • 2
    Welcome to ELU. The to in your examples goes with the verb, not how, and the question was asking about words which definitely cannot start a sentence (either statement or question). How is obviously a word which can occur first. In fact How to can even occur in a question, albeit colloquially: "How do I do that?" "How to do that? Well, first you..." [Please note that Stack Exchange is not a discussion forum. Answers should simply answer the question, quoting justification for the answer.] – Andrew Leach Apr 26 '15 at 08:34
-2

In written academic English, it is acceptable to begin a sentence with a subject gerund.

"Drinking and driving is dangerous."

While beginning a sentence with an infinitive is common in spoken English, it is usually not considered proper written academic English.

A: Why did you ask this question? B: To satisfy my curiosity.

Even the longer form using 'in order to' is not proper written academic English.

A: Why did you ask this question? B: In order to satisfy my curiosity.

In other words, I would never begin a sentence with 'to' on a research paper that I planned on submitting to a college professor. Furthermore, my students are instructed not to do so either.

Gigi
  • 1
  • To be honest, Gigi, I don't agree with your answer. But I don't mind you posting it. What would help your point, though, and actually what is required in answers here, is a reference or two to some authority, with attribution. If you edited your post to include such support for your views, they would be taken more seriously... and I might agree with you after all. – Margana Jul 12 '15 at 01:24
  • OP did not specify 'written academic English'. And you artificially engineer context. Obviously, 'Secondly, ...' is ridiculous in certain contexts. I cannot imagine anyone complaining about a non-response sentence starting 'In order to ...' or just 'To [further] investigate ...'. – Edwin Ashworth Jul 12 '15 at 22:45
  • 1
    To clarify, you wouldn't present a paper that began with To. In order to be sure that was correct, I believe I should put my documentation in order. – SrJoven Jul 13 '15 at 13:49
-3

What about else? It is an adverb that is used in a similar manner to the post-positive adjectives referred to by Edwin Ashworth in his comment (which should be an answer).

bib
  • 72,782
-4

It depends on who is writing what. I can't imagine a grammatical sentence beginning with an objective pronoun ("Us......"). Poets and writers in general will always find a way, though. Of course, as mentioned by Robusto, one can always begin a sentence with any word and add "...is a word that..." but that would be a tricky way to answer.

Centaurus
  • 50,047
-5

What about 'and'? I'm pretty sure it isn't grammatically correct at the start of a sentence

dan
  • 1