{"id":3545,"date":"2026-10-23T12:10:47","date_gmt":"2026-10-23T04:10:47","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.carenage-moto.com\/blog\/?p=3545"},"modified":"2026-10-23T12:10:47","modified_gmt":"2026-10-23T04:10:47","slug":"can-others-be-used-in-a-sentence-with-a-conjunction-4e5c-721d43","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.carenage-moto.com\/blog\/2026\/10\/23\/can-others-be-used-in-a-sentence-with-a-conjunction-4e5c-721d43\/","title":{"rendered":"Can ‘others’ be used in a sentence with a conjunction?"},"content":{"rendered":"

As the owner of a specialty manufacturing company that supplies high-quality components for industrial assembly \u2013 we specialize in what many categorize under \u201cothers\u201d in procurement lists, I\u2019ve fielded this question more times than I can count, both in casual conversations with warehouse managers and in formal vendor qualification meetings: Can \u201cothers\u201d be used in a sentence with a conjunction? At first, this might read like a trivial grammar question, something better suited for a high school English worksheet than a real-world business discussion. But after years of navigating procurement paperwork, vendor onboarding forms, and client communication where \u201cothers\u201d is tossed around like a afterthought (I\u2019ve seen it written as a catch-all for \u201csuppliers not worth listing\u201d or \u201cparts we forgot to name\u201d), this grammar question has grown into a window into how so many businesses \u2013 including those of us stuck in the \u201cothers\u201d bucket \u2013 are misunderstood. Let\u2019s dive in, not just as a grammar geek, but as someone who\u2019s lived the confusion of being the \u201cother\u201d in every industry spreadsheet and email thread. Others<\/a><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

First, let\u2019s ground this in basic grammar, no stuffy textbook rules that make you zone out mid-lesson. Conjunctions are the words that link parts of a sentence together: and, but, or, nor, for, so, yet (the FANBOYS acronym we all crammed for in middle school). \u201cOthers\u201d is a plural pronoun (or adjective) that refers to additional or unspecified people, things, or groups outside a core set. The simplest correct sentence would be something like: \u201cOur core team sources steel, plastic, and others, but we don\u2019t cut corners on quality.\u201d Wait, that uses \u201cothers\u201d with the conjunction \u201cbut\u201d \u2013 and it\u2019s perfectly grammatically valid. But I\u2019ve seen versions that go wrong, not because of the conjunction or \u201cothers\u201d themselves, but because people treat \u201cothers\u201d like it\u2019s not a real part of a list. For example, a common procurement note I\u2019ve seen: \u201cWe need gaskets, seals, and others, but only from top-tier suppliers.\u201d That\u2019s a grammatically correct sentence! No one\u2019s bungling the conjunction here, because \u201cothers\u201d is a stand-in for unspecified items that share the same category (industrial sealing parts), and \u201cbut\u201d clearly sets up a condition for all of those items. The confusion isn\u2019t about \u201ccan they coexist\u201d \u2013 it\u2019s about how we frame \u201cothers\u201d in sentences, especially when we\u2019re talking about people or businesses that get lumped into that same vague category.<\/p>\n

Let\u2019s take a more specific business example, because that\u2019s where this matters most for me. Last quarter, a large industrial equipment manufacturer sent out a request for proposals (RFP) that included this line: \u201cPre-qualified suppliers must provide documentation for raw steel, precision machined parts, and others, and must be ISO 9001 certified.\u201d That\u2019s two conjunctions \u2013 \u201cand\u201d twice! \u2013 paired with \u201cothers,\u201d and it\u2019s 100% grammatically correct. The problem wasn\u2019t the grammar, though. The problem was that this manufacturer had been categorizing my company (which makes custom small machined parts that don\u2019t fit neatly into their pre-set categories) under \u201cothers\u201d for three years, and every time they sent an RFP, they\u2019d send it to the big-named suppliers in their core lists, never explicitly tagging the \u201cothers\u201d bucket to my email. I\u2019d spend weeks following up, only to get a generic reply: \u201cThanks for submitting, we work with \u2018others\u2019 but only on new projects.\u201d Wait a second \u2013 \u201cothers\u201d in that sentence wasn\u2019t just a grammar point. It was a code for \u201cwe don\u2019t prioritize suppliers we don\u2019t recognize, even if our own RFP lists them.\u201d That\u2019s the real power of this sentence structure: how the words we choose (including how we use \u201cothers\u201d with conjunctions) shape how people (and businesses) are treated.<\/p>\n

I\u2019ve also seen this question pop up in client feedback, and it\u2019s led me to notice a lot of small, avoidable mistakes that come from treating \u201cothers\u201d like an afterthought. A few months back, a small assembly shop told me they turned down a partnership with a big box retailer because of this sentence on their vendor page: \u201cPreferred vendors handle electrical components, wood, and others, but \u2018others\u2019 refers to suppliers we\u2019ve worked with before.\u201d That\u2019s a grammatically correct sentence, but the conjunction \u201cbut\u201d creates a hard line \u2013 \u201cand others\u201d sounds inclusive, but the \u201cbut\u201d restricts it to a specific, pre-approved group. The shop I was talking to made parts that fit into \u201cothers\u201d technically, but the wording made them feel like a second-class option. That\u2019s why when I write my own communications, I\u2019m careful with how I use \u201cothers\u201d with conjunctions: if I say, \u201cMy company supplies custom machined parts, rubber seals, and others, and every order is inspected before shipping,\u201d that\u2019s a clear, inclusive line \u2013 the \u201cand others\u201d doesn\u2019t separate those items from the core list, and the second \u201cand\u201d reinforces that all of our parts get the same care.<\/p>\n

Now, let\u2019s get back to grammar for a second, because there are common mistakes that people make when they pair \u201cothers\u201d with conjunctions, and they\u2019re not just grammar errors \u2013 they\u2019re clarity errors that hurt businesses like mine. The wrong version would be: \u201cWe order bolts, nuts, and others, but they need to be delivered by Friday.\u201d Wait, who is \u201cthey\u201d here? Is it the bolts, nuts, or the \u201cothers\u201d? That\u2019s a misplaced pronoun, not a mistake with the conjunction or \u201cothers\u201d \u2013 but it\u2019s exactly the kind of vague wording that makes procurement teams toss \u201cothers\u201d into the \u201cunclear items\u201d pile, and then leave suppliers like me at the bottom of the list. The fix is simple: \u201cWe order bolts, nuts, and other small fasteners, but these items need to be delivered by Friday.\u201d Wait, no \u2013 if you want to keep \u201cothers,\u201d it would be: \u201cWe order bolts, nuts, and others, but all of these items need to be delivered by Friday.\u201d That makes it clear, no grammar issues. The mistake isn\u2019t using \u201cothers\u201d and a conjunction \u2013 it\u2019s not making sure the sentence is specific enough to avoid confusion.<\/p>\n

Another place this confusion comes up is in diversity and inclusion conversations, surprisingly. As a small business owner, I\u2019ve heard people argue that using \u201cothers\u201d in a sentence (even with conjunctions) is exclusionary, because it frames the group it\u2019s referring to as less than the core set. For example, if a company says, \u201cOur suppliers are Local Co, Regional Co, and others, and we prioritize these partnerships,\u201d that \u201cothers\u201d can feel like the suppliers on the edge, not part of the main group. But here\u2019s the thing: \u201cothers\u201d isn\u2019t inherently exclusionary \u2013 it\u2019s how you pair it with conjunctions that changes that. If you say, \u201cOur suppliers include Local Co, Regional Co, and others, and all of these partnerships get equal priority,\u201d that \u201cand\u201d links the core suppliers to the others, no hierarchy. That\u2019s the difference between a sentence that uses \u201cothers\u201d correctly and fairly, and one that uses it to marginalize. And for me, as someone who falls into that \u201cothers\u201d bucket on nearly every form, that\u2019s a huge distinction. I don\u2019t want to be labeled as less important \u2013 I want to be part of the group, and clear, correct sentence structure helps with that.<\/p>\n

I\u2019ve spent the last 12 years in this industry, watching new suppliers get lumped into \u201cothers\u201d from day one, and watching established vendors dismiss those of us in that bucket because of vague wording. Last year, I was part of a roundtable for small component suppliers, and everyone there had a similar story: they\u2019d submit detailed proposals, only to get a note back that said, \u201cWe review \u2018others\u2019 but don\u2019t have space in our current supply chain.\u201d The \u201cbut\u201d there creates a barrier, even though \u201cand others\u201d would sound more open. When I helped rewrite that note for a client recently, we changed it to: \u201cWe review all suppliers, including those categorized as \u2018others,\u2019 and we will reach out if your products meet our needs.\u201d That small change \u2013 using \u201cand\u201d instead of a restrictive conjunction like \u201cbut\u201d \u2013 didn\u2019t just fix a grammar point. It opened a door for suppliers who had been overlooked for years.<\/p>\n

Let\u2019s go back to the original question: Can \u201cothers\u201d be used in a sentence with a conjunction? The short answer is a resounding yes \u2013 but only if you use it correctly, clearly, and fairly. It\u2019s not a grammar trick, or a rule only English teachers need to worry about. For a supplier like me, who makes parts that don\u2019t fit neatly into pre-set industry categories, how people use \u201cothers\u201d in a sentence shapes whether I get a shot at a partnership, whether my products are taken seriously, whether my company is seen as a real part of the supply chain. I\u2019ve seen sentences where \u201cothers\u201d and conjunctions work perfectly to include and clarify, and I\u2019ve seen the same structure used to push small businesses to the margins.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s why when I write my own marketing materials, my RFP responses, my follow-up emails to clients, I\u2019m intentional with every word. I don\u2019t hide behind \u201cothers\u201d as a vague catch-all, and I don\u2019t let others use \u201cothers\u201d to dismiss my work. For example, when I send a quote, I end it with: \u201cOur company supplies custom precision parts, industrial fasteners, and other specialized components, and every order comes with a 30-day quality guarantee. If you need to discuss your specific needs, please reach out to our team.\u201d That\u2019s a sentence that uses \u201cothers\u201d and two conjunctions \u2013 and, and \u2013 perfectly, clearly, and it invites people to connect, not to shut me out.<\/p>\n

I\u2019ve also had clients come to me after they noticed how I frame these sentences, and they\u2019ve revised their own procurement forms to be clearer. One mid-sized manufacturing plant told me they changed their form from \u201cSupplier Category: Core, Secondary, Others\u201d to \u201cSupplier Category: Core, Secondary, and Additional\u201d \u2013 not because of grammar, but because they wanted to stop labeling suppliers as \u201cothers\u201d and start seeing them as part of the team. That\u2019s the power of this small grammar question: it\u2019s not just about words on a page. It\u2019s about how we see the people and businesses we work with, every day.<\/p>\n

As the owner of a specialty supplier that\u2019s long been stuck in the \u201cothers\u201d bucket, I\u2019ll keep fighting to make sure that when someone uses \u201cothers\u201d in a sentence, it\u2019s used correctly, fairly, and with clarity. And if you\u2019re a procurement manager, a business owner, or someone who\u2019s ever written a line that includes \u201cothers\u201d and a conjunction, take a minute to think about what that sentence is really saying. Is it including others, or pushing them aside? Is it clear, or is it vague enough to leave small suppliers like mine in the dark?<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

If you\u2019re tired of dealing with vague supplier lists, missed deadlines, or the frustration of being labeled as \u201cone of the others,\u201d let\u2019s talk. My team has years of experience working with industrial manufacturers, and we specialize in the components that get overlooked in core lists. We don\u2019t cut corners, we meet tight deadlines, and we treat every order with the same care as a major contract. Reach out to our team to discuss how we can support your next project, no vague categories, no hidden barriers.<\/p>\n

Others<\/a> References
\nThe Chicago Manual of Style, 17th Edition. University of Chicago Press, 2017.
\nModern English Grammar in Use, 4th Edition. Cambridge University Press, 2020.
\nSmall Business Procurement Trends Report 2023. National Federation of Independent Business, 2023.<\/p>\n

\n

Shandong Shining Import & Export Co., Ltd.<\/a>
Founded in 1986, We are one of the most professional hand tools manufacturers in China. With abundant experience, we warmly welcome you to buy advanced hand tools for sale here here from our factory. If you have any enquiry about customized service, please feel free to email us.
Address: No.06073, Unit A, Building 2, Yihe Three Road, Comprehesive Bonded Zone, Linyi City, Shandong Province, China
E-mail: info@shiningtool.com
WebSite: https:\/\/www.shiningtool.com\/<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

As the owner of a specialty manufacturing company that supplies high-quality components for industrial assembly \u2013 … Can ‘others’ be used in a sentence with a conjunction?<\/span>Read more<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":131,"featured_media":3545,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[3508],"class_list":["post-3545","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-industry","tag-others-4f41-724e5d"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.carenage-moto.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3545","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.carenage-moto.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.carenage-moto.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.carenage-moto.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/131"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.carenage-moto.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3545"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/www.carenage-moto.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3545\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.carenage-moto.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3545"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.carenage-moto.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3545"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.carenage-moto.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3545"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.carenage-moto.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3545"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}