Nevertheless\Nonetheless

[alijawed]

hey thanks Mike for talking some sense into me, otherwise I'd die an ignorant. Here are some more Qs.

1. Which ones are gramatically correct:

- " I could not have possibly been killed."
- " I could not possibly have been killed."

2. What's the difference between these two sentences:

- "He'd be alive, if you called." or "He'd be alive, if you had called."
- "He would have been alive, if you had called."

thanks,
Ali.

 

[MikeNewYork]

hey thanks Mike for talking some sense into me, otherwise I'd die an ignorant. Here are some more Qs.

1. Which ones are gramatically correct:

- " I could not have possibly been killed."
- " I could not possibly have been killed."

2. What's the difference between these two sentences:

- "He'd be alive, if you called." or "He'd be alive, if you had called."
- "He would have been alive, if you had called."

thanks,
Ali.

You're welcome. :lol:

1. I would use 2. This says that it is an impossiblity that you have been killed. This is logical as you are writing.
#1 appears to say the possibility of you being killed is impossible, or something to that effect.

2. A. I would use "if you had called". That makes this a mixed conditional:

past perfect, then present conditional.

I prefer this one because there are three different times here:

1. No call was made (earlier past)>
2. He died. (later past)
3. He would be alive. (present)

This makes it clear that you cannot bring him back by calling now or by calling after he died in the past.

2. B. That is correct as a third conditional: past perfect, then past conditional.

It says the same thing as the mixed conditional except that it discusses the possibility of his being alive in the past, but after the phone call.

 

[alijawed]

Hey thanks again Mike, the reply was clear and detailed.
but I still fail to any difference in the implied meaning of these two:


" I could not have possibly been killed."
" I could not possibly have been killed."

You said the first one seems to imply the impossibilty of the person being killed, where as I think the "could have" usage makes it appear just as much like the first one in terms of the meaning. I mean why do I think one's got to be right and the other wrong. For instance,

I could not have been killed--- is the right way to say it.
I could have not been killed--- is only grammatically-wrong to say.

I don't know, I might be wrong,.. awaiting your reply.

Ali.

 

[beastmaster]

Nonetheless is the correct one because there is a contrast here so the second one is the correct one

 

[Liz AG]

I would've said "Nevertheless" :/ well, it's good to know I can use them both

I'm echoing Silentium. Good to learn something new today.

 

[çakırpençe]

Both of them is used equally
we are thougt of that way at primary school in Turkiye

 

[threnody]

Nevertheless is the correct one.

 

[Eden Darien]

I think both of these are okay...
But I prefer to use nevertheless here...

According to Collins dictionary...
nevertheless = You use nevertheless when saying something that contrasts with what has just been said. (FORMAL)
Most marriages fail after between five and nine years. Nevertheless, people continue to get married.
= nonetheless (SYN)

none|the|less /n'ʌnðəl'es/
[ADV] ADV with cl
Nonetheless means the same as nevertheless. (FORMAL)
There was still a long way to go. Nonetheless, some progress had been made...
His face is serious but nonetheless very friendly.
= nevertheless

I hope its help... :-D

 

[soutter]

Nevertheless, nonetheless and however while we are at it are more or less the same.