Having not much money, he could afford it.

[keannu]

I don't think I have heard of 2, but does it ever make sense?

1.Not having much money, he couldn't afford it.
2.Having not much money, he couldn't afford it.

 

[Route21]

As an NES but not a teacher, what they would both mean to me would be:
" The reason why he could not ("not" added, post facto, by moderators) afford it was that he didn't have much money".
Neither made sense to me.

Regards
R21

 

[keannu]

Thanks, but i'm not focusing on the logic, but the interchangeability between "having not much money" and "not having much money"? Are they interchangeable or differerent or does the former never work?

 

[emsr2d2]

Did you mean, then, to write "couldn't" in your title, instead of "could"? I, like Route21 I think, concentrated on the contents of your title which is a statement that doesn't make sense.

 

[keannu]

I adopted the little silly original sentence from a mid-term preparation material, and it focues on grammar, not the meaning. Could you just tell me you can use "Having Not..." in a sentence?
.Having not much money, he couldn't afford it.

 

[Rover_KE]

1.Not having much money, he couldn't afford it.
2.Having not much money, he couldn't afford it.

They are grammatically correct, mean the same and are interchangeable.

But they are not natural.

Rover

 

[keannu]

Maybe those are related to amount, both meaning the same thing, but the following's 2 wouldn't make sense, ungrammatical.
1.Not having done his homework, he was rebuked by his teacher.
2.Having not done his homework, he was rebuked by his teacher.

Aso, can be this interpreted like in this way?
Not having much money, he could afford it => Though he didn't have much money, he could afford it.

 

[Rover_KE]

1.Not having done his homework, he was rebuked by his teacher.
2.Having not done his homework, he was rebuked by his teacher. Again: grammatical/same meaning/unnatural.

Also, can be this interpreted like in this way?
Not having much money, he could afford it => Though he didn't have much money, he could afford it. No.

`

 

[konungursvia]

They are grammatically correct, mean the same and are interchangeable.

But they are not natural.

Rover

Really? 1. is perfectly natural in AmE, and we hear 2 at [times] from awkward young people, the sort who use "like" a lot.

 

[bhaisahab]

Really? 1. is perfectly natural in AmE, and we hear 2 at from awkward young people, the sort who use "like" a lot.

It seems unnatural to me. It would be natural as "He was rebuked by his teacher for not having done his homework".