Is "and yet" grammatically incorrect and/or ambiguous?

[David M]

Hello Mark

David,

No, I have not read all of your posts on this topic (nor have I read all of Richard's) -- I have a job which leaves me with limited time to read every post on this forum.

Dictionaries do not define English grammar, they only define single words. To find the meaning of "and yet" one would have to have access to a scholastic book on English grammar and/or writing.

Regarding the use of "and yet", I assume that it is one particular post of Richard's in with which you have an issue. Please include a link to the one post in which Richard made his claim so I can read it for myself.
Always double check your links to ensure that they contain the information that you are referencing. The webpage to which this link [http://painintheenglish.com/case/431] redirects does not contain the quote that you are using. Don't take my word for it, go to the page yourself and look for the quote you included and you will see for yourself that the page does not contain it. It does, however, contain the following quote:

Attachment 1347

The url is missing the last digit. I have corrected the original post. This is the correct link; http://painintheenglish.com/case/4314/

I sincerely hope that you are kidding with me here. You're using a blanket statement which covers all websites, and you seem to be stating categorically that [ALL] websites are "fact" -- a statement which is demonstrably false as attested to by the screen capture seen above. The vast majority of websites/webpages are based solely on the opinion of a person or people in charge of each particular website/webpage, or completely anonymous strangers who post utter garbage in the comments sections, and have no peer review to determine the veracity of the statements being made. I would be much more inclined to trust a website within the .edu domain than any other, because of the implied educational nature of the domain extension. Do you have any URLs to .edu domain sites that discuss the meaning and proper use of "and yet" which support your unique position?

Enough independent websites can be found discussing the use of the same phrase and the use of double conjunctives. It is fact that people are discussing this. It is a fact "and yet" is said to be idiomatic.

I have easily found many .edu websites which do discuss the proper grammatical use of "and yet":

http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/conjunctions.htm

• John plays basketball well, yet his favorite sport is badminton.
  
• The visitors complained loudly about the heat, yet they continued to play golf every day.

In sentences such as the second one, above, the pronoun subject of the second clause ("they," in this case) is often left out. When that happens, the comma preceding the conjunction might also disappear: "The visitors complained loudly yet continued to play golf every day."
Yet is sometimes combined with other conjunctions, but or and. It would not be unusual to see and yet in sentences like the ones above. This usage is acceptable.

http://www.chompchomp.com/terms/coor...onjunction.htm

Recognize a coordinating conjunction when you see one.

And, but, for, nor, or, so, and yet—these are the seven coordinating conjunctions. To remember all seven, you might want to learn one of these acronyms: FANBOYS,YAFNOBS, or FONYBAS.

https://owl.english.purdue.edu/engagement/2/1/43/

http://writing.wisc.edu/Handbook/Transitions.html
This last .edu website that I found lists "and yet" as a transitional phrase used to contrast or show contrast.

The coordinating conjunction "and" is used as a to show comparison.

Both "yet" and "and yet" are coordinating conjunctions used to show contrast.

These were but a few of many .edu websites at which I have looked. None of the .edu websites that I have perused thus far have said that there is anything wrong with using "and yet" as a coordinating conjunction; most state categorically that using "and yet" is, in fact, proper.

Since the the double conjunction is a common idiom. it is not surprising that it is accepted by many. You will note that in one of the references I have given it said that it was acceptable to use in in speech, but it was not good to use it in the written form, when to use clarity, only one conjuction should be used.
This argument is now about the perfectness of Richard's formulation. I accepted that he dropped the "and", why it has been introduced again, I do not understand why this has been done. I am still waiting for Richard to answer my questions in another thread. When those questions get answered, we might get some progress. As it is, this thread is purely concentrating on the double conjunction "and yet".

I have included scans from a college textbook for writers that I own as part of my personal library. Although the book discusses "and" and "yet", it does not discuss the use of the two words together, nor does it say that there is anything inherently wrong with doing so. This book was published back in 1996 when using "and yet" was apparently neither here nor there with grammarians in the academic community, and so it was not even included as an improper term. As the colloquial use of "and yet" has become a more commonly accepted term over the last (nearly) two decades, scholarly textbooks now include it as an accepted coordinating conjunction in its own right.

That is a point I have made. I cannot find the double conjunction defined in the dictionary. I am prepared to accept that it does the same job as "yet" on its own. It just proves my point that the formulation is not worded as succinctly as it could be and the use of "and" is superfluous.

The Scott, Foresman Handbook for Writers, Fourth Edition
Copyright © 1996 by Harper Collins College Publishers
ISBN 0-673-99728-6

14a-2 Pay attention to coordinating words. Different joining words give different signals, so be sure to pick the ones that do what you want them to. For example, and, moreover, also, and the semicolon show that you’re joining ideas of the same kind.
…
But, yet, however, and nevertheless signal contrast between the two independent clauses of a coordinate sentence.

Example:
The statue’s hair is carved in the style of early archaic sculpture, yet its feet show stylistic traits of late archaic sculpture.

To join ideas…

26c-1 Use commas before the coordinating conjunctions and, but, for, yet, so, or, and nor when those words link independent clauses to form compound sentences.

Clauses are described as independent when they can stand on their own as sentences. Joining two independent clauses with a comma and a coordinating conjunction produces a compound sentence.
Dogs are smarter than cats, and they are more sociable too.
Some people prefer cats, but such persons often need professional help.
Cats seem friendly ant times, yet they cannot be trusted.
Dogs are gregarious and playful, so they often seem less serene than cats.
A comma is especially important when the two clauses separated by the conjunction are lengthy.

To handle semicolons appropriately…

27a-1 Use semicolons to join independent clauses closely related in thought. Notice that conjunctions (such as and, but, so) aren’t needed when clauses are linked by semicolons.
Films focus on action and movement; plays emphasize language and thought.
The history of British cinema is uneven; the best British films come from the period just before and during World War II.
Italian cinema blossomed after World War II; directors like de Sica, Fellini, and Antonioni won critical acclaim.

Leaving out semicolons, however, would create run-on sentences.
If a comma alone is used to join two independent clauses (that is, clauses that could stand as complete sentences), the result is a comma splice.
…
Remember that while a semicolon alone is strong enough to join two independent sentences, a comma can link them only with the help of coordinating conjunctions—and, but, for, yet, or, nor, and so.

Attachment 1342Attachment 1343Attachment 1344Attachment 1345Attachment 1346

Thank you for the notes. They do not give and example of "and yet".
What are the attachments? I think the hyperlinks need sorting out. I get an "invalid link" message when I click on them.

All the best
David

[Guido Fawkes]

Hello Mark
The url is missing the last digit. I have corrected the original post. This is the correct link; http://painintheenglish.com/case/4314/

Ah, that make more sense.

Enough independent websites can be found discussing the use of the same phrase and the use of double conjunctives. It is fact that people are discussing this. It is a fact "and yet" is said to be idiomatic.

Come on guy, your choice of independent websites has to have some sort of quality control. I will stipulate to your choice of website http://painintheenglish.com/case/4314/ as long as you stick to it, no matter what. That being said this is a new post to that webpage:

http://painintheenglish.com/case/4314/#comment-26123
Since you have already emphatically stated that this webpage contains the truth, you are now obliged to accept this new entry as truth and move the conversation with Richard along. So how are we going to handle this latest post?

I don't see where Richard's having used "and yet" changed the fundamental​ meaning of his statement. Honestly, it seems to me that you lack sufficient ability to articulate proper support for your side of the argument, so instead you're cowering behind trivialities.

If you don't like the way Richard stated it, try rewording it yourself and asking Richard if he accepts the rewording? Then perhaps your debate can move on.

---

The broken links are scans of pages from the English composition book I have here at my home.
I'll try attaching them here again:

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Enough independent websites can be found discussing the use of the same phrase and the use of double conjunctives. It is fact that people are discussing this. It is a fact "and yet" is said to be idiomatic.

Hey there David,

Enough? What are you talking about? You only posted one link that refers (incorrectly) to "and yet" as an "idiom." Where are the other sites? Please post the links.

I have explained your error on this point many times and you have never shown any error in my answer. All you do is repeat your baseless assertions without presenting any evidence or analysis. And the really crazy thing is that the links you do post usually don't support your case at all! For example, here is what you wrote in post #286 on November 6, 2013:

We can agree to the idiomatic use of words and then we have to realize that idioms might not be understood as you expect them to be understood. Therefore, you must choose to use better words and avoid the ambiguity. Here follows a piece of evidence to say; "idioms" can be ambiguous.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/idiom?s=t
idiom
 
noun
1. an expression whose meaning is not predictable from the usual meanings of its constituent elements, as kick the bucket or hang one's head, or from the general grammatical rules of a language, as the table round for the round table, and that is not a constituent of a larger expression of like characteristics.
2. a language, dialect, or style of speaking peculiar to a people.
3. a construction or expression of one language whose parts correspond to elements in another language but whose total structure or meaning is not matched in the same way in the second language.
4. the peculiar character or genius of a language.
5. a distinct style or character, in music, art, etc.: the idiom of Bach.

We are all guilty of using words idiomatically. As #1 says; "meaning is not predictable". The words; "and yet" have not had the predicted meaning you intended. Another reason for changing your formulation.

Look at definition #1, the one that you cited in your comment. It refers specifically to expressions that have a meaning that cannot be predicted from constituent elements, like "kick the bucket." Could anyone understand the meaning of "kick the bucket" from the constituent words? Of course not. The words "kick" and "bucket" have nothing to do with the meaning of the phrase (death).

Now consider the phrase "and yet." Can that phrase ever mean anything other than what is implied by the words "and" and "yet"? Nope. It is not an idiom, and there is no ambiguity of any kind. Your assertions are simply false. You have never written anything to support your assertion that "and yet" is an idiom and that its meaning is "ambiguous."

Since the the double conjunction is a common idiom. it is not surprising that it is accepted by many. You will note that in one of the references I have given it said that it was acceptable to use in in speech, but it was not good to use it in the written form, when to use clarity, only one conjuction should be used.
This argument is now about the perfectness of Richard's formulation. I accepted that he dropped the "and", why it has been introduced again, I do not understand why this has been done. I am still waiting for Richard to answer my questions in another thread. When those questions get answered, we might get some progress. As it is, this thread is purely concentrating on the double conjunction "and yet".

You have never shown how any clarity is lost by using "and yet." The fact that all the greatest authors and authorities of the English language commonly use it, including professors of philosophy in their peer-reviewed articles concerning the meaning of ambiguous words, shows that your claims are entirely contrary to reality.

I reintroduced the "and yet" because you complained when I removed it, asserting that I was being "inconsistent" by conceding to your demands that I remove it! Given the rank insanity of your assertion, I saw no good reason to play along with you on that point. I put it back in to prompt you to deal with the reality that your position is wrong. That's why I started this thread. I wanted to collect the evidence that L67 and I had laboriously collected that proved you would rather deny all the greatest authors and authorities of the English language than admit that I am right. It's not that you don't want to admit you are wrong. You seem to have no problem with that, so long as it does not imply that I am right. Case in point: When I showed that you used the phrase "and yet" 277 times in this forum alone (accounting for 16% of your posts) you chose to falsely accuse yourself of using "bad grammar" rather than admit that I am right!. What a hoot! I wish you could see what crazy fool you are making yourself appear to be.

That is a point I have made. I cannot find the double conjunction defined in the dictionary. I am prepared to accept that it does the same job as "yet" on its own. It just proves my point that the formulation is not worded as succinctly as it could be and the use of "and" is superfluous.

As I have explained 2.3 million times, you cannot find it in the dictionary because the experts who write the dictionaries know it is not an idiom in need of a definition separate from the definitions of "and" and "yet." You have never responded to this point. Why not? It seems to indicate that you know you are wrong but simply are too proud to admit it.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

I don't see where Richard's having used "and yet" changed the fundamental​ meaning of his statement. Honestly, it seems to me that you lack sufficient ability to articulate proper support for your side of the argument, so instead you're cowering behind trivialities.

Mark,

Are you suggesting that it could change the meaning of the sentence in any way at all? Is there any difference in meaning between these two sentences?

There would be a contradiction if P and Not P.

There would be a contradiction if P and yet Not P.

Richard

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Here is the list of examples intended to show how to use the word "yet" in a sentence (from http://sentence.yourdictionary.com/yet).

The phrase "and yet" occurs in 12 of the 27 examples, accounting for 44% of the examples given.

Yet Sentence Examples

1. And yet, he was excited - anticipating sharing this wonderful event.13 6
2. Yet it kept surfacing in arguments.7 3
3. Some might consider his response silly or controlling, yet to her it was sweet and reassuring.4
4. Dulce was the oldest of the girls, yet her accent was the most prominent.4 1
5. Yet he was arrested last week for selling drugs to kids like little Nicholas over there?4 1
6. And yet, she had honored her promise to go with him to the party the next night.4 1
7. Alex wanted an answer, yet the only thing she was sure of was doubt.11 9
8. The voice and words belonged to Josh, and yet he had been dead for more than two years.3 1
9. For instance, they had been married nearly five years, and yet she was still uncomfortable with intimacy.5 4
10. And yet, in a way, waiting this long might have been an advantage.1
11. Yet she instantly recognized the Spanish heritage in his father.1
12. Of course, Alex didn't have any gray hair yet, and his lips were fuller - more defined.1
13. They must have been close, and yet, to the best of her memory, Alex had not spoken of Gerald.2 1
14. Yet before the day was over, it was obvious that wasn't the case.4 3
15. And yet, didn't clinical words like selective reduction and gestational carrier mask the facts?
16. And yet, there was something about her that suggested she was in uncharted waters - maybe body language.
17. And yet, she was reluctant to say anything to church members - even family members.
18. Yet Señor Medena never left the house.
19. Yet the next morning he acted normal - even cheerful.
20. Christmas was only a few days away, and yet it didn't seem like Christmas.1 1
21. Yet he too was an excellent dancer - or maybe everyone's dancing skills were so much better than hers that it only appeared so to her.
22. Yet somewhere deep inside she feared that if he was capable of betrayal once, then he might be again.
23. And yet, the driver was there.
24. Yet, what about the uneasy feeling she had today?
25. Yet, it wasn't fair.
26. Carmen stopped at the corner, uncomfortable with the heat of the exchange, yet unwilling to interrupt.
27. To her, the idea was ludicrous, and yet, it probably looked that way to Dulce.

[Guido Fawkes]

Mark,

Are you suggesting that it could change the meaning of the sentence in any way at all? Is there any difference in meaning between these two sentences?

There would be a contradiction if P and Not P.

There would be a contradiction if P and yet Not P.

Richard

Richard,

There is no difference between using “yet” and using “and yet” as a transitional phrase to show contrast between two independent clauses. All of the .edu domain websites support this understanding.

This means that there is also no difference between "P and not P" and "P and yet not P" when either of theses sentence structures are used to show contrast between two independent clauses.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Richard,

There is no difference between using “yet” and using “and yet” as a transitional phrase to show contrast between two independent clauses. All of the .edu domain websites support this understanding.

This means that there is also no difference between "P and not P" and "P and yet not P" when either of theses sentence structures are used to show contrast between two independent clauses.

We appear to be in perfect agreement.

I asked because your emphasis upon "fundamental meaning" seemed to suggest a contrast with "meaning" per se.

Thanks for clearing that up!

[Guido Fawkes]

We appear to be in perfect agreement.

I asked because your emphasis upon "fundamental meaning" seemed to suggest a contrast with "meaning" per se.

Thanks for clearing that up!

For rational thinking people like you and me who accept credible sources, the meaning of the sentence is not changed at all by the addition of the word "and".

However, for those with a more anal-retentive nature, who resort to incredible sources, I was trying to get the point across that such a minor change does not in any way alter the fundamental meaning of the sentence.

I believe that David actually understands completely what it is that you were saying in your original post of which he has 'found' contention, he just can't conceive of an articulate way to present his side of the argument - even to himself, I suppose.

In an earlier post you described his actions as being like, 'watching a train wreck,' and I agree. You want to walk away because you know that there is noting that you can do which will actually be of any help, but morbid curiosity keeps you from actually walking away. It would be funny if it weren't actually so sad.

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Here is the frequency of occurrences of "and yet" in the most popular English translations of the Bible arranged in descending order. There are 11 translations. The frequencies range from 55 to 24, with an average of 34.7 occurrences per translation.

NAS	55
RSV	48
NRS	44
KJV	35
ASV	35
DRA	31
NIV	29
NET	29
YLT	28
NKJ	24
WEB	24

David M charges ALL the members of ALL the committees involved in ALL these translations with using "bad grammar."

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Here is an article on the Guardian titled The 100 greatest novels of all time: the list.

I doubt that even one of those authors failed to use the phrase "and yet."

So I started at the top of the list with Don Quixote. I simply Googled the title with the phrase "and yet" and found he used it frequently. The first quote I found was hysterically ironic, given the context of this thread (source):

‘That which you say of this man,’ answered the goatherd, ‘is very like that which in books of chivalry is written of knights-errant, who did all those things which you apply to this man; and yet I believe that either you jest, or else that this gentleman’s head is void of brains.’

I then moved to the next book listed, Pilgrim's Progress, and again the first quote I found was amazingly apt for the discussion at hand (source):

{4} May I not write in such a style as this?
In such a method, too, and yet not miss
My end--thy good? Why may it not be done?

So I moved on to the third book in the list, The Life and Adventures of Robinson Crusoe, and yet again I found an amazingly apt quote (which also is the first occurrence in his book, source):

As to going home, shame opposed the best motions that offered to my thoughts, and it immediately occurred to me how I should be laughed at among the neighbours, and should be ashamed to see, not my father and mother only, but even everybody else; from whence I have since often observed, how incongruous and irrational the common temper of mankind is, especially of youth, to that reason which ought to guide them in such cases—viz. that they are not ashamed to sin, and yet are ashamed to repent; not ashamed of the action for which they ought justly to be esteemed fools, but are ashamed of the returning, which only can make them be esteemed wise men.

The fourth book is Gulliver's Travels. It was not hard to find an apt quote (source):

He said “he wondered at one thing very much, which was, to hear me speak so loud;” asking me “whether the king or queen of that country were thick of hearing?” I told him, “it was what I had been used to for above two years past, and that I admired as much at the voices of him and his men, who seemed to me only to whisper, and yet I could hear them well enough.

The fifth book listed is The History of Tom Jones, a Foundling. Its benighted author used the phrase "and yet" eighty times in this book! For example (source):

There were not, perhaps, many more unhappy persons than poor Partridge. He had lost the best part of his income by the evidence of his wife, and yet was daily upbraided by her for having, among other things, been the occasion of depriving her of that benefit; but such was his fortune, and he was obliged to submit to it.

The sixth book, Clarissa, is one of the longest books in the English language and uses the phrase "and yet" hundreds of times. For example (source):

For a girl to lay so much stress upon going to church, and yet resolve to defy her parents, in an article of the greatest consequence to them, and to the whole family, is an absurdity.

I could go on, but there is no need. I doubt there is even one noted English book that fails to contain the phrase "and yet" (except of course Gadsby, the 50,000 word novel famous for not including the letter "E").

And yet for all that, David M will not hear. Reminds me of this verse from the "Good Book" -

1 Corinthians 14:21 In the law it is written, With men of other tongues and other lips will I speak unto this people; and yet for all that will they not hear me, saith the Lord.

Richard