Neither in "Inverted sentences"

[Roozbeh]

Hello,

It's my honour to be associated with professional native English teachers. I am an English teacher from Iran.
Well, my first thread (question) is about the correct usage of "neither" in the sentences below. Actually, there is a disagreement between one of my colleagues and myself. I would be obliged if you would help us with this quandary.

Which of the following would be correct?

1. Neither is there a plate nor pizza here. (My colleague's choice)
2. Neither a plate nor pizza is here. (My choice)

To me, the problem in No.1 is splitting "neither" away from its noun. In No.2, the writer's splitting it by putting a verb between "neither" and the noun it is modifying. I believe that the "neither/nor" construction is generally not separated by a verb, since "neither/nor" acts as a "dual conjunction". However, my colleague thinks otherwise. He claims that No.1 is the correct form of "inversion".

Best,
Roozbeh

 

[SoothingDave]

Welcome to the forum.

Neither version is very natural. But #2 is better.

#1 introduces "is there ... here" for no apparent reason.

 

[emsr2d2]

I don't find either of them natural although, of the two, I prefer yours. I understand that your title mentions "inverted sentences" but I don't know why you're trying to use it when it's not necessary. I (and the majority of native speakers) would use "There is neither a plate nor [a] pizza here".

It might work in a different context - "Neither Susan nor John is here". That matches the construction of your version but uses a much more likely context.

[Cross-posted with SoothingDave.]

 

[Roozbeh]

No. I am not intending to use the inverted one necessarily. That difference, however, has become the subject of heated debate within the realm of Advanced points in English as a second language. Fluency takes precedence. No doubt.

So, as I previously implied, the first sentence is unnatural. We cannot consider that as ungrammatical. Correct me if I am wrong.