在本文的一開始我們先來看一段文字：
“But it turns out that the material being washed into the sea every year has no appreciable effect on the composition of seawater….And where salts have accumulated in water from land erosion into lakes without outlets, like the Great Salt Lake and the Dead Sea the balance of salts in the water is quite different from that in the ocean.” — Marston Bates, The Forest and the Sea (45)
這段文字使用了 “but” 和 “and” 做句子的開頭，你會覺得不妥嗎？
筆者以前也認為這樣的用法是錯誤的而避免使用，但在廣泛地閱讀原文文章後，發現這樣的用法其實很常見，且時常出現在知名作家與雜誌中，他們難道不知道這樣的用法是錯誤的嗎？
可能很多老師都有說過不要在句子的開頭用 “and” 或 “but” 等對等連接詞，權威辭典《The Merriam-Webster Dictionary of English Usage》與知名寫作書籍《Style & Difference》卻皆指出這種經驗可能來自於小學生寫作時用一連串的連接詞來表達他們的想法，像是：
“We wanted to go to get burgers and they weren’t open. But we still got burgers. But we had to go somewhere else to get them. But they weren’t as good as the ones we were going to get…….”
老師看到小學生這種缺乏邏輯組織的流水帳式寫作風格和冗長不堪的句子覺得很煩，就對小學生說：「夠了！寫作的時候不要一直用 and 和 but 開頭！」這樣的表達方式太過口語化、不夠正式而不適合用在寫作上。但很多人長大後也沒有再去思考這件事，這個規則就一直這樣傳遞下去，好像變成了一個事實。
然而，其實並沒有這個文法規則，許多知名作家、新聞雜誌都喜歡使用 “and” 和 “but” 來自然地連接想法。比起使用又長、又顯眼、又正式的 “however, in addition, moreover…”，他們更喜歡用 “but, and” 等對等連接詞，使用對等連接詞做句子的開頭不會過度正式或生硬，而自然到讀者常常不會注意到他的存在，可以達到直接、精準、自然而動人的效果。
其實用 “and” 或 “but” 開頭的寫法從西元九世紀開始就被大量使用，權威辭典《The Merriam-Webster Dictionary of English Usage》中的 “Is it Ever Okay to Start a Sentence With ‘And’? FANBOYS might not get you far” 指出：
“It’s perfectly acceptable to begin a sentence with “And,” as well as the other words that we are often taught to avoid such as “but” or “or.” Writing samples tracing back to the 9th century, including Bible translations, break these “sacred” rules, which stem from attempts to curb school children from stringing too many unrelated sentences together.”
就連經典寫作書籍《The Elements of Style》當中也有這樣的用法，如：
“But since writing is communication, clarity can only be a virtue. And although there is no substitute for merit in writing, clarity comes closest to being one.” — William Strunk Jr. & E. B. White, The Elements of Style, 1959
以下再列出一些專家學者與書籍中類似的說法，如：
“And the idea that and must not begin a sentence, or even a paragraph, is an empty superstition. The same goes for but. Indeed either word can give unimprovably early warning of the sort of thing that is to follow.” — Kingsley Amis, The King’s English (1997)
“Contrary to what your high school English teacher told you, there’s no reason not to begin a sentence with but or and; in fact, these words often make a sentence more forceful and graceful. They are almost always better than beginning with however or additionally.” — Professor Jack Lynch, Associate Professor of English, Rutgers University, New Jersey
“There used to be an idea that it was inelegant to begin a sentence with and. That idea is now as good as dead. And to use and in this position may be a useful way of indicating that what you are about to say will reinforce what you have just said.” — Sir Ernest Gowers, The Complete Plain Words (1954)
“There is a persistent belief that it is improper to begin a sentence with and, but this prohibition has been cheerfully ignored by standard authors from Anglo-Saxon times onwards.” — RW Burchfield, New Fowler’s Modern English Usage
“A prejudice lingers from the days of schoolmarmish rhetoric that a sentence should never begin with and. The supposed rule is without foundation in grammar, logic, or art.” — Modern American Usage (1966)
許多國際知名新聞雜誌也常常使用 “and” 或 “but” 開頭的用法，筆者僅舉出幾個例子，如下：
(筆者在使用對等連接詞之處做 ｛ ｝ 的標示)
1. The New York Times, “How Full Employment Became Washington’s Creed”
At the time, concern over the deficit helped to stem more aggressive fiscal policy responses. ｛And｝ concerns about economic overheating pushed the Fed to begin lifting interest rates — albeit very slowly — in late 2015. As the unemployment rate dropped, central bankers worried that wage and price inflation might wait around the corner and were eager to return policy to a more “normal” setting. ｛But｝ economic thinking has undergone a sea change since then. Fiscal authorities have become more confident running up the public debt at a time of very low interest rates, when it isn’t so costly to do so.
2. The Guardian, “Trump’s US investment ban aims to cement tough-on-China legacy “
The arrival of the two-star admiral, whom Reuters described as overseeing US military intelligence in the Asia-Pacific region, has not been formally confirmed by either government. ｛But｝ it drew immediate (albeit undefined) threats of retaliation from Beijing, which considers Taiwan to be the most sensitive issue in China-US relations…….Biden is highly experienced in foreign policy, working for decades under US policies of engagement and cooperation with China. ｛But｝ his position has significantly shifted as the US and its allies have come up against Xi’s increasing belligerence. He has pledged to take a tough stand on human rights and military aggression, and publicly criticised Xi during the campaign. The 2020 Democratic party platform pledged pushback on China “where we have profound economic, security, and human rights concerns”…….｛But｝undoing any of what Chinese state media termed Trump’s “final madness”, by overriding his executive orders, could come at a domestic political cost.
3. The Washington post, “Biden aims to restore order after four years of tumult”
White House press secretary Jen Psaki has highlighted the support for Biden’s coronavirus relief package from business groups, saying there has been an “outpouring of support” for various parts of the package “from everyone from Bernie Sanders to the Chamber of Commerce.”
｛But｝ the Biden team’s concerted effort to revive some of the basic traditions of past White Houses also has its risks. Washington trying to work together can look an awful lot like elites palling around, or the overly clubby atmosphere that gave rise to the early enthusiasm for Trump’s candidacy.
｛And｝ key Republican senators have already expressed skepticism, if not outright opposition, to Biden’s $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief proposal.
4. Foreign Affairs, “The Last Chance for American Internationalism”
｛Yet ｝Trump’s overall impact was dismaying, because he rarely offered good solutions to the problems he identified. Skepticism of international organizations and multilateralism did not shield the United States from the ravages of COVID-19; the only answer to such a transnational scourge was more, not less, international cooperation. Withdrawing from international institutions and from agreements such as the Paris climate accord did not make these entities perform better so much as it isolated Washington and ceded influence to corrupt authoritarians and U.S. competitors. ｛And ｝although the drawbacks of economic integration with China were, by 2020, undeniable, the only way to mitigate them — short of implausible autarky — was deeper economic integration with the democratic allies Trump maligned. Illiberal nationalism was no guide to statecraft in an interdependent world…….｛But｝ Trump’s most pernicious effect will be the dark shadow his tenure casts over future U.S. foreign policy. Biden’s inclination — judging from his speeches, his track record in the Senate and as vice president, and his personnel choices — is to revive American internationalism and adapt it for an era of great-power rivalry.
5. Foreign Affairs, “The Myth of a Responsible Withdrawal From Afghanistan”
｛But｝ the slow-moving Afghan talks remain a long shot for peace. The Taliban and the Afghan government still disagree on fundamental issues, including whether the country should remain a republic or even retain any features of electoral democracy. ｛And｝ both parties have been hounded to the table; neither believes it has exhausted its military options…….｛But｝ as attractive as splitting the difference may seem, it is almost certainly impossible. Regardless of what happens with the peace process, the Biden administration will soon find that it must choose a more decisive course in Afghanistan.
6. Wall Street Journal, “U.K. Covid-19 Variant Could Be More Deadly”
The vaccine rollout is further advanced in the U.K. than elsewhere in Europe. Almost 5.4 million people had received at least one shot of a vaccine in the U.K. as of Thursday. ｛But ｝the emergence of the variant has encouraged the government to delay the application of a second vaccine shot in an effort to confer some protection on more people with an initial shot…….Viruses mutate all the time. ｛But｝ this variant stood out because it contained an unusually large number of mutations: 23 in all, including eight on the spike protein, the part of the virus that enables it to bind onto and infect human cells. Scientists think this variant could be more infectious because one of the mutations allows it to bind and enter cells more readily.
7. The Economist, “Peace, order and rocky government”
Nonetheless Canada has many good reasons to feel pleased with itself. Its constitutional motto of “peace, order and good government” may not set the pulse racing in the manner of America’s “life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness”. Most Americans probably think of it as a dull old neighbour, when they think of it at all. ｛But｝ peace, order and good government are solid virtues, and still rare enough not only to make Canadians count these blessings but also for millions of people from less orderly places to flock to Canada to enjoy them too.
8. The US Constitution Article. IV, Section 1
Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. ｛And｝ the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.
這些國際新聞雜誌使用 “and” 和 “but” 等對等連接詞開頭來連接句子是不是讓文章讀起來非常自然而順暢呢？
以上提供了許多證據說明使用 “and” 或 “but” 開頭文法上是沒有問題的 (後接獨立子句)，只是對等連接詞 (coordinating conjunction) 較不正式，而連接式副詞(conjunctive adverbs) 較為正式，從以下二段文字的比較可以感受出他們的差別：
1. She wanted to leave the office, drive home, and spend the evening alone in front of a fire. But she knew that duty called her to finish the project and to put her best effort into making it superb.
2. She wanted to leave the office, drive home, and spend the evening alone in front of a fire. However, she knew that duty called her to finish the project and to put her best effort into making it superb.
至於要使用哪個，重點是，我們須要考慮到我們寫作的類型、情境、目的、對象，而有不同的寫法、風格與口氣 (tone)。在學術文獻中幾乎不會用 and 或 but 等連接詞做開頭，因為太過口語而不正式；但如果下班後想要看個書或部落格來放鬆一下，內容卻使用非常正式的寫作風格，當中句子的開頭都像是 “In addition, nonetheless, on the other hand, furthermore…” ，好樣在看論文一樣，不就讓人壓力大到快窒息而無法達到休閒的效果了嗎？
小結：從以上的證據來看，我們可以了解到使用 and 或 but 等對等連接詞開頭在文法上是沒有問題的，一直以來也被許多知名作者、新聞雜誌大量使用。
至於要不要使用它是個人的選擇，就算不使用也不會怎麼樣，本文的目的只是希望能意識到其實我們有這個選擇，不用因為過去的經驗而限制了現在自己的字詞選擇與寫作風格。
以上內容僅為筆者的閱讀分享，若有疏失還請多多指教。
BTW, 由於臉書上的文字空間較緊密，不方便閱讀較長的文章，小編最近創了一個網誌，並將文章放在上面，以提供更舒適的閱讀平台，網址如下：
https://s-68544.medium.com/ (也可在臉書關於處的網站找到)
參考資料：《The Merriam-Webster Dictionary of English Usage》、《Style & Difference》、《The Elements of Style》、《The New York Times》、《The Guardian》、《The Washington post》、《Foreign Affairs》、《Wall Street Journal》、《The Economist》、《The US Constitution Article》
https://www.merriam-webster.com/....../words-to-not......
https://www.thewriter.com/....../and-and-but-why-its....../
https://getitwriteonline.com/....../starting....../
https://prowritingaid.com/....../starting-a-sentence......
