"Or" against "then" in lists of penalties
Hypothesis examined: in series of measures, the Qur'an would use أَوْ ("or") to leave a choice between them, and ثُمَّ or وَ ("then", "and") to combine them, and this opposition would be a rule of the corpus.
The hypothesis comes from comparing two passages listing the same penalties. In 5:33, the recompense of those who wage war against God is given as alternatives: "that they be massacred, or crucified, or have their hands and feet cut off on opposite sides, or be banished". In 7:124, Fir'awn threatens the magicians with all of them at once: "I will certainly cut off your hands and feet, on opposite sides, then I will certainly crucify you".
The contrast is real and the translation respects it. But it rests on a single pair of passages, and the difference between أو (alternative) and ثمّ / و (succession, accumulation) is ordinary Arabic grammar: it calls for no rule specific to the corpus. No other series was found showing a regularity beyond this ordinary sense.
In the text
أَن يُقَتَّلُوٓا۟ أَوْ يُصَلَّبُوٓا۟ أَوْ تُقَطَّعَ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَأَرْجُلُهُم مِّنْ خِلَٰفٍ أَوْ يُنفَوْا۟ مِنَ ٱلْأَرْضِلَأُقَطِّعَنَّ أَيْدِيَكُمْ وَأَرْجُلَكُم مِّنْ خِلَٰفٍۢ ثُمَّ لَأُصَلِّبَنَّكُمْ أَجْمَعِينَ