0

I went to the park because I needed to clear my head, and when it was morning, I returned home.

In this sentence, we see two subordinate clauses and two independent clauses.

The two subordinate clauses are 'because I needed to clear my head' and 'when it was morning'. The two independent clauses are 'I went to the park' and 'I returned home'.

However, the second subordinate clause—which follows a coordinating conjunction ('and')—is fronted. Therefore, I would like to know if there is any rule that dissuades fronting immediately after a conjunction, or do we treat it like any normal sentence? (This is a broader expansion on a previous question I had.)

Here are two more examples, each of which is different.

It was true that in the morning, his head would be clear.

In the beginning, his head was cloudy, but in the end, he felt rejuvenated.

Improve this question

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
1

I went to the park because I needed to clear my head, and when it was morning, I returned home.

It is perfectly OK to front an adverbial clause, even in a sentence like yours. If you front an adverbial clause, it's normal to put a comma after it, as you have done. When the fronted adverbial clause ends up in the middle of a sentence, it needs an extra comma before it, so it is delimited at both ends by a comma. The comma before and is optional, so we can simply more that comma one word later:

I went to the park because I needed to clear my head and, when it was morning, I returned home.

This article explains this. The same applies to the other two sentences:

It was true that, in the morning, his head would be clear.

In the beginning, his head was cloudy but, in the end, he felt rejuvenated.

Improve this answer
2
  • I agree with the use of commas in the subordinate clauses. However, I have seen writers omit the comma after 'and' and 'but' on many occasions. For example, 'I drove to the beach, and when I arrived, I saw the sun rising from the sea.' This appears to be a matter of style, although I think your version is more appropriate for 'that' clauses.
    – MJ Ada
    Commented Oct 13, 2021 at 18:10
  • Adding to this, I would like to note that my question relates more to the flexibility of subordinate clauses when choosing where to position (specific rules). Your question does address this, albeit indirectly.
    – MJ Ada
    Commented Oct 13, 2021 at 18:16

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .