1

enter image description here

I am trying to describe the structure shown in the image. My example is as follows:

The string is wound on the bobbin sequentially from the left to the right.

As far as I searched, it seems that "sequentially" is usually used with the plural. Is the usage of "sequentially" in my example correct?

Improve this question
8
  • 1
    You might want to read this about windings: electronics-tutorials.ws/transformer/transformer-basics.html Sequentially is an adverb and has nothing to do with singular and plural. Commented May 3, 2018 at 18:01
  • 1
    seems fine to me. Reading this, I'd think that the windings are sequential. Commented May 3, 2018 at 18:06
  • 1
    I don't think sequentially is apt. Commented May 3, 2018 at 19:10
  • 2
    The string is wound on the bobbin evenly from the left to the right. The next layer is wound evenly from right to left, and so (pun sew) on. Commented May 3, 2018 at 21:32
  • 1
    I would use continuously. Or just wound. sequentially is redundant because not sequentially by your meaning would be a mess. Commented May 4, 2018 at 1:37

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
3

Your question: Is it possible to use “sequentially” with the singular?

Your example: The string is wound on the bobbin sequentially from the left to the right.

There is nothing wrong with using sequentially for the reason you ask. Sequentially is defined as "forming or following a logical order or sequence" so it doesn't matter that you are writing instructions about a singular item if you are a referring to multiple steps.

However, the word is out of place in your example because the verb wound is the past particle of wind which aptly describes the ongoing action of winding the thread. Winding is a continuous circular motion, so "sequentially" does not aptly describe the action because technically there is only one ongoing step.

Improve this answer
3
  • Except that you start with one end of the the string (or the bobbin) and stop once you reach the other end. The circular motion continues until it can't any more ;) (Still, the sentence would sound better if the string was wound or should be wound or has been wound. I don't think that sequentially is an issue.) Commented May 6, 2018 at 19:58
  • @jasonbassford "winding" refers to the motion, not the string. You could wind a handle, that wouldn't run out. Commented May 26, 2018 at 7:49
  • Yes, but when I wind a string, I always think of it as a single 360° rotation. Which means that it's perfectly understandable to me to "wind a string around something twice" (and sequentially)—meaning that I have made two such complete motions. Those motions can be in sequence. (And, yes, I could say "complete winding motion" instead, but the meaning is clear without that exact level of detail.) Commented May 26, 2018 at 15:35

You must log in to answer this question.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.