I wonder if it is correct to say:

  • From A there follows B

if you want to say that A entails B (or B is a consequence of A).

  • "entails"? . . . Like what, you be writing linguistics stuff or what? -- Your example appears okay, but then it is pretty late at night for me . . . (Note that your example might perhaps be a fronted version of "There follows B from A", maybe or maybe not.) – F.E. Mar 23 '14 at 8:10
  • Yes - "entails" in the sense of linguistic relation between A and B. – Mad Hatter Mar 23 '14 at 8:11
  • Then why not simply say "A entails B"? -- or is this for non-linguistic material? (For "entails" has a different meaning than "follows", connotative-wise for sure, for a rationale or line-of-argument, imo.) Note that for "implicature", one might also use "follows". But I'd think you'd want to keep "implicature" statements distinctly separate from "entailment" statements. The word "follows" probably isn't exact enough to use as a replacement for the meaning of "entail". – F.E. Mar 23 '14 at 8:18
  • The only problem with "A entails B" is that I am using it very often in the paper I am working on now (the paper is on mathematical logic). And I need some synonymous phrases. – Mad Hatter Mar 23 '14 at 8:43
  • I wouldn't use "entails" here. The dictionary definition of the word allows it, but the most usual meaning is that B is a component part of A. Housekeeping entails cooking, cleaning, laundry... Readers might mistake the meaning as "you can't have A without B". I don't see anything wrong with "from A there follows B", though it sounds a bit terse and inelegant in that compressed form. But when A and B are replaced by phrases denoting mathematical procedures, it will read smoothly enough. Could you not say, "From A, it follows that...", or "The logical consequence of A is..."? – Terpsichore Mar 23 '14 at 17:06

I would avoid this construction.

The problem with "From A, there follows B" is that there is being used as a sort of relative pronoun that already implies from whatever its antecedent is. If you think of a similar construction using the more common "there goes", you could not say, "Into the sky, there goes the airplane." You could, however, say, "There goes the airplane into the sky."

So while I can't cite a firm grammatical rule, I do think it's an awkward joining of two types of sentences or phrases that are better off used alone. You could say, as alternatives, "There follows B, from A" or, "A, and there follows B" or even, "A. There follows also B."

  • OK, I think you are right. But what about omitting "there" and writing "From A follows B"? Would this be correct? – Mad Hatter Mar 23 '14 at 8:40
  • 1
    No, it would have to be "From A, B follows" if B is a name, and "From A, it follows that B" if B is the statement of a proposition or theorem. – user2310967less Mar 24 '14 at 9:29

I think that B follows A from there sounds better.

else use the following:

From A, there follows B

  • I agree. But is "From A there follows B" grammatically correct? – Mad Hatter Mar 23 '14 at 8:02
  • I think that From A, there follows B is correct. – skm Mar 23 '14 at 8:05

In mathematics, especially logic, there is a useful expression meaning "when A is correct, B is also (or always) correct" and this is "B follows A", or, "from A follows B", or "supposing A is true, then B is true as well". It is highly technical,in no way it may imply that "B being true" means "A might be true". The expression mostly used in lectures is "B follows from A", given the Russian or Chinese or English origin of speakers, and all others following them.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.