310. Aspects of Negation

.

The idea of “not” can take numerous forms and affect nearby wording in various ways

THE CHALLENGE OF ENGLISH NEGATION

This post examines different ways of saying “not”, plus their grammatical impacts on surrounding words. Of course, both areas are common in English language coursebooks at both elementary and higher levels, and might thus seem strange in a blog seeking to avoid mainstream topics. My interest is particularly in aspects that often seem to be ignored, under-emphasised or insufficiently explored. I cannot promise to cover all of the gaps, but hopefully some at least of the ideas will prove illuminating.

Some aspects of negation that I consider worth mentioning are actually absent here because they are examined in other posts. The variety, uses and challenges of double negatives are the topic of 9. Reading Obstacles 5. Words that express negative meaning without indicating this in their spelling feature in 13. Hidden Negatives and 298. Grammar Meanings without Grammar, #4. Word parts that mean “not” are listed in 146. Some Important Prefix Types. Correct and incorrect ways of answering negative questions appear in 297. Types of Response to a Question, #2.

Also absent here is consideration of “negative connotation” in words like questionable and interruption. It is less relevant because it involves a different meaning of “negative”: more like “bad” than “non-existent” (see 16. Ways of Distinguishing Similar Words, #2).

. 

ALTERNATIVE WAYS OF SAYING “NOT”

1. “No”

This familiar alternative to not is used before nouns and comparative adjectives. With nouns, it is a “determiner” (see 110. Nouns without “the” or “a”), with adjectives an adverb (see 194. Adverbs that Say How Much). The exact uses are:

WITH VERBS: no is not possible.

BEFORE UNCOUNTABLE NOUNS (e.g. no money): no mostly replaces not any at the start of a sentence, but elsewhere is an optional alternative to it, though slightly more formal or emphatic. For example, …found no money emphasizes the absence of money more than …did not find any money. Note how any always follows not – *no any is an impossible combination.

BEFORE COUNTABLE NOUNS (e.g. no idea): at the start of a sentence, no usually replaces not any and is usually preferred to not a(n). Elsewhere, it is an optional but slightly more formal or emphatic alternative to both not any and not a(n). Before complement nouns, it sometimes suggests inadequacy (…is no hero).

BEFORE BASE-FORM AND SUPERLATIVE ADJECTIVES: no cannot replace not except (optionally) before different and good.

BEFORE COMPARATIVE ADJECTIVES (e.g. no easier, no more difficult): no can optionally replace not, but implies “not to any extent” or “not in any way”.

.

2.  Pronouns

Negative pronouns include few (= not sufficiently many), little (= not sufficiently much), nobody / no-one (= not anyone), none (= not one) and nothing (= not anything). As the bracketed information shows, each combines not with a particular noun idea. Few represents a plural noun, little an uncountable one. Consider this:

(a)  Problems were expected but few occurred.

The indication here is of a nearly unproblematic outcome. The message would be the same with problems replaced by uncountable delay (+ was), necessitating little instead of few.

Many readers will know that few and little sometimes have a in front to express a different meaning. What changes is in fact the negativity: quantities are still indicated to be small, but they are no longer cast as inadequate.

Few and little are the only pronouns listed above that can also link with a following noun as “determiners”, e.g. few problems. None does have a corresponding determiner, but it is the different word no – a surprising change given that no change happens with not just few and little but also every other quantity expression (all, each, enough, most, many and some: see 28. Pronoun Errors and 133. Confusions of Similar Structures 1, #1).

For an example of little misused, see the task in 6. Hidden Negatives.

.

3.  Adverbs

It is hardly surprising that adverbs are among the alternatives to not, given that not is itself an adverb. Again, the alternatives add an extra idea to that of not. The main ones are little, neither, never, nowhere, rarely, scarcely, barely, seldom, hardly and no longer.

Adverb uses of little can again be made positive by adding a in front. Rarely has the positive equivalent occasionally, while the meanings of scarcely and barely can be expressed positively with very occasionally (showing frequency) or just (showing quantity, as in just enough).

.

4. Verbs

Verbs with a negative prefix are an obvious kind that can express the idea of “not”. The prefix is usually dis- (disbelieve, dislike, disobey, displease, distrust etc.). There are a few verbs, however, that lack any visible indication of negativity yet are still intuitively negative. Often, it will be the kind of words that they combine with that indicate negativity.

For example, AVOID, FAIL, LACK and NEGLECT may require an object with any (e.g. lack any hope) where their opposites (ENCOUNTER, SUCCEED, POSSESS, ATTEND TO) would have one with some. DENY, DOUBT, FORBID, PROHIBIT and REFUSE TO ACCEPT report negative statements with not or similar removed from them, thus implying that the idea of “not” is already present in their own meaning:

(b) Gomez (2020, p. 78) denies that the cost is excessive.

This means Gomez  says the cost is not excessive (see 279. Grammatical Differences between Citation Verbs, #6).

.

5. Other

The ways of recognising negativity in verbs seem equally applicable to nouns (e.g. indecision, refusal), adjectives (e.g. averse, non-conformist, uninvited) and adverbs (e.g. illegally).

Negative conjunctions tend to combine a starting adverb with a later conjunction: no sooner…than…,  not only…but also…,  hardly/ scarcely…when…,  not…any more than… (see 64. Double Conjunctions). Similarly, the conjunction neither needs a later nor, though mid-sentence nor sometimes stands alone, like let alone (see 191. Exotic Grammar Structures 3, #2) and not that (269. Exotic Grammar Structures 7, #1).

A notable preposition is without. It can negate a following verb, forming an adverb-like addition to a longer sentence:

(c) Chemicals are needed that protect crops without disrupting ecosystems.

(d) Without (our) knowing all the facts, we cannot make a decision.

The without part in (c) means “but do not disrupt…”; that in (d) “if we do not know…”.

Verbs directly after without need the -ing (gerund) form, like any other verb after a preposition. Their subject can be indicated more explicitly with a preceding possessive adjective – our in (d). However, it can also be an ordinary (pro)noun, changing the verb into a participle with -ing or -ed (see 75. How to Avoid “Dangling” Participles, #4).

The without part in (c) is like a how-saying “manner” adverb, linking principally with the main verb protect. This prevents it starting the sentence. In (d), by contrast, the adverbial information relates to all of the rest of the sentence (see 121. Sentence-Spanning Adverbs), and could as a result occupy either the start or the end.

.

INFLUENCES ON SURROUNDING WORDS

6. Verb before its Subject

Sentences starting with a negative adverb usually need their subject positioned after some or all of the verb, as in questions (see 307. Word Order Variations, #3). 

.

7. Word Substitution

There are some words whose meaning often has to be expressed differently in negative statements (as in questions). The best-known is some (alone and within various longer words) – typically replaced by any. This pair is widely covered in mainstream grammars so needs little attention here. I wish just to emphasise that any is occasionally used without a negative and some occasionally accompanies one.

Any without a negative has a changed meaning – often implying an if statement. Some alongside a negative may be illustrated as follows:

(e) Even the most popular film will not please someone.

This indicates that many people will be pleased by popular films – someone represents a minority. Anyone, by contrast, would say nobody will be pleased. In the first case, not negates the verb please; in the second, it negates someone (making it replaceable by no-one). In a similar way, …did no go somewhere means one place was not visited, implying that others were; whereas anywhere would mean all possible places were unvisited.

Other words that are often (but not always) replaced in negative statements include also → not either, too (= also) → not either, still → no longer and already → not yet. Consider this:

(f) “Some” cannot often accompany a negative and “too” cannot either.

Either is necessary here instead of too or also.

Not either statements like the above can usually be rephrased as two sentences. There are two ways of wording the second sentence. The simplest is to replace and with a full stop. Very often, however, English speakers will change not either into a starting Neither…. This necessitates a further change: positioning the verb before its subject: Neither can “too” above (see 307. Word Order Variations, #3).

As well as words that are not very likely in negative statements, there are some that are especially likely there. Ever used with a negative verb to mean “at any time” (see 272. Uses of “Ever”, #1), is likely with positive verbs to be replaced by a time-point adverb like before, once or sometimes. Long with not + verb frequently becomes for a long time without it. Much frequently becomes often or plenty (see 98. “Very”, “Much and “Very Much”, #1). Note, though, that long and much can remain unchanged with positive LIKE (…much likes them, …has long liked it) and similar-meaning verbs (ADMIRE, APPRECIATE, ENJOY, LOVE, WANT, DISLIKE).

.

8. Modified Reported Speech

Negative verbs like DENY and REFUSE (#4 above) are not the only reporting verbs that transfer negation from a reported statement to themselves. Other verbs of this kind, however, locate the negative alongside themselves rather than within their very meaning, like this:

(g) Ling (2022, p. 46) does not think that inflation will persist.

Here, not negates will persist, not think. Other verbs like THINK include BELIEVE, EXPECT, FEEL, IMAGINE and SUPPOSE. They are all “thought” verbs. However, not all thought verbs are like them. Hoped not to…, for example, introduces a hope whereas did not hope to… does not. Other verbs like HOPE include ASSUME, DOUBT, JUDGE and KNOW.

There are, in addition, some non-reporting verbs that are usable like THINK, especially APPEAR and SEEM.

.

9. Added Emphasizers

Negative expressions can be made stronger with special wording before or after them:

(h) Petrov is NOT in any way criticising the theory.

Different negative types require different emphasizers. Common combinations are as follows (* = needs intervening words; + = forbids intervening words):

AT ALL: after barely, few, hardly, little, *neither, never, *no, no-, +none, *nor, not, rarely, scarcely, seldom, without

AT ANY TIME: after barely, hardly, neither, never, *no, no-, +none, nor, not, rarely, scarcely, seldom, without

BY ANY MEANS: after neither, nor, not

DEFINITELY: before no, no-, none, not, without

EVER: after barely, hardly, scarcely, *nor, not

IN ANY WAY: after neither, never, nor, not, without

UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES: after neither, never, *no, no-, +none, nor, not

VERY: before +few, +little, +rarely, +scarcely, +seldom

WHATSOEVER: after few, little, *no, no-, +none, *nor, not, *without

309. Tricky Grammar Contrasts 5

.

Sometimes two grammar structures are hard to distinguish because of similar forms and/or meanings

TRICKY CONTRASTS IN ENGLISH

As in most languages, it is quite common in English to find two items, of either vocabulary or grammar, whose meanings are not easy to differentiate. Although a few pairs of this kind are covered by most English coursebooks, and are as a result well-known, many are overlooked.

In this blog, posts with the above title consider rarely-explained meaning differences between grammatical structures that seem to say the same. For a list of all the posts, see 217. Tricky Grammar Contrasts 1. These structures are to be distinguished from similar-seeming ones that often cause grammar errors – separately considered under the heading Confusions of Similar Structures. For differences between confusingly similar vocabulary items, there are numerous posts entitled “Tricky Word Contrasts”. For a full list, plus an alphabetical list of all of the words in them, click here.

.

EXPLANATIONS OF SIMILAR STRUCTURES

1. “The Xs…” versus “Xs such as…”

One of the many combinations that can be made by placing a noun (or noun-like expression) in front of one or more others is a plural class name, such as colours, followed without a comma by one or more names of members of the class, such as brown and grey. There are associated grammatical requirements which differ according to whether the member names represent some or all of the class members.

The simplest means of indicating the idea of “some” is a suitable expression added directly after the class name, such as like, such as or including:

(a) Colours like brown and grey can be depressing.

This links can be depressing with not just brown and grey but also colours of a similar kind (a category the reader is assumed to be able to recognise). For a full list of possible linking expressions, see 1. Simple Example-Giving.

By contrast, the simplest way to show that one or more nouns after a class name are naming all of the class members that the whole statement is about (i.e. that brown and grey above are all, or the only, colours that can be depressing), is to avoid special wording after the class name, and instead add the before it:

(b) The colours brown and grey can be depressing.

For a full description of this usage, see 117. Restating Generalizations more Specifically, #3.

A complication arises when the class name refers to a specific identified group rather than a general class, a meaning that also requires the. Sentences like (a) can accommodate this just by adding the at the start, but in sentences like (b), where the is already present, there is a need to do something like naming the class member(s) before the class name:

(c) The brown and grey colours can be depressing.

.

2. Text-Describing Present Perfect Tense

Both the present perfect tense (with has/have) and the past simple (with -ed) enable mention to be made of an earlier part of a text where they are used. The difference between them is similar to that in their everyday use, where the present perfect typically refers to times of a more recent and still-relevant nature. Thus, to talk correctly about an earlier part of a text, there is a need to recognise what in texts is considered “recent”.

One useful distinction in this respect involves chapters or sections. If the indicated earlier part of the text is in a chapter before the indication, the past simple is the more likely choice; otherwise, the present perfect is preferred:

(d) The last chapter presented definitions; the current one has described relevant procedures.

Obviously, the fact that the relevant procedures are earlier in the current chapter means the verb in the present perfect tense is probably at the end (at the start, it would be describes or will describe). In fact, this use of the present perfect tense is so likely to be near the end of a chapter that it can be considered a kind of end-marking signpost language (see the end of #2 in 186. Language in Oral Presentations).

Yet the present perfect tense is not always the right choice for referring back to something in the same chapter or section. There are certain past-referring adverb expressions that necessitate, or at least allow, the past simple, similarly to expressions in everyday usage like last night or ago. Examples are at the start (colouring the start as long ago), a few paragraphs back and earlier.

.

3. “The” between BE and a Comparative Adjective

A familiar use of comparative adjectives is after the noun they are describing, with a link verb like BE or SEEM in between:

(e) Driving is quicker than cycling, but cycling is cheaper.

Here, the comparative adjective quicker is describing the earlier noun driving, and cheaper is describing cycling.

What is notable about this usage is that the is sometimes possible before the comparative. Sentence (e) could end …is the cheaper. Adding the requires an absent than… after the comparative. For that to be possible, the idea that would normally follow than – indicating what the comparison is with – must already be obvious from either the situation where the sentence is uttered or previous words. In (e), of course, it is the previous word driving that indicates what cycling is being compared with.

Where the is possible, it is not compulsory, and creates only a slight meaning difference. It seems just to emphasise that the meaning of the unmentioned than part is already available.

.

4. “South of” versus “to the South of”

These expressions (and their equivalents with the other compass words, such as east and north-west) may each express either static location or movement. To appreciate the difference made by to the to the static meaning, consider the following:

(f) Zambia is south of Tanzania.

This indicates that Zambia is geographically beyond the southern border of Tanzania, but not how far. Adding to the, on the other hand, would say that Zambia is next to this border (see 295. Options in Saying Where, #7).

By contrast, the movement meaning without to the is illustrated in sentences with a travel verb like went:

(g) Livingstone went south of Tanganyika.

This means Livingstone made a journey across the southern border of Tanganyika. Adding to the, on the other hand, would say that Livingstone made a journey into the southern part of Tanganyika, probably from somewhere in the same country.

For more about words like south, see 151. Ways of Using Compass Words.

.

5. “Cannot decide” versus “Cannot make a decision”

Various reasons for preferring MAKE A DECISION to the simpler DECIDE are identified earlier in this blog in 39. “Decide” or “Make a Decision”?. An important one is that the frequent need of DECIDE to precede an object or to verb can be a problem if there is a good reason not to have one of these, such as a wish not to state the obvious.

What happens, though, if DECIDE does not need an object, as in the following?

(h) The committee is deciding tomorrow.

Used like this, DECIDE is likely to mean not just “find a solution” but “make a selection from multiple options”. The options are likely to be equally attractive or unattractive, and to be already known, perhaps because they have just been mentioned. The usage is probably “object-dropping” rather than “intransitive” (see 8. Object-Dropping Errors). MAKE A DECISION remains an alternative, but would be vague about the number and visibility of the options.

A stronger difference arises when cannot is included. Cannot decide implies that difficulty of selection is the reason why, whereas cannot make a decision, in less strongly suggesting selection, is more likely to indicate a different reason for the absence of a decision, such as illness.

.

6. “Know to” versus “Know how to”

Somebody who knows how to do something knows the way it can or should be done. How introduces an indirect question within which the relevant action is expressed with a to (infinitive) verb (see 105. Questions with a “to” Verb).

On the other hand, knowing to do something is knowing that it is the right thing to do, as in this example:

(i) Lions know to keep clear of elephants.

The meaning here is that lions know keeping clear of elephants is the way to behave. The infinitive is a kind of object of know, and hence in a closer grammatical relationship (see 302. Verbs with a Partner Infinitive, #1). One other verb usable in the same two ways is LEARN.

.

7. “that is to say” versus “that is”

These are both synonyms of in other words, commonly used for rephrasing a just-mentioned idea (see 286. Repeating in Different Words, #4 and #6). They are often presented as interchangeable, when in fact they sometimes have to be punctuated differently.

The rephrased wording next to each expression may be located in the same sentence as the original wording, or in a new sentence directly after it. In the first case, the usage is preposition-like; in the second, both expressions are connectors – a dual capability also possessed by for example (see 226. Words with Complicated Grammar 2, #4).

With new-sentence rephrasing, the punctuation of the two expressions is also the same, namely a full stop before and a comma directly after:

(j) Heart disease is linked to a sedentary lifestyle. That is (to say), it becomes more likely if exercise is rare.

When the rephrasing is not in a new sentence, a comma is needed before both expressions and another one, or a full stop, is needed at the end of the rephrasing, thus forming a parenthesis (see 294. Parentheses):

(k) Anticyclones, that is to say high pressure areas, bring quiet weather.

A difference in this situation, however, is that that is always seems to need a further comma directly after it, whereas that is to say is only likely to have one there if the explanation is long.

One reason for the more frequent comma usage after that is may be the possibility of other meanings being understandable when a comma is absent, such as the relative pronoun use of that. A problem with this comma need, though, is that it can bring unwelcome high comma densities – three within 6 words in (k) (Anticyclones, that is, high pressure areas, …). This may be a reason why the longer that is to say is often preferred.