Summary
OR, NOR, FOR, and SO are small words that do big work in scholarly prose. Use OR to frame alternatives (often with either / whether) and apply the proximity rule for agreement; use NOR for negative alternatives (often with neither) and to extend a negation across clauses; use FOR to introduce a reason (conjunction, not preposition), with a comma before it; use SO for results or purposes, typically with a comma and sometimes with so that for clarity.
Craft precise, readable coordination: match subjects and verbs correctly in either…or / neither…nor, maintain parallel structure, punctuate compound sentences cleanly, and avoid dangling or ambiguous alternatives. In formal academic writing, prefer so that for purpose, keep for sparing and explicit, and rewrite mixed-number subjects that produce clunky agreement.
Bottom line: these four coordinators shape argument logic—choice, negation, cause, and effect. Handle agreement, punctuation, and parallelism with care, and your methods, results, and conclusions will read with clarity, momentum, and authority.
📖 Full Length (Click to collapse)
Helpful Tips for Using Coordinating Conjunctions in Scholarly Prose: OR, NOR, FOR, SO
Coordinating conjunctions are the quiet architecture of academic argument. They connect methods to outcomes, caveats to claims, and alternatives to decisions. This guide focuses on four often-misused coordinators—OR, NOR, FOR, SO—with clear rules, scholarly examples, edits you can copy, and pitfalls to avoid.
1) Coordination in a Nutshell
Coordination joins units of equal grammatical rank—words, phrases, or independent clauses—and assigns equal syntactic weight to each part. The seven coordinators (often remembered by FANBOYS) are for, and, nor, but, or, yet, so. This article focuses on OR (alternatives), NOR (negative alternatives), FOR (reason), and SO (result/purpose). Mastering these four improves precision in abstracts, method descriptions, results narratives, and discussions.
2) Using OR: Alternatives and Choices
Function. OR offers alternatives between equivalent grammatical units.
2.1 With either / whether
Pairings such as either…or and whether…or emphasize choice. Keep the units parallel.
2.2 Agreement: the proximity rule
When or connects different-number subjects, the verb agrees with the nearer noun/pronoun.
Better still, recast to avoid awkwardness: “We found that the protocol—not the instruments—was flawed.”
2.3 Serial or
In a list, or presents mutually exclusive options; add Oxford commas for clarity in dense prose.
2.4 Meaning and scope
Be explicit about whether options are exclusive (one only) or inclusive (one or more). In methods, a short qualifier helps: “participants could select one or more responses.”
3) Using NOR: Negative Alternatives and Extended Negation
Function. NOR coordinates negative alternatives and often pairs with neither.
3.1 Extending a negation across clauses
Use nor to carry forward a negation introduced earlier. In this use, invert subject and auxiliary as in a question, and add a comma (or a semicolon) before nor.
3.2 After a positive clause
In formal style, nor can follow an affirmative clause meaning “and not.”
3.3 Agreement with neither…nor
As with either…or, apply the proximity rule when subjects differ in number; otherwise, keep both singular for a singular verb.
4) Using FOR: Reason (as a Conjunction)
Function. Conjunctive for introduces a reason after a clause. Distinguish it from prepositional for (“for 12 weeks,” “for patients”). Place a comma before the conjunctive use.
4.1 Formal tone and frequency
Conjunctive for is somewhat literary. In methods and results, because or since often reads cleaner; in discussions, occasional for can vary rhythm and highlight justification.
4.2 Avoid ambiguity
When a sentence already contains a prepositional for, switching to because can prevent confusion.
5) Using SO: Result and Purpose
Function. So coordinates a consequence; so that expresses purpose or intended result. A comma typically precedes so when joining two independent clauses.
5.1 Comma or no comma?
Use a comma before so when it links independent clauses. If the second unit is not an independent clause, no comma is needed.
5.2 Avoid ambiguity (result vs. purpose)
When intention matters, choose so that or in order that.
6) Parallelism: Keep Coordinated Elements Aligned
Coordination implies equality. Match grammatical form to avoid cognitive friction, especially in aims, methods, and findings.
7) Punctuation with Coordinators
| Pattern | Guideline | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Clause, for clause | Comma required | “We delayed submission, for the IRB requested amendments.” |
| Clause, so clause | Comma usually required | “The pilot worked, so we scaled the trial.” |
| Clause, nor aux + subject + verb | Comma (or semicolon) + inversion | “We found no bias, nor did we detect drift.” |
| Either A or B (clause) | No comma inside the pair | “Either we publish now or we add Study 3.” |
8) Agreement with either…or / neither…nor
These constructions can produce subject–verb errors. Use the proximity rule or recast.
❌ “Either the authors or the editor are responsible.” → ✅ “… is responsible.”
❌ “Neither the table nor the figures was updated.” → ✅ “… were updated.”
9) Scholarly Style Choices
- Reserve conjunctive for for clear causal justification; otherwise use because/since.
- Prefer so that for purpose in methods (“we blinded assessors so that…”).
- Use or to clarify design options (exclusive vs. inclusive choices) and pre-register which applies.
- Use nor to maintain negative scope in limitations or null-result statements.
10) Before → After: Edit-Ready Repairs
1) Ambiguous alternative Before: Participants could choose paper or online. After: Participants could choose either paper or online (one mode only). 2) Agreement error Before: Either the preprint or the reviews is public. After: Either the preprint or the reviews are public. [Nearest noun: reviews] 3) Weak reason with prepositional “for” Before: We paused for the system crashed. After: We paused, for the system crashed. [conjunctive for] Better: We paused because the system crashed. 4) Result vs purpose Before: We increased the dosage, so the patients could recover. After (purpose): We increased the dosage so that patients could recover. After (result): We increased the dosage, so patients recovered more quickly. 5) Non-parallel coordination Before: The aims were to evaluate adherence and the effect was assessed. After: The aims were to evaluate adherence and to assess effect.
11) Quick Reference Table
| Conjunction | Core meaning | Typical commas | Common pairings | Scholarly uses |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| OR | Alternative/choice | No comma inside pair; comma in lists per style | either…or, whether…or | Design options, analytic branches, survey options |
| NOR | Negative alternative / extend negation | Comma or semicolon before clause + inversion | neither…nor | Null results, limitations, exclusion criteria |
| FOR | Reason / justification | Comma before when joining clauses | — | Rationale in discussion; justify deviations |
| SO | Result; with so that = purpose | Comma before when joining clauses | so that, in order that | Outcomes in results; intentions in methods |
12) Troubleshooting Checklist (Print This)
- [ ] Coordinated elements are grammatically parallel (verb with verb, noun with noun).
- [ ] Either…or / neither…nor: verb agrees with the nearer subject or sentence is recast.
- [ ] Commas used correctly (for, so with two full clauses; nor with inversion).
- [ ] Alternative scope is clear (exclusive vs inclusive or).
- [ ] So that used for purpose; bare so used for result.
- [ ] No comma splices; coordinators join complete clauses where intended.
- [ ] Terminology remains consistent on both sides of the coordinator.
13) Practice: Decide and Revise
- Neither the model assumptions nor the residual plots is convincing.
- We delayed data collection for the facilities were closed.
- Either the study was underpowered or the effect were trivial.
- The reviewers requested major changes, so that we expanded the limitations section.
- Participants could select email, SMS, or app notifications (any number).
1) “… nor the residual plots are convincing.” (nearest noun plural)
2) “We delayed data collection, for the facilities were closed.” / “… because the facilities were closed.”
3) “… or the effect was trivial.” (nearest noun singular)
4) “The reviewers requested major changes, so we expanded the limitations section.” (result)
5) Add scope note: “(participants could select one or more).”
14) Conclusion: Small Words, Strong Logic
In a manuscript’s tight spaces—abstracts, methods, results—coordinators carry a disproportionate share of the logic. OR frames methodological forks; NOR extends and balances negation; FOR justifies choices; SO articulates consequences and aims. When you attend to agreement, punctuation, and parallelism while using them, reviewers can focus on your contribution rather than your syntax. That is how small words do big rhetorical work in scholarly writing.
Need a quick pass on coordination, parallelism, and punctuation before submission? Our editors can tune your manuscript to house style and eliminate logic-breaking joins.
