zlacker

[parent] [thread] 1 comments
1. hmcq6+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-08-30 02:42:18
I disagree with v_____.

"He didn't send the letter. The lawsuit was dropped."

"He didn't send the letter therefore the lawsuit was dropped."

Two very different examples. "therefore" in the second example communicates a causal effect from the independent clause that isn't present in the first example.

I'm sure one could argue that context clues could imply that same connection and therefore "therefore" is redundant but I just don't agree with the premise.

replies(1): >>viccis+Vs1
2. viccis+Vs1[view] [source] 2025-08-30 18:59:55
>>hmcq6+(OP)
Therefore is reasonable in that case, though it still reads a bit clumsy. "The lawsuit was dropped" seems like the most important part of that blurb, so leading with it flows better. "The lawsuit was dropped after he didn't send the letter" is so much nicer. You get to the point and explain it immediately after instead of giving the reader information you have to contextualize after. "Therefore" just reads as pedantic and overbearing in most situations in my opinion (and I guess my teacher's opinion too).
[go to top]