Thursday Tip: Extra conjunctions, omitted conjunctions

The standard series form—A, B, and C—pops up everywhere writers need to talk about a set of similar things. A few examples from an article on carbon offsets from Wednesday’s New York Times:

Corporations and shoppers in the United States spent more than $54 million last year on carbon offset credits toward tree planting, wind farms, solar plants and other projects.

Back in 1998, the agency did not create definitions for phrases that are common now — like renewable energy, carbon offsets and sustainability.

Dell lets visitors to its site fill their shopping carts with carbon offsets for their printers, computer monitors and even for themselves.

But don’t let that familiar form blind you to other possibilities. More forceful and nuanced groupings are possible by adding an extra conjunction or omitting the conjunction.

Consider the next World Development Report from the World Bank:

The 2009 report is on density and distance and division—the three main geographical dimensions of economic development.

The extra conjunction emphasizes the combination of the three dimensions yet gives each its separate identity, making it more likely that readers will remember all three. Later mentions of the three would use the conventional form, with a single and. And because the three make up the full set, we would not omit the and—as in distance, density, division, which implies that the three are part of a larger set.

An extra conjunction can also distinguish pairings:

He can gush and despise, revel and sneer, as through a bifocal lens.

By contrast, dropping a conjunction can compress the series, showing that all three are concurrent. Take this example from the Golden Compass:

Lyra’s heart was thumping hard, because something in the bear’s presence made her feel close to coldness, danger, brutal power.

With shorter series that end a sentence, the final word can resonate without the and.

A note of caution: Don’t overuse these flourishes. You’ll annoy your readers.