I'm no taller than John?

Status
Not open for further replies.

keannu

VIP Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2010
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Korean
Home Country
South Korea
Current Location
South Korea
I can understand 1, but in 2 in my grammar book, it compares to a math equation saying no means 0, so it makes the meaning of equality, is it true?
Even if it is, it's hard to understand. What's the difference between not and no in this case?

1.I am not taller than John = Not {I am taller than John}
not(A>B) -> A<=B
2.I am no taller than John = I am {no taller} than John
no =zero : no(A>B) -> A=B
 
Last edited:

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
No + comparative + than is acceptable.


1. I am not taller than John = Not {I am taller than John}. I could be shorter than John.

2. I am no taller than John = I am {not taller} than John. I am the same height as John.
 

freezeframe

Key Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2011
Member Type
Academic
Native Language
English
Home Country
Canada
Current Location
Canada
I can understand 1, but in 2 in my grammar book, it compares to a math equation saying no means 0, so it make the meaning of equality, is it true?
Even if it is, it's hard to understand. What's the difference between not and no in this case?

1.I am not taller than John = Not {I am taller than John}
not(A>B) -> A<=B
2.I am no taller than John = I am {no taller} than John
no =zero : no(A>B) -> A=B

Interesting use of equations.

The second sentence implies smaller difference between the heights:

"I am not taller than John" -- I could be much shorter.
"I am no taller than John" -- I am of similar height (not necessarily identical as your equation suggests).



Also, the second sentence is more emphatic. The focus in such construction is more on the second item in the comparison: "I am no taller than John" implies that John is short. The first sentence does not contain such implication (John could very well be very tall, I'm just not taller).

Compare:

"it is no bigger than a grain of rice" -- a grain of rice is very small
"he is no more intelligent than Heather" -- Heather is not intelligent
 

freezeframe

Key Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2011
Member Type
Academic
Native Language
English
Home Country
Canada
Current Location
Canada
No + comparative + than is acceptable.


1. I am not taller than John = Not {I am taller than John}. I could be shorter than John.

2. I am no taller than John = I am {not taller} than John. I am the same height as John.


Interesting. I read 2. as implying similar but not necessarily identical height. I'll ponder this.
 

philo2009

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2009
Member Type
Academic
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
Japan
I'm afraid that I see no semantic difference between these two sentences, the only real difference existing in terms of their syntax, with one negative adverbial (no) substituted for another (not).

'No', however, unlike 'not', is a simple submodifier, i.e. an adverb confined to the modification of adjectives/other adverbs (in this particular case, specifically to that of the comparative forms of adjectives) and thus here serves to realize AdjP no taller, while 'not' is most naturally construed here as a verb-phrase modifier (i.e. a 'true' adverbial by the lights of Quirkian terminology), thus serving here to realize VP am not (taller than John).

However, since the direct negation of the assertion that I am taller than John (#1) is the same as the positive assertion of my failing to be taller he is (#2), the two sentences have effective semantic equivalence. Or, to put it more simply, #1 affirms that I am NOT a person who is taller than John and #2 that I am a person who is NOT taller than John (both of these logically allowing that I am a person who is the same height as John or that I am a person who is shorter than John).
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
I'm afraid that I see no semantic difference between these two sentences, ...logically allowing...
As we all know, philo, language is not necessarily logical. Quirk et al (1985) write:

"Negation with no may have different implications than verb negation with not. While He is not a teacher denotes that his occupation is not teaching, He is no teacher indicates that he lacks the skills needed for teaching.The determiner no converts the usually nongradable noun into a gradable noun that characterises the person ..."

I feel that negation of a comparative form with no implies (and only implies) a simple negation of the comparative in the sense of no ...er than = as ...as. Negation with not, however, allows more possibility of an oppposite comparative, in the sense of I am not taller than = I am only as tall as/shorter than.
 
Last edited:

freezeframe

Key Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2011
Member Type
Academic
Native Language
English
Home Country
Canada
Current Location
Canada
I feel that negation of a comparative form with no implies (and only implies) a simple negation of the comparative in the sense of no ...er than = as ...as. Negation with not, however, allows more possibility of an oppposite comparative, in the sense of I am not taller than = I am :shock: only as tall as/shorter than.

Interesting. Do you consider something like "it is no bigger and no smaller than... " rhetorical?
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
Interesting. Do you consider something like "it is no bigger and no smaller than... " rhetorical?
No. I think that it is emphasising the equality of size. Note that I said that I felt this construction implies equality, not specifically asserts it.
 

freezeframe

Key Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2011
Member Type
Academic
Native Language
English
Home Country
Canada
Current Location
Canada
No. I think that it is emphasising the equality of size. Note that I said that I felt this construction implies equality, not specifically asserts it.

Interesting too. I'm now thinking about this too much. With me that sometimes leads to unnecessary nuancing and navel gazing. :-D
 

Tdol

No Longer With Us (RIP)
Staff member
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Native Language
British English
Home Country
UK
Current Location
Japan
Interesting too. I'm now thinking about this too much. With me that sometimes leads to unnecessary nuancing and navel gazing. :-D

And then the next day, you feel a bit differently about it and it's back to the navel. ;-)
 

birdeen's call

VIP Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2010
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Polish
Home Country
Poland
Current Location
Poland
I'm afraid that I see no semantic difference between these two sentences
Neither do I. (So do I?) I don't agree with 5jj's fomulas.

I think the second sentence may suggest that the speaker's height is nearly that of John, but the basic meaning seems to be the same. "No" negates "taller" as does "not" in

"I'm taller than you."
"Not taller, but shorter."

Knowing only that someone's being taller is negated, we can't infer whether he is shorter or not.
 

keannu

VIP Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2010
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Korean
Home Country
South Korea
Current Location
South Korea
As we all know, philo, language is not necessarily logical. Quirk et al (1985) write:

"Negation with no may have different implications than verb negation with not. While He is not a teacher denotes that his occupation is not teaching, He is no teacher indicates that he lacks the skills needed for teaching.The determiner no converts the usually nongradable noun into a gradable noun that characterises the person ..."

I feel that negation of a comparative form with no implies (and only implies) a simple negation of the comparative in the sense of no ...er than = as ...as. Negation with not, however, allows more possibility of an oppposite comparative, in the sense of I am not taller than = I am only as tall as/shorter than.

I think what you said is almost revolutionary to my life-time curiosity of "no more than" vs "not more than" or "no less than" vs "not less than".

I think "no" has the implication of no existence of something such as "There is no person in the room", that's "why I am no taller than John" means "I have no fact or there's no fact that I am taller than John, so I stay at John's level" while "not" means the opposite of something.

Now I can understand why "He is no more than a beggar" means "He is only a beggar" as it means "He stays a beggar without having a higher state than that". "No" can be interpreted as "there isn't" instead of negation. I hope I understood it right, and I think so.

Thanks for your great teaching!
 

birdeen's call

VIP Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2010
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Polish
Home Country
Poland
Current Location
Poland
"I am no taller than John" means "I have no fact or there's no fact that I am taller than John, so I stay at John's level" while "not" means the opposite of something.
This reasoning is flawed. If we only know that "there's no fact that we are taller than John", we cannot say whether or not "we are at John's level".
 

keannu

VIP Member
Joined
Dec 27, 2010
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Korean
Home Country
South Korea
Current Location
South Korea
This reasoning is flawed. If we only know that "there's no fact that we are taller than John", we cannot say whether or not "we are at John's level".

Maybe fivejedjon can give us an opinion about yours, and I happend to have another question between "no good" and "not good".
If "no good" should be gradable, it means "it is still good, but poor quality or low level", but it doesn't mean something like that.
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
Maybe fivejedjon can give us an opinion about yours, and I happend to have another question between "no good" and "not good".
If "no good" should be gradable, it means "it is still good, but poor quality or low level", but it doesn't mean something like that.
I'll be back with a response to the main question before long. May I suggest that we leave consideration of 'no/not good' to another thread? It's an interesting point, but it may sidetrack this thread.
 

birdeen's call

VIP Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2010
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Polish
Home Country
Poland
Current Location
Poland
Consider the following situation. I am 168 cm tall and John is 198 cm tall. I am asked, "Are you no taller than John?" If I want to tell the truth, what do I have to say, yes or no? (Regardless of the likeliness of the question.)
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
I think several points are being slightly overlooked:

1. I am not saying that a comparative form with no always and only means a simple negation of the comparative in the sense of no ...er than = as ...as. I am simply saying that it can imply this.

2. I am not saying that a comparative form in a negative utterance with not always and only implies an opposite comparative form, merely that it can.

3. English is a language. Languages do not always follow the rules of formal logic,

4. There are clearly situations in which there is a difference between no-negation and not-negation. I gave an example of this in post #6.

Having established a difference between no and not- negation with a noun, we can consider whether it is possible with a comparative structure.

1. Prague isn’t more beautiful than Paris.
2. Prague is no more beautiful than Paris.

In 1#, the (contracted) not negates the verb, and therefore the whole assertion. In #2, it is not clear whether no is to be read as referring to more alone, or to more beautiful. Both readings appear to be possible. In the case of the former, definitely, and the latter, perhaps, then it seems to me that there is an implication that Prague is as beautiful as Paris. It appears to be impossible to ‘prove’ this. All I can say is that in my own usage, and in that of others that I have encountered, this appears to be possible. I feel that #4 below is less likely to be heard than #3.

3. Prague isn’t more beautiful than Paris; in fact it’s rather an ugly city outside the Old Town.
4. ?Prague is no more beautiful than Paris; in fact it’s rather an ugly city outside the Old Town.

The situation with comparatives formed with –er is not so striking, but I feel that #6 is less likely to be heard than #5

5. I’m not taller than John; in fact, I am quite a bit shorter.
6. ?I’m no taller than John; in fact, I am quite a bit shorter.
 
Last edited:

birdeen's call

VIP Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2010
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Polish
Home Country
Poland
Current Location
Poland
The situation with comparatives formed with –er is not so striking, but I feel that #6 is less likely to be heard than #5

5. I’m not taller than John; in fact, I am quite a bit shorter.
6. ?I’m not taller than John; in fact, I am quite a bit shorter.
Your numbers 5 and 6 are identical. Did you mean

6. ?I’m no taller than John; in fact, I am quite a bit shorter.

?

(Please have a look at my question above your post.)
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
Your numbers 5 and 6 are identical. Did you mean

6. ?I’m no taller than John; in fact, I am quite a bit shorter.

(Please have a look at my question above your post.)
Thanks, BC. I'm off to correct it, then I'll look at your question.
 

5jj

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 14, 2010
Member Type
English Teacher
Native Language
British English
Home Country
Czech Republic
Current Location
Czech Republic
I am 168 cm tall and John is 198 cm tall. I am asked, "Are you no taller than John?" If I want to tell the truth, what do I have to say, yes or no? (Regardless of the likeliness of the question.)
It's hard to disregard the likeliness of the question. I can honestly conceive of this question being asked only if the asker has believed that 'I' am taller than John, and I have just told him that I am the same height. He then asks, "Are you (really) no taller than John?" (I could also accept 'not' in that question.

As to the answer, I think it would be 'yes (I really am no taller than John)'.

I feel that this is not a satisfactory response to your question, but it's the best I can do at the moment.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top