because, as, since, for

[hyonji]

What is the difference between these conjuntion "because, as, since, for"?

Or do they mean the same?

For example,
Because she was badly injured, she couldn't walk.
As she was badly injured, she couldn't walk.
Since she was badly injured, she couldn't walk.
For she was badly injured, she couldn't walk.

can I say any of these sentence and do they sound correct to native speakers?

[Duncan Powrie]

"Because..." is the clearest signal that a reason is being given (meaning relations don't need to be so explicitly signposted, though: She was badly injured (and/so)...she couldn't walk...; She couldn't walk - (cos) she was badly injured" etc).

The "For..." example you have given, on the other hand, seems WRONG to me, but doubtless there are a few strange examples to be found in poetry or older styles of writing (that is, more context/written co-text might make its use clearer and make sense).

Obviously, "As..." and "Since..." can be used in similar ways to "Because..." above, but I suspect that the other uses of these words (e.g. in making comparisons, or as a preposition before time phrases, respectively) are the more frequent and/or "associated" ones (to native speakers) in speech at least.

[Stephen Jones]

They all have the same meaning, though 'because' is the only one that doesn't have another meaning.

'for' is the only one that cannot begin the sentence. If you use 'for' it, and its following subordinate clause, must come after the effect in the main clause.

She couldn't walk, for she was badly injured. Correct
For she was badly injured, she couldn't walk. Wrong

[Duncan Powrie]

Succinct, Stephen, succinct...I should take half a leaf out of your book! Are you sure that the "For..." sentence is absolutely wrong, though? I was imagining it following on from another sentence (perhaps in poetry of some kind), and in turn being followed by more...

[karma78]

I was fired because I got caught goofing off many times.
I was fired as I got caught goofing off many times.
I was fired since I got caught goofing off many times.
I was fired for I got caught goofing off many times.


are there any sentences that sounds awkward?

I've thought that people use "becasuse" when they want to put more emphasis on the reason,"as/since" when the reason is not so important and when the reason is know to both the speaker and the listener, and "for" when the speaker want to say the reason as a afterthought.

[lolwhites]

In your examples, for sounds awkward to me. Using for in this context sounds a bit archaic to me.

[LarryLatham]

Hi there, guys. I've been out of town (and out of touch) for a week or so, and seem to have missed quite a bit.

Stephen said:

They all have the same meaning...

Stephen, like you, I am generally a "lumper", in the sense that I like to find similarities, rather than differences, wherever I can in English. Goodness knows, any chance to simplify things is bound to be helpful, as long as the simplification is real and valid. But I tend to draw a line in front of such statements as you've made here. As Duncan points out, there may be certain contexts where differential use of these words as conjunctions in complex sentences could offer shades of meaning. Karma78 also seems to be onto something when he suggests that certain of them might be used when a user wishes to emphasize particular elements of his thoughts. Even lolwhites' comment that 'for' sounds awkward in some uses adds to the feeling that these words, while undoubtedly highly similar in meaning, are not identical. I've said this before, and I'll say it here again: It must be extremely unlikely that different words have identical meanings or uses. We should be careful not to lead people (students, or non-native speakers in particular) onto a slippery slope leading to confusion by suggesting that different words have the same meaning. If that were true, then how would speakers decide which to use? Native speakers seem to not labor in confusion when selecting between words with similar meanings. That leads me to believe that there are real, if sometimes slight, differences.

So, without getting too detailed here, I'd counsel a certain caution here in our reply to hyonji's original question. I'd be more comfortable if we said they are quite similar, and in many contexts could probably be interchanged without altering the pragmatic effect of the statement. But I'd hasten to add that in certain other contexts there may be sufficient differences in shade as to point strongly to the use of one as opposed to the others.

Larry Latham