In words like forward, backward or toward, the -ward root is related to the Latin vertere and versus (to turn) and goes as far as Sanskrit (vartate ).

So this root has a rich history and has appeared in various altered forms in numerous Indo-European languages.

In German we have wu00e4rts which has the s: ru00fcckwu00e4rts (backward(s)) and vorwu00e4rts (forward(s)).

Apparently the Old English root was either -weard or -weardes. In Ancient Egypt the word “os” means one form as opposed to one without es. This is my first version of Brits -wards whereas contemporary Americanism simply does not hold water since both versions trace back to respective Old English forms.

In any case, there is no need to have any qualms about being put in a ward or about left it off.

In words like forward, backward or toward, the -ward root is related to the Latin vertere and versus (to turn) and goes as far as Sanskrit (vartate ).

So this root has a rich history and has appeared in various altered forms in numerous Indo-European languages.

In German we have wu00e4rts which has the s: ru00fcckwu00e4rts (backward(s)) and vorwu00e4rts (forward(s)).

Apparently the Old English root was either -weard or -weardes. In Ancient Egypt the word “os” means one form as opposed to one without es. This is my first version of Brits -wards whereas contemporary Americanism simply does not hold water since both versions trace back to respective Old English forms.

In any case, there is no need to have any qualms about being put in a ward or about left it off.

In words like forward, backward or toward, the -ward root is related to the Latin vertere and versus (to turn) and goes as far as Sanskrit (vartate ).

So this root has a rich history and has appeared in various altered forms in numerous Indo-European languages.

In German we have wu00e4rts which has the s: ru00fcckwu00e4rts (backward(s)) and vorwu00e4rts (forward(s)).

Apparently the Old English root was either -weard or -weardes. In Ancient Egypt the word “os” means one form as opposed to one without es. This is my first version of Brits -wards whereas contemporary Americanism simply does not hold water since both versions trace back to respective Old English forms.

In any case, there is no need to have any qualms about being put in a ward or about left it off.

In words like forward, backward or toward, the -ward root is related to the Latin vertere and versus (to turn) and goes as far as Sanskrit (vartate ).

So this root has a rich history and has appeared in various altered forms in numerous Indo-European languages.

In German we have wu00e4rts which has the s: ru00fcckwu00e4rts (backward(s)) and vorwu00e4rts (forward(s)).

Apparently the Old English root was either -weard or -weardes. In Ancient Egypt the word “os” means one form as opposed to one without es. This is my first version of Brits -wards whereas contemporary Americanism simply does not hold water since both versions trace back to respective Old English forms.

In any case, there is no need to have any qualms about being put in a ward or about left it off.

In words like forward, backward or toward, the -ward root is related to the Latin vertere and versus (to turn) and goes as far as Sanskrit (vartate ).

So this root has a rich history and has appeared in various altered forms in numerous Indo-European languages.

In German we have wu00e4rts which has the s: ru00fcckwu00e4rts (backward(s)) and vorwu00e4rts (forward(s)).

Apparently the Old English root was either -weard or -weardes. In Ancient Egypt the word “os” means one form as opposed to one without es. This is my first version of Brits -wards whereas contemporary Americanism simply does not hold water since both versions trace back to respective Old English forms.

In any case, there is no need to have any qualms about being put in a ward or about left it off.

In words like forward, backward or toward, the -ward root is related to the Latin vertere and versus (to turn) and goes as far as Sanskrit (vartate ).

So this root has a rich history and has appeared in various altered forms in numerous Indo-European languages.

In German we have wu00e4rts which has the s: ru00fcckwu00e4rts (backward(s)) and vorwu00e4rts (forward(s)).

Apparently the Old English root was either -weard or -weardes. In Ancient Egypt the word “os” means one form as opposed to one without es. This is my first version of Brits -wards whereas contemporary Americanism simply does not hold water since both versions trace back to respective Old English forms.

In any case, there is no need to have any qualms about being put in a ward or about left it off.

In words like forward, backward or toward, the -ward root is related to the Latin vertere and versus (to turn) and goes as far as Sanskrit (vartate ).

So this root has a rich history and has appeared in various altered forms in numerous Indo-European languages.

In German we have wu00e4rts which has the s: ru00fcckwu00e4rts (backward(s)) and vorwu00e4rts (forward(s)).

Apparently the Old English root was either -weard or -weardes. In Ancient Egypt the word “os” means one form as opposed to one without es. This is my first version of Brits -wards whereas contemporary Americanism simply does not hold water since both versions trace back to respective Old English forms.

In any case, there is no need to have any qualms about being put in a ward or about left it off.

In words like forward, backward or toward, the -ward root is related to the Latin vertere and versus (to turn) and goes as far as Sanskrit (vartate ).

So this root has a rich history and has appeared in various altered forms in numerous Indo-European languages.

In German we have wu00e4rts which has the s: ru00fcckwu00e4rts (backward(s)) and vorwu00e4rts (forward(s)).

Apparently the Old English root was either -weard or -weardes. In Ancient Egypt the word “os” means one form as opposed to one without es. This is my first version of Brits -wards whereas contemporary Americanism simply does not hold water since both versions trace back to respective Old English forms.

In any case, there is no need to have any qualms about being put in a ward or about left it off.

In words like forward, backward or toward, the -ward root is related to the Latin vertere and versus (to turn) and goes as far as Sanskrit (vartate ).

So this root has a rich history and has appeared in various altered forms in numerous Indo-European languages.

In German we have wu00e4rts which has the s: ru00fcckwu00e4rts (backward(s)) and vorwu00e4rts (forward(s)).

Apparently the Old English root was either -weard or -weardes. In Ancient Egypt the word “os” means one form as opposed to one without es. This is my first version of Brits -wards whereas contemporary Americanism simply does not hold water since both versions trace back to respective Old English forms.

In any case, there is no need to have any qualms about being put in a ward or about left it off.

I would argue that “but”, when it applies to a clause, cannot be anywhere else than at the start of a clause. Is it a form of “clause-initial particles” or something like that?

Is ‘but’ at the very beginning of a sentence? Does a sentence start with “but” have any value if it’s added to a brand new conversation context? Why don’t all the suggestions for the following paragraph make sense?

*In

writing, I usually want to avoid start with “but”, let alone a book or paper.

Why we write or not start with but?

And the sandwich wasn’t there.

I looked in the

fridge but the sandwich wasn’t there: exactly what I deserved, you know?

Is there no spoken difference? When readers learn that language, they will write, never tell it to

them.