Explanation
Coordination links syntactic units analysed as having equivalent structural status within the construction. This does not mean that every substitution or reversal is harmless: meaning, order and construction-specific restrictions can produce asymmetries. Coordination matters to originating contexts such as parataxis, hendiadys and gapping, but none can be diagnosed merely from the presence of two words or verbs. Semantic unity does not establish syntactic subordination, just as a verb sequence does not establish coordination. Analysis must separate form, function and possible omission through language-specific criteria.
Movement of thought
1. Delimit the candidate units. 2. Compare their syntactic functions. 3. Examine linking expressions and omissions. 4. Test reordering and expansion. 5. Describe the structure and its restrictions.
Scientific use case
Syntactic research can systematically compare distribution, omission possibilities and interpretation across coordinated structures.
Example
“Lea reads and Nils writes” coordinates clauses. “Lea buys bread and milk” instead contains a coordination of nominal expressions.
Counterexample
Two successive verbs are not automatically coordinated; they may form another kind of complex predicate construction.
Distinction
Distinguish coordination from subordination, parataxis as a broader mode of arrangement and semantic unity alone.
Effect on thought and perception
Coordination shows how several units may jointly occupy a syntactic position or form a larger structure.
Resonance
Several things become connected without becoming alike in every respect.
Provenance
Parallel source review reconciled 2026-10-07; human specialist review not claimed.
Cite this entry
Reich, Michael (Hrsg./ed.): „Coordination“. Atlas der Sprache, AT-NAV-G03-051. ATLAS 259, data model 1.6.0. https://atlasoflanguage.com/concept/AT-NAV-G03-051The address remains stable; editorial content may evolve. Editorial reading state: 2026-10-15. Include your access date for precise references.