0

This question already has an answer here:

For example, in the sentence:

This is because he was smart, and he worked hard, and so he was very rich.

Is this structure correct? If not, how can the sentence be corrected?

marked as duplicate by Scott, Skooba, jimm101, Nigel J, tchrist Mar 31 '18 at 20:23

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • Well, it's illogical, since his success (apparently) didn't involve stock market manipulation, but it's grammatically correct. – Hot Licks Dec 25 '15 at 21:35
  • 2
    What is because he was smart and worked hard? Is he rich because of these things? – StoneyB Dec 25 '15 at 21:36
  • It's a little clunky; try rearranging: "He was very rich because he was smart and he worked hard." – Gus Dec 25 '15 at 21:40
  • can ignore the meaning. just want to know whether the structure "this is because...and so..." is correct or not? because i am trying to edit the translation, and i should keep the source text as it is if it is correct. – Victoria Dec 25 '15 at 21:52
  • 1
    "Since he was smart and worked hard he was very rich." or "He was smart and he worked hard, so he was very rich." are both significantly less wordy. – The Nate Dec 25 '15 at 23:35
2

It might or might not be grammatically correct (per Hot Licks' comment) but it seems clunky and redundant to me.

This is because he was smart, and he worked hard, and so he was very rich.

In this particular sentence, "This is because" should refer to some described "this" that comes before this sentence. For example,

He is very rich. This is because he was smart and worked hard.

That way, "this" has a logical reference (it refers to "being rich") and "because he was..." etc. explains why he is rich.

"And so" indicates the result of his working hard and being smart. "He was very rich because he was smart and worked hard" means exactly the same thing as "He was smart and worked hard, and so he was very rich."

The best way to edit this sentence and keep close to its current form would be to remove "This is because" (since it works best with a reference in a previous sentence), leaving you with

He was smart, and he worked hard, and so he was very rich.

Edit: Hot Licks has pointed out that this answer changes depending on what the preceding sentence is. As a standalone sentence, the structure is extremely awkward. But it could be acceptable in context.

  • 1
    You have no idea what the context is. If the preceding sentence is "He was powerful and owned half of the politicians in the state." then it makes perfect sense the way it is. – Hot Licks Dec 25 '15 at 22:26
  • But the absence of the context is the author's fault. – Artyom Lugovoy Dec 25 '15 at 22:34
  • Yeah, but it is pretty awkward on its own. I just tried to give something of an answer based on what limited information was given in the question. Thank you for noting the potential effect of context, and I've edited something in about that. (I still think it's awk even with the preceding sentence you gave as an example.) – Yee-Lum Dec 25 '15 at 22:41
  • thank you for your answer. according to the context, the structure is OK. thanks again!! – Victoria Dec 26 '15 at 1:47
-1

The answer to your question is YES, it is correct. It is just correct. Anything more is unsolicited advice. Like this:

This (subject) is (verb, see Descartes). That is an independent clause.
This is because
There are two possibilities: 1. He was smart and worked hard, so he was rich. Because of this, this. 2. He was smart. Because of this, this. Also, he worked hard, and so he was very rich.
In other words, the coordinating conjunction "and" may join two reasons, or it may join a reason with an independent clause.

Either way, "This is," is already a sentence. That is the main clause of the sentence.

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