Results 1 to 2 of 2
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • Bengali; Bangla
      • Home Country:
      • Bangladesh
      • Current Location:
      • Singapore

    • Join Date: Jul 2013
    • Posts: 495
    #1

    Smaller families are not necessarily less interesting than big ones.

    Hi there,
    What does this sentence means actually? "Smaller families are not necessarily less interesting than big ones."
    Does it mean that smaller families are more interesting than big ones?

    Thanks.

  1. Raymott's Avatar
    • Member Info
      • Native Language:
      • English
      • Home Country:
      • Australia
      • Current Location:
      • Australia

    • Join Date: Jun 2008
    • Posts: 24,104
    #2

    Re: Smaller families are not necessarily less interesting than big ones.

    No. It means that it's not necessarily true that small families are less interesting than big ones. This does not make any judgement about whether big or small families are more interesting. In fact, it says specifically that small families cannot be judged to be less interesting. Nor can it be said that big families are more interesting.

Similar Threads

  1. necessary vs. necessarily
    By Nicky_K in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-Jul-2012, 08:49
  2. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 26-Sep-2011, 13:34
  3. not necessarily
    By contiluo in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 22-Nov-2010, 01:09
  4. divide families, break up families
    By joham in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 30-Jun-2010, 11:47
  5. necessarily
    By IMPSX-UE in forum Ask a Teacher
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 25-Dec-2008, 08:24

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •