And After That

• #2

If y'all

are

going to employ it, the comma is

essential

to avoid a garden-path judgement.

But I'd propose that then (no comma), afterward or afterward are more usual.

• #v

If you Google "after adverb" yous'll get lots of guidance on this. Information technology's certainly not a mistake, but its punctuation does need careful handling. Compare for case the famous schoolboy howler:

Charles I said "I go from a corruptible to an incorruptible Crown, where no disturbance can exist, no disturbance in the world" half an hour subsequently his head was cut off.

• #6

Information technology'due south not a change. It's been used this way throughout the history of English. The OED has several quotations in Onetime English, and then from Chaucer, Shakespeare, and many others up to the present twenty-four hours. It is less common, and y'all take to be careful its function tin can't be misinterpreted in the position information technology's in, but it's normal English.

• #8

If you Google "after adverb" you'll get lots of guidance on this. Information technology's certainly not a error, merely its punctuation does need conscientious handling. Compare for case the famous schoolboy howler:

Charles I said "I go from a corruptible to an incorruptible Crown, where no disturbance tin be, no disturbance in the world" half an hour after his caput was cut off.

Ok, such usage is absolutely clear for me.

My point is: I've ever thought (and been taught) you tin't employ 'after' without something that 'complements' information technology - a pronoun (that), a noun (lunch), a clause (eating luncheon). What I mean is that sentences:

After lunch they went out.
After that they went out.
Subsequently eating lunch they went out.
Afterwards (Subsequently/So) they went out.

are all correct, whereas:

They had lunch. After, they went out.

is a judgement which would exist considered erroneous, especially in writing.

That's what good dictionaries tell me, and Michael Swan'southward "Bible" of English language usage, and M. Vince, and M. Hewings...

Last edited: Jan 13, 2021

• #9

... I've e'er thought (and been taught) you can't use 'after' without something that 'complements' it...

You were taught wrong, that's all. Otherwise, how can yous explain sentences like "Jack fell down and broke his crown, and Jill came tumbling after" or "They all lived happily always after"? These examples are long-established and (coming every bit it does at the very end of the sentence) after clearly has no complement.

The merely real difficulty arises when after is in the middle of a sentence, and that's when careful punctuation comes to your aid.

• #11

You posted this thread today at 12:20. Twelve minutes after , I replied that other words are more usual. Soon after , three other people likewise responded...

• #13

Historical references notwithstanding, the use of "afterward" as an adverb rather than a preposition seems to have gone largely out of favour in modern-day Be, but less so in AE. Fifty-fifty in Keith's examples in #11, there is no fashion I would employ "after"; I would use "later on" instead. It feels even worse when "subsequently" comes on its own, unqualified past things like"twelve minutes" or "soon".

While the OP's volume is perhaps going a lilliputian also far in calling the usage an "mistake", I agree with information technology as a recommendation to avert it.

• #17

- Soon

after

afterward, 3 other people also responded...

-

Soon after

Later, three other people too responded...

Sorry, my mistake. I was focusing on the first "subsequently" and overlooked that the second one was unlike.
I would not, of course, use "shortly later" for that one, but "soon laterwards", or mayhap "soon after that".
My point stands that I would not use "shortly after".

• #xix

There'southward no need. It's just a preference. I feel a kind of intuitive revulsion confronting using later as an adverb. This is weaker when the word is adorned as in #11 than when it's by itself, but all the same potent enough to brand me prefer one of the alternatives that sound better to me.

• #20

... I feel a kind of intuitive revulsion against using after as an adverb...

Edinburgher, the land of your nervous system isn't a terribly good indicator of whether the usage is correct or not! "Later on" is

possible

standing lone, though non recommended. In conjunction with "soon" it's perfectly good.

boganfento1981.blogspot.com

Source: https://forum.wordreference.com/threads/after-vs-after-that.3782573/