confirming and agreeing

Status
Not open for further replies.

starmooneye

New member
Joined
Jul 3, 2016
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Chinese
Home Country
China
Current Location
Taiwan
On your forum I read the folowing conversation:
Question: Do people say No to mean they are in agreement with negative statements?
Answer: We aren't using "no" to agree, we are using "no" to CONFIRM a negative statement.


So my question is does that mean:
Mother: We are not buying a new car.
Father: No. (he confirms) / Father: Yes. (he agrees)

I always thoughtt no is for confirmation/agreement and yes for disagreement/no confirmation?
 
OK, so:

If Mother and Father both want no new car:
Mother: We are not buying a new car.
Father: No, we aren´t. (confirming)
OR
Mother: We are not buying a new car.
Father: Yes, that´s right, we are not buying a new car. (agreeing)


If Mother want´s no new car, but the father want´s to buy a new car:
Mother: We are not buying a new car.
Father: Yes, we are! (not confirming)
Or
Mother: We are not buying a new car.
Father: No, that´s wrong, we are buying a new car. (disagreeing)


Is this list true?
 
Could 'No' mean 'No, that's not the case'?

Given the potential ambiguity, people almost always add a few words to these responses. Listeners who are uncertain what was meant ask for clarification. So this subject isn't worth a lot of discussion beyond the recommendation to use enough words to make the response unambiguous.
 
: We aren't using "no" to agree, we are using "no" to CONFIRM a negative statement.
I just looked through some threads and wonder about this one. I mean there is a small difference between confirming and agreeing, but in this context it should mean the same?
So you agree and confirm a negative Statement with "no", for example:
Person 1: We should not go there.
Person 2: No, we should not. I completely agree with you.


In this example Person 2 agrees with "no", so the sentence "We aren't using "no" to agree, we are using "no" to CONFIRM a negative Statement." is wrong. Or do I misunderstand the Quote? Starmooneye seems to have quoted the moderator Cagey (at least this brought my Google Search to light).
 
I want to point out something else:


Person 1: We should not go there.
Person 2: No, we should not. I completely agree with you.

In this example person 2 is using "no" to AGREE with person 1. But somehow moderator Cagey once wrote:
"We aren't using "no" to agree, we are using "no" to CONFIRM a negative Statement."

So?
 
I think we talk about two different things, sorry. My question is this:
A moderator here once wrote:
"We aren't using "no" to agree, we are using "no" to CONFIRM a negative Statement."
Is this true?

For example:
Person 1: You are not going there?
Person 2: No, I am not going there. (Person 2 CONFIRMS with no)

Person 1: We should not go there.
Person 2: No, we should not. I completely agree with you. (Person 2 AGREES with no)

So in my Point of view the sentence a mod here once wrote is wrong and we agree and confirm negative statements with no. In fact agreeing and confirming is nearly the same here. Am I right?
 
From my point of view, the 'No' used by person 2 is intended to confirm the negative statement rather than to agree with person 1.
 
In your second example, the extra words after 'No, we should not' ' tell us clearly that this is agreement. Had they been, 'I told you that very clearly', then we have confirmation.

But can someone now tell me why a moderator here once wrote the rule "We aren't using "no" to agree, we are using "no" to CONFIRM a negative Statement."? We just prooved that we can use "no" to CONFIRM AND AGREE a negative Statement.
 
That thread does not contain the sentence you asked about. Until we can see exactly what this moderator was commenting on, it's difficult to know whether s/he mad a mistake.

But in post #8 the moderator talked about this general rule, not only about a specific sentence. So the rule "We aren't using "no" to agree, we are using "no" to CONFIRM a negative Statement." has to apply on all answers to negative Statements. But somehow it doesn´t.
 
Okay thank you, but what is the example the moderator is talking about in the other thread? I mean you can read the whole thread, but I can't find ´the example, so I thought it is a general rule.
 
I'm the one who wrote it, and I don't see much of a difference now between "confirming" and "agreeing."

This yes/no thing is really quite simple: use enough words to show the actual situation.

This is the more useful part of that post:
Regardless of whether it's a statement or question and regardless of whether it's phrased in the negative or positive:
A: Jane is home.
or
A: Jane isn't home?
B: Yes, she is. (When Jane is home)
B: No, she is not. (When Jane isn't home.)

Ah, so it's the same person after all?
Ah, so they are different people?

Yes, it is the same person.
No, it is a different person.

Do not worry about agreeing with the person's belief. Answer in a way that tells what the actual situation is.

The part in bold addresses the issue without ambiguity. Don't worry about confirmation, agreement, negative, positive, question, statement, etc.
 
Ah Okay, thank you. :)

Is this always like this?

Example:
A: Jane is not home?
B: No she is not.

Is this short for "No, she is not home." or is it short for "No, she is not not home" (meaning she is home)? In another thread here I guessed it is more Logical it means she is not not home (meaning she is home), though it feels strange.
 
Yes, but that seemed a bit unsure to me, as if it was just a quick thought. So I wanted to ask for clearer advice.
 
Ah Okay, thank you. :)

Is this always like this?

Example:
A: Jane is not home?
B: No she is not.

Is this short for "No, she is not home."

Yes. It is short for "No, she is not home."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top