UW–MADISON (HTTP://WWW.WISC.

EDU)

THE WRITING CENTER Search

(HTTPS://WRITING.WISC.EDU/)
University of Wisconsin – Madison
(https://writing.wisc.edu/)

MENU

HOME (HTTPS://WRITING.WISC.EDU) / UW-MADISON WRITER’S HANDBOOK (HTTPS://WRITING.WISC.EDU/HANDBOOK/) /

IMPROVING YOUR WRITING STYLE (HTTPS://WRITING.WISC.EDU/HANDBOOK/STYLE/) /

CONNECTING IDEAS THROUGH TRANSITIONS

CONNECTING IDEAS THROUGH

TRANSITIONS

WRITING THAT ESTABLISHES

RELATIONSHIPS AND
CONNECTIONS BETWEEN (https://writing.wiscw
IDEAS eb.wisc.edu/handbook
/)
Introduction
Common Kinds of Relationships Writers
Establish between Ideas IMPROVING
Cohesion
YOUR
Coherence
Transition Words and Phrases
WRITING
STYLE
(HTTPS://WR
ITING.WISC
INTRODUCTION
According to poet and science writer Diane WEB.WISC.E
DU/HANDBO
Ackerman, “one of the brain’s deepest needs [is] to
fill the world with pathways and our lives with a
design.” We naturally look for how things are OK/STYLE/)
related. In writing, this means that readers tend to
assume that two side-by-side sentences or adjacent
paragraphs relate to each other. If the pathways and Clear, Concise
design of your writing aren’t clear to readers,
+ Sentences
readers will either get confused or frustrated or try
Transitional
to mistakenly intuit their own connections. Both
+ Words and
responses can be disastrous. Phrases

Good writing provides clear passages through all of

your ideas so that readers don’t get lost or start to
blaze their own conceptual trail. These connections
between ideas occur at the sentence, paragraph,
section, and (for longer works) even chapter level.
As a writer, it is your responsibility to make sure
that your readers follow this progression, that they
understand how you arrive at your various ideas and
how those ideas relate to each other. In this page, we
explore how to make your connections between
ideas understandable by using common relationship
categories to compose sentences that are cohesive,
paragraphs that are coherent, and transitions that
clearly order and introduce ideas.

COMMON KINDS OF
RELATIONSHIPS WRITERS
ESTABLISH BETWEEN IDEAS
Writers are always working to establish clear
relationships between and within all of their ideas.
Consider how Derek Thompson moves naturally
between one concept to another in this short
passage from his The Atlantic feature about the
future of jobs entitled “A World Without Work”:

[1] One common objection to the idea that

technology will permanently displace huge
numbers of workers is that new gadgets, like
self-checkout kiosks at drugstores, have failed
to fully displace their human counterparts,
like cashiers. [2] But employers typically take
years to embrace new machines at the
expense of workers. [3] The robotics
revolution began in factories in the 1960s and
’70s, but manufacturing employment kept
rising until 1980, and then collapsed during
the subsequent recessions.

In the first sentence, Thompson begins with an idea

that is familiar to readers at three different levels.
The argument that machines haven’t replaced all
retail employees and therefore won’t do so in the
future is common to anyone who has thought much
about workplace technology. This idea is also
specifically familiar to the individuals who have
been reading Thompson’s article. Finally, Thompson
makes this idea even more familiar by connecting it
to an example that his readers are familiar with: the
effects of self-checkout kiosks. In his second
sentence, Thompson uses the transition word “but”
to establish a contrastive relationship; what he is
about to say in some way opposes what he just said.
He concludes this passage with a sentence providing
chronologically organized evidence for the idea he
raised through that contrast. In this example, he
very quickly leads us from the 1960s to the late 20th
century and is able to cover a lot of ground clearly
because he starts with happened earlier and
concludes with what has happened more recently.

In just these three sentences, we can see Thompson

establishing different kinds of relationships between
concepts. He is:

guiding us from familiar ideas into unfamiliar

ones,

comparing two unlike things,

providing examples for his claims, and

presenting information chronologically.

Familiarity, contrast, example, and chronology are

four common ways that topics can be related, but
there are several others. The following lists
identifies key relationships that we tend to find
naturally in the world around us when we ask
questions like, “Why did that happen?” and, “How
do these two things fit together?” If you can
obviously situate any your ideas within these well-
known structures, then readers will be able to more
quickly understand the connections you are
establishing between your ideas. In the list that
follows we identify these common relationship
categories, explain them, and provide examples of
sentences that establish these kinds of relationships.
(All off these sample sentences are about research in
Lake Mendota—the body of water just north of the
UW-Madison campus.)

FAMILIARITY–CONNECTING WHAT
READERS KNOW TO WHAT THEY
DON’T KNOWN.
Learning often involves drawing from existing
knowledge in order develop new knowledge. As
a result, this is one of the most important
relationships you can establish in your writing.
Start with what your readers know (either
because you can assume a common knowledge
or because you’ve already told them about this
earlier in your paper or even in the preceding
sentence) in order to then take them to
something they don’t know.

Example: When you dive into a lake for

a quick swim, you’re actually entering a
diverse limnology laboratory—the
research field for the ecologists who study
inland waters.

CAUSATION–CONNECTING THE
INSTIGATOR(S) TO THE
CONSEQUENCE(S)
We are very familiar with thinking about ideas
and processes in relationship to cause and effect.
You can use the prevalence of this relationship
 to your advantage by relating your ideas to
causation.

Example: In the mid-19th century, the

white sand beaches that used to line Lake
Mendota were engulfed by the additional
four feet of water that the Tenney Locks
brought into the lake (Van Eyck).

CHRONOLOGY–CONNECTING WHAT
ISSUES IN REGARD TO WHEN THEY
OCCUR.
This is particularly useful if you are describing a
sequence of events or the steps of a process.

Example: In 1882, E.A. Birge was

gathering data about the prevalence of
blue-green algae in Lake Mendota (Van
Eyck). By 1897, he was publishing about
plankton (Birge). Even when he became
president of UW-Madison several years
later, his interest in freshwater lakes
never waned (“Past presidents and
chancellors”).

COMBINATIONS

LISTS–CONNECTING NUMEROUS ELEMENTS.

You can think of this as a “this + this + this”
model. You are saying that a collection of
concepts or elements contribute equally or
 simultaneously to something. Within lists,
it’s still important that you are being
strategic about which elements you are
identifying, describing, or analyzing first,
second, and third.

Example: Across its studied history,

Lake Mendota has been negatively
affected by blue-green algae,
Eurasian milfoil, spiny water fleas,
and zebra mussels, among others
(Van Enyck).

PART/WHOLE—CONNECTING NUMEROUS
ELEMENTS THAT MAKE UP SOMETHING
BIGGER.
This is a “this + this + this = that” model.
You are showing how discrete elements form
something else through their connections.

Example: Across generations, the

damage Lake Mendota has sustained
as a result of the unnaturally prolific
prevalence of blue-green algae,
Eurasian milfoil, spiny water fleas,
and zebra mussels has irreparably
altered these waters.

CONTRAST–CONNECTING TWO
THINGS BY FOCUSING ON THEIR
DIFFERENCES.
 This establishes a relationship of dis-similarity.
It helps readers understand what something is
by comparing it with something that it is not.

Example: But whereas boosting the

population of walleye and northern perch
in Lake Mendota effectively reduced the
prevalence of Eurasian milfoil, scientists
haven’t been able to develop a plan to
respond to the damaging spiny water
fleas (Van Eyck).

EXAMPLE–CONNECTING A GENERAL
IDEA TO A PARTICULAR INSTANCE OF
THIS IDEA.
Arguments are made more understandable and
persuasive when you develop your overall claims
in relationship to specific evidence that verifies
or exemplifies those claims. Which examples
will be the most persuasive (e.g., statistical data,
historical precedent, anecdotes, etc.) will depend
on the knowledge, interests, disposition, and
expectations of your reader.

Example: “These new challenges

demand new solutions, some behavioral
(such as cleaning boats from lake to lake)
and some research-driven (for example,
identifying a natural predator for the
invasive species)” (Van Eyck).
IMPORTANCE–CONNECTING WHAT IS
CRITICAL TO WHAT IS MORE
INCONSEQUENTIAL.
This can also be thought of as connecting what is
big to what is small. You may also choose to
reverse these relationships by starting with what
matters least or what is smallest and building to
what is the most important or what is the most
prominent. Just make sure that you are helping
your reader understand which end of the
spectrum you are starting with.

Example: Boaters were inconvenienced

by the Eurasian milfoil clogging their
propellers, but the plants’ real harm was
dealt to the lake’s native flora and,
consequently, its fish (Van Eyck).

LOCATION–CONNECTING ELEMENTS
ACCORDING TO WHERE THEY ARE
PLACED IN RELATIONSHIP TO EACH
OTHER.
Even if you aren’t writing about geographical
entities, you can still clarify how various ideas
are positioned in relationship to each other.

Example: Whether or not the lake is

pretty is peripheral to the issue of whether
or not its natural ecosystems are in
balance.
SIMILARITY–CONNECTING TWO
THINGS BY SUGGESTING THAT THEY
ARE IN SOME WAY ALIKE.
This highlights commonalities to show readers
how elements or ideas are serving the same
function.

Example: Just as invasive water flora

(i.e., Eurasian milfoil) disrupted Lake
Mendota’s ecosystem in the 1970s, in 2009
scientists discovered that the lake was
being damaged by invasive water fauna
(i.e., spiny water fleas) (Van Eyck).

While the examples provided above for each of these

relationships is a sentence or short series of
sentences where relationships are established
through sequencing and transition words, you
should also develop these kinds of common
connections between ideas on a large scale through
grammatical parallelism, paragraph placement, and
your progression from one section to another.

Also, as can be seen in these examples, sometimes

multiple different relationships are functioning
simultaneously. For instance, consider again the
example for the “Importance” item:
 Example: Boaters were inconvenienced by
the Eurasian milfoil clogging their propellers,
but the plants’ real harm was dealt to the
lake’s native flora and, consequently, its fish
(Van Eyck).

The ideas in this sentence work within the following

relationship categories:

Importance—Connecting what is more

inconsequential (i.e., how boaters are bothered
by Eurasian milfoil) to what is most critical
(i.e., how the lake’s ecosystem is disrupted by
Eurasian milfoil),

Contrast—Connecting two things (i.e., boaters’

concerns and the lake’s wellbeing) by focusing
on their differences,

Causation—Connecting an instigator (i.e.,

Eurasian milfoil) to consequences (i.e., native
plants’ destruction and, secondarily, the native
animals’ destruction).

This collection of interwoven relational connections

doesn’t mean that these ideas are jumbled; this is
just an indication of how relationships can become
interconnected.

Since clearly working within these relationship

categories can be useful for organizing your key
concepts as well as guiding readers through the
structure of entire papers or particular paragraphs
as well as sentences, different kinds of connections
can be similarly layered across the whole structure
of a paper. For example, if you are composing an
argument about why it’s so hard for meteorologists
to pin-point the severity and location of tornadoes,
the overarching relationship of your ideas might be
part/whole because you’re interested in how a range
of factors contribute to a difficult prediction process.
However, within your paragraphs, you might have to
use chronological and causation relationships to
describe the physical processes by which tornadoes
are formed. And from sentence to sentence, you’ll
need to make sure that you are starting with what’s
familiar to your readers before moving into what’s
new.

COHESION
Joseph Williams and Joseph Bizup, in their
handbook Style: Lessons in Clarity and Grace,
identify the process of moving from what is known
to what is unknown as “cohesion.” “Sentences are
cohesive,” they write, “when the last few words of
one sentence set up the information that appears in
the first few words of the next” (67). They relate this
careful sequencing to the issue of “flow”—readers
find that ideas follow each other naturally when one
sentence begins where the previous sentence left off.

Consider another annotated example passage from

Derek Thompson’s economic analysis of the effects
of automation and technology on jobs. This
paragraph comes after one about how horses (once
primary forces for industrial production) were made
obsolete by transportation technology.

[1] Humans can do much more than trot,

carry, and pull. [2] But the skills required in
most offices hardly elicit our full range of
intelligence. [3] Most jobs are still boring,
repetitive, and easily learned. [4] The most-
common occupations in the United States are
retail salesperson, cashier, food and beverage
server, and office clerk. [5] Together, these
four jobs employ 15.4 million people—nearly
10 percent of the labor force, or more workers
than there are in Texas and Massachusetts
combined. [6] Each is highly susceptible to
automation, according to the Oxford study.

Thompson’s most obvious application of Williams

and Bizup’s concept of cohesion happens at the end
sentence 4 and the beginning of sentence 5 where he
first lists four professions (salesperson, cashier,
server, and clerk) then begins the next sentence
with, “these four jobs.”

But even on a conceptual level, Thompson is

continuously moving from old information to new
information. Consider this analysis of the
conceptual shifts within each of these six sentences
where Thompson’s ideas have been stripped down
and his key concepts have been highlighted in
different colors:
 [1] Humans have more skills than horses. [2]
Humans’ full range of skills aren’t always
utilized by many office jobs. [3] Many jobs
don’t push us to our full potential. [4] Here
are the most common jobs. [5] These jobs
employ many people. [6] These jobs could be
eliminated through automation.

Thompson begins this paragraph by connecting a

new idea (i.e., humans’ present occupational
relationship to technology) to an old idea from the
previous paragraph (i.e., horse’s past relationship to
technology). After introducing the human subject,
he then uses it to bring in his next topic: workplace
skills. Then, through skills he brings in the issue of
jobs, and jobs eventually lead him to the issue of
automation. This sequence holds together like a line
of conceptual dominoes.

Connecting new ideas to old is a practice that you

should implement across sentences, paragraphs,
and even whole sections of your writing. However,
be careful. If this practice becomes heavy-
handed or overdone, your writing can
become patronizing to your readers. Make
sure that you are clearly and comprehensively
connecting ideas and not just sequencing subjects.
COHERENCE
In Style: Lessons in Clarity and Grace, Joseph
Williams and Joseph Bizup also write about the
importance of coherence. While “cohesion” and
“coherence” sound similar, they are two different
things. “Cohesion” is about ideas that connect to
each other “the way two pieces of a jigsaw puzzle
do,” whereas “coherence” “is when all the sentences
in a piece of writing add up to a larger whole” (69).
Sometimes this is also called “unity.” Coherence is
achieved when the things you are writing about all
clearly contribute to the same overarching topic. For
example, let’s return to the domino example from
above. The movement from humans to skills to jobs
to automation works because Thompson’s larger
article establishes a thematic connection between all
of these topics: work changes in response to
technological developments. Thompson is even able
to start this paragraph with an otherwise
unexpected reference to horses because in the
previous paragraph he has shown his readers how
horses also relate to this theme of work changing in
response to technological development. Within your
writing, it’s important to make sure that all of your
smaller ideas are related to and pointed towards the
same goal.

Williams and Bizup suggest one way of making sure

that your writing is coherent or unified is to pay
attention to what each of your sentences is about—
its subject (the noun or pronoun that guides a
sentence) and topic (the idea that is the focus of that
sentence). In most sentences, your subject and topic
should be the same thing. Also, most of the time
your topic should be short and direct, and each
paragraph should be primarily dedicated to one
topic. As an example, consider again this paragraph
from the Thompson article about human skills, jobs,
and automation. The subjects/topics of each
sentence have been highlighted.

1] Humans can do much more than trot,

carry, and pull. [2] But the skills required in
most offices hardly elicit our full range of
intelligence. [3] Most jobs are still boring,
repetitive, and easily learned. [4] The most-
common occupations in the United States are
retail salesperson, cashier, food and beverage
server, and office clerk. [5] Together, these
four jobs employ 15.4 million people—nearly
10 percent of the labor force, or more workers
than there are in Texas and Massachusetts
combined. [6] Each is highly susceptible to
automation, according to the Oxford study.

Note that after setting up this paragraph in a way

that connects back to the previous paragraph’s focus
on horses, Thompson settles into the issue of jobs as
his clear and primary focus. The final four sentences
have some version of “jobs” as their subject and
topic. This consistency allows him to develop
coherent ideas about this one issue.

For more information about writing intentionally

structured and unified paragraphs, check out our
resource on paragraphing. Additionally, if you are
trying to discern whether or not your paragraphs are
functioning coherently across your entire paper, we
recommend the practice of reverse outlining. You
can find out more about this technique here.

TRANSITION WORDS AND

PHRASES
The best way to clearly communicate the logical
pathways that connect your ideas is to make sure
that you move smoothly from old information to
new information (cohesion) and that your readers
always understand how your primary topics
contribute to the big picture of your overall
argument (coherence). While we’ve considered ways
that whole sentences and paragraphs can do this
work, sometimes even individual words can help
you establish clear, cohesive, and coherent
relationships between your ideas. In writing these
are often called “transition words.”

The following is a list of useful transition words and

phrases. Following the list of common relationship
categories provided above, these words are
organized according to the kinds of relationships
they frequently develop. Of course, establishing
clear relationships between ideas requires much
more than just dropping one of these into the start
of a sentence, but used sparingly and carefully based
on the logical associations they establish, these
words can provide usefully obvious indications to
your readers of the kind of connections you are
trying to develop between your ideas.

Causation–Connecting instigator(s) to
consequence(s).

accordingly consequently since

as a result for that therefore
and so reason thus
because hence
on account of

Chronology–Connecting what issues in regard to

when they occur.

after later soon

afterwards never subsequently
always next then
at length now this time
during once until now
earlier simultaneously when
following so far whenever
immediately sometimes while
in the
meantime

Combinations
Lists–Connecting numerous events.
Part/Whole–Connecting numerous elements that
make up something bigger.

additionally finally last, lastly

again first, firstly moreover
also further next
and, or, not furthermore second,
as a result in addition secondly, etc.
besides in the first too
even more place
in the second
place

Contrast–Connecting two things by focusing on

their differences.

after all however on the

although in contrast contrary
and yet nevertheless on the other
at the same nonetheless hand
time notwithstandingotherwise
but though
yet

Example–Connecting a general idea to a particular

instance of this idea.

as an for example to
illustration for instance demonstrate
e.g., (from a specifically to illustrate
Latin that is
abbreviation
for “for
example”)

Importance–Connecting what is critical to what is

more inconsequential.

chiefly foundationally of less

critically most importance
importantly primarily

Location–Connecting elements according to where

they are placed in relationship to each other.

above centrally opposite to

adjacent to here peripherally
below nearby there
beyond neighboring wherever
on

Similarity–Connecting to things by suggesting

that they are in some way alike.

by the same in similar likewise

token fashion wherever
in like here
manner in the same
way
Other kinds of transitional words and
phrases
Clarification

i.e., (from a that is to put it

Latin that is to say another way
abbreviation to clarify to rephrase it
for “that is”) to explain
in other
words

Concession

granted naturally to be sure

it is true of course

Conclusion

finally in conclusion to conclude

lastly in the end

Intensification

in fact of course undoubtedly

indeed surely without doubt
no to repeat yes

Purpose
for this so that to this end
purpose to that end
in order that

Summary

in brief in summary to sum up

in sum in short to summarize

WORKS CITED
Ackerman, Diane. “I Sing the Body’s Pattern
Recognition Machine.” The New York Times,
15 June 2004.
https://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/15/science/essay-
i-sing-the-body-s-pattern-recognition-
machine.html
(https://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/15/scie
nce/essay-i-sing-the-body-s-pattern-
recognition-machine.html). Accessed 6 June
2018.

Birge, Edward Asahel. Plankton Studies on Lake

Mendota. Harvard University Library of the
Museum of Comparative Zoolog., 1897.

“Past presidents and chancellors.” Office of the

Chancellor, University of Wisconsin-Madison,
2016. https://chancellor.wisc.edu/past-
 presidents-and-chancellors/
(https://chancellor.wisc.edu/past-presidents-
and-chancellors/). Accessed 16 June 2018.

Thompson, Derek. “A World Without Work.” The

Atlantic, July/August 2015,
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/07/world-
without-work/395294/. Accessed 14 June
2018.

Van Eyck, Masarah. “Lake Mendota: a scientific

biography.” L&S News, College of Letters and
Sciences University of Wisconsin-Madison, 29
Aug. 2016. http://ls.wisc.edu/news/lake-
mendota-a-scientific-biography
(http://ls.wisc.edu/news/lake-mendota-a-
scientific-biography). Accessed 15 June 2018.

Williams, Joseph M. and Joseph Bizup. Style:

Lessons in Clarity and Grace. 12th ed.,
Pearson, 2017.
 (http://www.wisc.edu)

CONTACT US

Writing Center
6171 Helen C White Hall
600 North Park Street, Madison, WI 53706
Email: wcenter@writing.wisc.edu (mailto:wcenter@writing.wisc.edu)
Phone: 608-263-1992 (tel:608-263-1992)

(http://www.facebook.com/pages/UW-Madison-Writing-
Center/145856925471700)
(http://twitter.com/uwwritingcenter)
(https://www.instagram.com/uwmadisonwritingcenter/)

Feedback, questions or accessibility issues: wcenter@writing.wisc.edu (mailto:wcenter@writing.wisc.edu).

This site was built using the UW Theme (https://uwtheme.wordpress.wisc.edu/). © 2019 Board of Regents of the
University of Wisconsin System. (http://www.wisconsin.edu)