In last week’s column, we looked at how inverted sentences allow us to abandon the normal subject-verb-complement (S-V/C) sequence so we can deliver the verb or its complement wherever we feel it can do its work best. We also observed that sentences structured this way could serve as powerful tools for emphasizing and for heightening feeling.
These lines from Shakespeare’s “Sonnet XVIII,” for instance, achieve these goals through C-S-V inversion:
“Sometimes too hot the eye of heaven shines,
And often is his gold complexion dimm’d.” Now here’s that same idea in the normal S-V/C pattern:
The eye of heaven shines too hot sometimes,
and its gold complexion is dimmed often.
The first version, no doubt, is memorable poetry; the second, an immediately forgettable declarative sentence.
One criticism against inverted sentences, of course, is that they can give prose a strained literary or poetic tone that’s unsuitable for day-to-day communication. Indeed, talk like Shakespeare when arguing your case to a boss or prospective employer and you can be sure of being promptly shown the door! From the practical standpoint, though, inverted sentences can be very effective transitional devices beyond the sentence level. They can provide a seamless, effortless flow of ideas as we develop an exposition or discourse from one sentence to the next.
Consider the role the inverted sentences play in the following exposition:
That morning, Amelia did just anything she wanted in class. She sang and whistled. Three times she darted out of the room on a
whim. She booed a reciting classmate. Twice she rudely interrupted her teacher. At no time did she relent in her impertinence or
apologize for her misdeeds. Worse, she felt no guilt at all. Rarely had she behaved this way, and it disturbed her to realize only
the next morning that she had gravely offended her teacher.
Now see what happens when we render the inverted sentences above in the normal S-V/C pattern:
Amelia did just anything she wanted in class that morning. She sang and whistled. She darted out of the room three times on a
whim. She booed a reciting classmate. She rudely interrupted her teacher twice. She did not relent in her impertinence and did not
apologize for her misdeeds at any time. She felt no guilt at all, which was worse. She had rarely behaved this way, and she found
it disturbing to realize only the next morning that she had gravely offended her teacher.
What seems to have happened to the exposition when all its inverted sentences—and also its sentences with an adverbial phrase in front—were put in the normal sentence pattern? Well, for one, the sense of drama and tension is largely gone. For another, the exposition now feels craggy, disjointed. And like a slow-moving train it now moves on its all-too-predictable tracks, neither swerving nor taking a bump, intent to simply reach its final destination.
When we compare the two passages above closely, it becomes clear how powerfully this inverted C-V-S sentence effects a transition: “At no time did she relent in her impertinence and apologize for her misdeeds.” It neatly sums up the consistency of Amelia’s erratic behavior as described in the preceding five sentences (“At no time did she relent in her impertinence”), while smoothly shifting the exposition to what was expected of her after behaving so badly (“apologize for her misdeeds”). The normal-pattern version makes no such transition at all and just plods on.
Similarly, the second inverted C-V-S sentence smoothly makes a transition from the exposition’s narrative mode to interpretative: “Rarely had she behaved this way, and it disturbed her to realize only the next morning that she had gravely offended her teacher.” In its normal S-V/C version (“She had rarely behaved this way, and she found it disturbing...”), the simple declarative mode is pursued without letup. The end result: a flat exposition with no highs and lows whatsoever.
Now, notice that our two sample inverted sentences begin with the negative phrases
“at no time” and
“rarely,” respectively. These phrases belong to the class of negative and restrictive adverbs that work so well in starting off inverted sentences doing transitional work. Other common adverbs in this class are
“only,” “never,” “hardly,” and
“little,” as in these inverted sentences: “
Only when I cry does the pain come back.” “
Never have I seen such a ravishingly beautiful woman.”
Comparative and duration adverbs like
“equally,” “marginally,” and
“simultaneously” likewise work well as transitionals in inverted sentences like this two: “
Equally important to the job is a mastery of English.” “
Marginally useful to our enterprise was the contribution of our Tokyo subsidiary.”
Whatever adverbial expressions lead them off, however, inverted sentences are rarely stand-alone affairs. And they work best as welcome breaks from a procession of normal-pattern sentences, providing functional transitions that make prose much smoother and more pleasing to read.
This essay, which first appeared in my weekly column “English Plain and Simple” in The Manila Times
, subsequently became Chapter 73 of my book Giving Your English the Winning Edge
, ©2009 by the Manila Times Publishing Corp. All rights reserved.Read this essay and listen to its voice recording in The Manila Times
:Inverted sentences as transitional devicesNext week:
Even more pragmatic uses of inversion (February 20, 2025)
Visit Jose Carillo’s English Forum, http://josecarilloforum.com. You can follow me on Facebook and X (Twitter) and e-mail me at j8carillo@yahoo.com.
