Home | About | RSS Feed | Contact and Publicity Guidelines | Comment Policy the Law, the Universe, and Everything 

Search


Concurring Opinions is a
general-interest legal blog
operated by Concurring
Opinions LLC, a Pennsylvania
Limited Liability Corporation.

jr_114_9780195367195_bnr

jr_114_9780195383768_bnr

advertise-here4


FC-CO(SS)

Our Podcast

Subscribe to Law Talk

law-rev-contents2.jpg


  • Posts by Author

  • Categories

  • Archives


  • Recent Comments

    • Observer on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • RJ on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • RJ on Ricci and Briscoe as Disparate Impact Cases

    • Mike Rich on Negligent Corpse Mishandling

    • anon on Privacy and Tattletales

    • orly lobel on At CELS, Hoping to Blog

    • harry brooks on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • RJ on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • Michael H Schneider on Negligent Corpse Mishandling

    • flood pictures on Public opinion on same-sex marriage

    • gtownstudent on And Justache For All at GW Law

    • AF on Ricci and Briscoe as Disparate Impact Cases

    • RJ on Ricci and Briscoe as Disparate Impact Cases

    • Maryland Conservatarian on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • Daniel S. Goldberg on Negligent Corpse Mishandling

  •  

    Site Meter

So . . .

posted by Lawrence Cunningham

Last week, Dave Hoffman posted about omitting needless words in exposition. In comments, I satirized his point, leading off with “So, . . .” and included dozens of other habitually-used words or phrases likewise lacking meaning.

My nudge reacted against an idiomatic fashion to begin sentences with “So,” in speech and writing, especially on blogs (including by esteemed contributors to this one). Aside from proponents of expressive clarity considering so a useless word when beginning a sentence, it may be improper English.

Exceptions recognize utility in narrow contexts, such as for poetry (“So lovely was the lavender lilac”), impression (“So these colonies stood strong”) or in rousing speeches (“So I say to my family and friends”) and in the familiar “So what?”

Current usage expands well beyond the exceptions. The word begins sentences like: “So, I read yesterday;” “So an interesting thread appears over at . . .;” and “So, the Supreme Court has decided . . . .” (No convention seems to have formed about whether a comma follows the word when it starts a sentence.)

Shall law professors or other academics encourage students to begin sentences with “So” in class discussion and research papers?    Do lawyers or judges appreciate that lead off? Is it appealing to readers of the English language in general? I doubt it.

I am convinced it is not good for professors to follow the idiomatic fashion. A few years ago, my law school interviewed an entry-level candidate who began sentences with “So” often. Many colleagues cited the annoyance as a negative. They tried to suppress the habit’s significance when evaluating the overall record, recognizing the idiomatic fashion, but it hurt the candidate. We did not extend an offer.

I cannot recall ever writing a sentence beginning with the word So in this usage, and hope I never do. I confess to using it in conversation on too many occasions, capitulating to fashion, yet wish I had not and hope to cut back.  It would help if everyone else cut it out too.


 September 10, 2009 at 3:54 am   Posted in: Culture   Print This Post Print This Post

Responses (6)

  1. BDG - September 10, 2009 at 6:05 am

    So, Seamus Heaney translates the opening word of Beowulf, “Hwaet,” as “So.” For him, it’s a way of centering the listener on the world of the story — “an exclamation calling for immediate attention.”

    http://www.wwnorton.com/college/english/nael/beowulf/introbeowulf.htm

    In another interview (which I can’t find a link to right now), he relates how the realization that “hwaet” could be translated as “So” was what convinced him to translate the whole poem.

    A powerful word, in other words. Not to be abandoned. But maybe also not to be overused.

  2. poet - September 10, 2009 at 7:47 am

    Beowulf is poetry.

  3. Dave - September 10, 2009 at 9:11 am

    Big difference between spoken and written language. In written language, we can strive for parsimony of expression because we can work on crafting language through the editing process. In spoken language, we lack this opportunity. Moreover, many words (like “so” or “well”) aren’t really uttered to convey denotative meaning but to connote something (e.g., deference, courtesy). These words may also be verbal placeholders used while the speaker pauses to think. I admire people whose speech sounds like they’re reading a well-written book, but I’m not one of them, and I’m pretty sympathetic to people who share this shortcoming. Finally, I wonder whether we want verbal speech to approximate formal written English. Perhaps that would be boring. There may well be appealing advantages to having speech match the informal and spontaneous character of daily life rather than the more regimented norms of written discourse.

  4. Patrick S. O'Donnell - September 10, 2009 at 2:42 pm

    I side with Rob Heverly at the Faculty Lounge on this one:

    [....]
    Persuasive to me on this point, however, is this entry from the Oxford Dictionary of American Usage and Style:

    So. A. Beginning Sentences with.
    Like And and But, So is a good word for beginning a sentence. Each of these three is the informal equivalent of the heavier and longer conjunctive adverb (Additionally, However, and Consequently or Therefore). Rhetoric, not grammar, is what counts here. The shorter word affords a brisker pace—e.g.: “Under a state law enacted last year, prisoners must serve at least 85 percent of their sentences, but the state Supreme Court has ruled that the change cannot be applied retroactively. So Mark Brown is out walking around” (Lancaster New Era).

    The Oxford English Dictionary has an entry for “so” that appears to approve of its use at the start of a sentence, “5. c. An introductory particle,” with the example, “So, let me see: my apron.” Another definition (10.b.) declares “so” can be used as “an introductory particle, without a preceding statement (but freq. implying one).” Given my reading, I don’t think starting a sentence with the word “so” breaks any clear rule of grammar or usage. [....]

    For Larry’s point, if we think of it more as “use words when you mean to use words, or else even good words can be used superfluously,” I’d agree. As an argument against the word “so” as a way to start sentences, I don’t think I do.

    See: http://www.thefacultylounge.org/2009/09/so-the-sequal.html

  5. Lawrence Cunningham - September 11, 2009 at 6:46 am

    Dave: Fair enough. I’d be happy to concentrate on the written rather than oral context.

    Patrick: Thanks for the link. I’d likewise be happy to concentrate on the manifest problem of overuse of so to begin a sentence, in the usage I describe, than rigid adherence to a rule banning so to begin a sentence.

  6. A.J. Sutter - September 11, 2009 at 8:15 am

    I’m glad Larry has given the spoken language a reprieve. In so doing, he’s spared a Yiddishism that fairly drips with connotative meaning (though when appropriate, the original “Nu?” is preferable), e.g.:

    Q: Hi, how are you?
    A: So, how should I be?

Leave a Reply

*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture. Click on the picture to hear an audio file of the word.
Click to hear an audio file of the anti-spam word


  • « Previous post
  • Next post »

Authors

Daniel J. Solove

Website
Understanding Privacy

Kaimipono Wenger

Website
SSRN Page

Dave Hoffman

Website
SSRN Page

Nate Oman

Website
SSRN Page

Frank Pasquale

Website
SSRN Page

Deven Desai

Website
SSRN Page

Danielle Citron

Website
SSRN Page

Lawrence Cunningham

Website
SSRN Page

Sarah Waldeck

Website
SSRN Page

Jaya Ramji-Nogales

Website
SSRN Page

Solangel Maldonado

Website
SSRN Page

Gerard Magliocca

Website
SSRN Page


Guests

Rachel Godsil
Alex Kreit
Anita Krishnakumar
Matthew Sag
Michael Zimmer






Previous Guests

Michael Abramowicz
Michelle Adams
Robert Ahdieh
Michelle Anderson
Laura Appleman
Ann Bartow
Francesca Bignami
Jeremy Blumenthal
Kathleen Boozang
Bruce Boyden
Donald Braman
Al Brophy
Neil H. Buchanan
Bill Burke-White
Scott Burris
Paul Butler
Naomi Cahn
Anupam Chander
Miriam Cherry
Jack Chin
Jennifer Collins
Allison Danner
Brannon Denning
Deven Desai
Mike Dimino
Mark Edwards
David Fagundes
Christine Haight Farley
Kim Ferzan
Dan Filler
Michael Froomkin
Amanda Frost
Timothy Glynn
Rachel Godsil
Eric Goldman
David Gray
Craig Green
Tristin Green
Jeffrey Harrison
Erica Hashimoto
Carissa Hessick
Laura Heymann
Robert Hillman
Christine Hurt
Darian Ibrahim
John Ip
Kevin Johnson
Dan Kahan
Brian Kalt
Sam Kamin
Michael Kang
Chimène Keitner
Orin Kerr
Nancy Kim
Heidi Kitrosser
Adam Kolber
Russell Korobkin
Anita S. Krishnakumar
Susan Kuo
Greg Lastowka
Sarah Lawsky
Erik Lillquist
Jeff Lipshaw
Jonathan Lipson
Jacqueline Lipton
Joseph Liu
Michael Madison
Solangel Maldonado
Jason Mazzone
Linda McClain
William McGeveran
Salil Mehra
Carrie Menkel-Meadow
Max Minzner
Scott Moss
Eric Muller
Jaya Ramji-Nogales
Helen Norton
Elizabeth Nowicki
Paul Ohm
Michael O'Shea
David Opderback
Kristen Osenga
Rafael Pardo
Marcy Peek
Eduardo Peñalver
Robert Percival
David Post
Shruti Rana
Geoffrey Rapp
Neil Richards
Lori Ringhand
Alice Ristroph
Susan Scafidi
Paul Secunda
Jonathan Siegel
Jessica Silbey
Peter Smith
Charles Sullivan
Rick Swedloff
Steph Tai
Andrew Taslitz
Robert Tsai
Jenia Turner
Steve Vladeck
Sarah Waldeck
Melissa Waters
Alfred Yen
David Zaring
Timothy Zick
Spencer Weber Waller
Howard Wasserman
Frank Wu
Corey Yung
Jonathan Zittrain

Blogroll

Above the Law
ACS Blog
Althouse
Balkinization
Becker-Posner Blog
BlackProf
BoingBoing
Chicago Law Faculty Blog
Conglomerate
CrimLaw
Crime & Federalism
CrimProf Blog
Crooked Timber
Discourse.net
Dorf on Law
Election Law
Emergent Chaos
The Faculty Lounge
Feminist Law Profs
43(B)log
Freakonomics Blog
Freedom to Tinker
Google Blogoscoped
How Appealing
Ideoblog
Info/Law
Instapundit.com
Juris Novus
Jurisdynamics
Law and Humanities Blog
Law and Letters
Law Librarian Blog
Legal Profession Blog
Legal Theory Blog
Legal Times Blog
Leiter Reports
Brian Leiter's Law School Reports
Lessig Blog
Madisonian Theory
Media Law Blog
Mirror of Justice
The Moderate Voice
National Security Advisors
Opinio Juris
Point of Law
PrawfsBlawg
ProfessorBainbridge.com
Property Prof Blog
Red Tape Chronicles
The Right Coast
Schneier on Security
SCOTUSBlog
Security Dilemmas
Sentencing Law and Policy
Simple Justice
Sivacracy.net
The Situationist
Susan Crawford
TalkLeft
Talking Points Memo
TaxProf Blog
Tech & Marketing Law
Truth on the Market
Volokh Conspiracy
WorkPlace Prof Blog
WSJ Law Blog
Wonkette
The Yin Blog


© Concurring Opinions

Powered by WordPress