pesky "then"

tko said:

Bill opened the door and then called out to Sally.
Bill opened the door and called out to Sally.

Does the use of the word "then" add anything to the sentence?

Click to expand...

Not in that example.

tko said:

I'm finding a ton of sentences where I've been using "then" and I don't really think I have to. Probably 70% of my usage can be eliminated - I think.

Click to expand...

... about my own ration too.
I find it's sometimes preferable to stick in a 'then.'

If you don't want to do things my way, do them yours.

or

If you don't want to do things my way then do them yours.

By using 'then' you can skip using a comma for one thing.
Probably not the best example, here, for why that'd be preferable.
I think sometimes syntax alone makes it seem a better option at times.

Editing is a sentence by sentence activity. Some sentences need pruning; some are just fine as luscious meanderings of posh prose.

The reason you may like "then cautiously entered" is because it keeps that verb in the past tense which is pleasing to the ear after "peeked."

tko said:

[FONT=&quot]They peeked through the door, then cautiously entered.
[/FONT][FONT=&quot]They peeked through the door, cautiously entering[/FONT].

The use of "then" is much more subtle that I realized. To me, the 1st sentence sounds better, but I can't tell you why.​

Click to expand...

Present participles like entering tell us about actions taking place at the same time as the past tense verb.

So they either peeked while entering or they peeked then entered.

You've given us a perfect example of how to use then and why it shouldn't always be thrown out.

tko said:

Bill opened the door and then called out to Sally.

Click to expand...

Including "and" before "then" is redundant and should usually be avoided except when used in dialogue.

In the OP's example, "then" is redundant. A simple "and" is fine.

There are times when "then" is needed.. when the order of events are very specific and you don't want to separate them with a period. "And" is more subtle, but "then" is more specific: one after another, and maybe a bit of time has passed between events and not almost simultaneously.

We watched the sunset, and then danced the night away.

Click to expand...

"And" won't work as well: We watched the sunset and danced the night away.

Separate sentences also don't work well: We watched the sunset. We danced the night away.

It's funny how "and then" creeps into speech patterns. I've heard it countless times when people relate stories in spoken form.

"...I asked him to stop, and then he acted like it was my fault, as if I had something to do with it. I told him to leave, just get out of my life and stay out. And then he looked at me with those big brown eyes, so I didn't know what to do and then called my spiritual adviser..."

In each of the sentences where "then" is used, it means: Subsequently or soon afterward.

He peeked through the door then stepped inside means he stepped inside after he peeked.

He peeked through the door and stepped inside means he did both at the same time.

RJK said:

In each of the sentences where "then" is used, it means: Subsequently or soon afterward.

He peeked through the door then stepped inside means he stepped inside after he peeked.

He peeked through the door and stepped inside means he did both at the same time.

Click to expand...

But, for your first sentence, my understanding is "then" is not a coordinating conjunction and can't be used in place of "and." You can use only "and" or "and then" to convey that meaning. No? Yes?

RJK said:

He peeked through the door and stepped inside means he did both at the same time.

Click to expand...

Not really. It's "understood" in this case that the actions are not simultaneous. The following, however, dictates simultaneity:

Peeking through the door, he stepped inside.

or

He peeked through the door, stepping inside.


"And" in this case is used in a sequence, as in "a sequence of events/actions" and not simultaneity.

He went to the store, bought some food, and paid at the register -- he didn't do all three at the same time. If you use "then," it would be awkward:

He went to the store, then bought some food, and then paid at the register.

We've been given a perfectly good word (then) to denote sequential, or subsequent, or events that follow soon afterward. We've also been given a perfectly good conjunction (and) to connect events, etc.

Why would you hope the reader "Understands" and means then, or and then, when you can be specific?

RJK said:

We've been given a perfectly good word (then) to denote sequential, or subsequent, or events that follow soon afterward. We've also been given a perfectly good conjunction (and) to connect events, etc.

Why would you hope the reader "Understands" and means then, or and then, when you can be specific?

Click to expand...

I don't hope. Readers, who are humans, are smart. We're trained to infer. "And" doesn't mean simultaneity. Not always. Context is key. There's no ambiguity when someone writes: I went to the story, got some bread, and paid for it. Using "then" is an overkill and reads awful: I went to the story, then got some bread, then paid for it.