In no time did they take action
- Thread starter joham
- Start date
- Views : 4,867
- Status
Raymott
VIP Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2008
- Member Type
- Academic
- Native Language
- English
- Home Country
- Australia
- Current Location
- Australia
No. The first could easily be misinterpreted as "And at no time did they take action" which means the exact opposite.
Besides, the main clause describes a positive action, and there's no reason to invert the sentence.
joham
Key Member
- Joined
- Oct 30, 2007
- Member Type
- Student or Learner
- Native Language
- Chinese
- Home Country
- China
- Current Location
- China
Thanks a lot, Raymott.
After I read your reply, I searched the Internet, and found that Standard English and Indian Usage--Vocabulary and Grammar by J. Sethi has a sentence like this: In no time did they vacate the house (=They vacated the house in no time). Could it be possible that this inversion is regional usage?
After I read your reply, I searched the Internet, and found that Standard English and Indian Usage--Vocabulary and Grammar by J. Sethi has a sentence like this: In no time did they vacate the house (=They vacated the house in no time). Could it be possible that this inversion is regional usage?
Raymott
VIP Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2008
- Member Type
- Academic
- Native Language
- English
- Home Country
- Australia
- Current Location
- Australia
It's possible that they say that in India. I've never heard this usage.
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2009
- Member Type
- English Teacher
- Native Language
- British English
- Home Country
- UK
- Current Location
- UK
I haven't heard it either.
david11
Senior Member
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2011
- Member Type
- Student or Learner
- Native Language
- Tamil
- Home Country
- India
- Current Location
- India
In no time was the president aware of what was happening.
Is this sentence correct?
Does it mean that president was aware of what was happening very soon?
If it does then, I think , there should be no inversion structure.
Is this sentence correct?
Does it mean that president was aware of what was happening very soon?
If it does then, I think , there should be no inversion structure.
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2007
- Member Type
- Other
- Native Language
- American English
- Home Country
- United States
- Current Location
- United States
It means the opposite. It means the president was never aware. There existed no time in which the president was aware. (I'd say "at no time" not "in no time" but that doesn't change the negation implied.)
david11
Senior Member
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2011
- Member Type
- Student or Learner
- Native Language
- Tamil
- Home Country
- India
- Current Location
- India
In no time also means a relatively short time .
So, can't it be meant as President was( or made) aware of what was happening in a relatively short time.?
If it can then shouldn't it be wrong to use inversion at all?
And what is the difference between in no time and at no time?
Last edited:
Raymott
VIP Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2008
- Member Type
- Academic
- Native Language
- English
- Home Country
- Australia
- Current Location
- Australia
That must be a regional usage. "In no time" is a common phrase used to mean "Very soon, without delay." - "He answered my post in no time (immediately)".
david11 is correct. Without inversion (and with a comma), the sentence would be:
"In no time, the president was aware of what was happening." That is, the president was very quickly aware of what was happening.
Don't you use that phrase in US?
Raymott
VIP Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2008
- Member Type
- Academic
- Native Language
- English
- Home Country
- Australia
- Current Location
- Australia
"At no time" means 'never'. The following clause is inverted
"In no time, " means "immediately, without delay, quickly". The following clause is not inverted.
"I heard a scream and in no time I was in the woman's room."
"I heard a scream but at no time was I in the woman's room."
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2007
- Member Type
- Other
- Native Language
- American English
- Home Country
- United States
- Current Location
- United States
Definitely, "in no time" means "right away, without delay." And "at no time" means "never."
But with the sentence quoted, the inversion, in my opinion, overrides anything else. The comma also makes a huge difference.
In no time, the president was made aware. -- Right away, they told him.
At no time was the president made aware. -- They never told him.
-- I think we agree on these.
In no time was the president made aware. -- For me, the inversion conflicts with the "in no time." But my overriding assumption would still be "they did not tell him."
Bottom line is: There is no reason for the inversion in a positive statement like this and you are very likely to confuse your readers if you do so.
But with the sentence quoted, the inversion, in my opinion, overrides anything else. The comma also makes a huge difference.
In no time, the president was made aware. -- Right away, they told him.
At no time was the president made aware. -- They never told him.
-- I think we agree on these.
In no time was the president made aware. -- For me, the inversion conflicts with the "in no time." But my overriding assumption would still be "they did not tell him."
Bottom line is: There is no reason for the inversion in a positive statement like this and you are very likely to confuse your readers if you do so.
- Status
Similar threads
