just anything

[navi tasan]

1) I cannot talk to him and ask him anything.
2) I cannot talk to him and ask him just anything.

I guess '1' could simply mean I can't ask him anything. But could it mean the same as '2'?

I think we need the 'just' for that meaning.

Gratefully,
Navi

 

[emsr2d2]

If you can't talk to him, it's obvious that you can't ask him anything. I'm not sure what you're trying to say.

 

[navi tasan]

Thank you very much emsr2d2,


I have to change my question.

1) I can't have an official meeting with him and ask him anything.
2) I can't have an official meeting with him and ask him just anything.

The second one is clear to me. I can have an official meeting with him, but I can ask him just anything in the meeting.

But does '1' make sense? And if it does, what does it mean? Could it be used instead of '2'? Could it mean I can't have an official meeting with him and therefore I can't ask him anything?

Gratefully,
Navi

 

[5jj]

1) I can't have an official meeting with him and ask him anything.


But does '1' make sense? And if it does, what does it mean? Could it be used instead of '2'? Could it mean I can't have an official meeting with him and therefore I can't ask him anything?

It could mean the same, It could also mean the same as your second suggestion.

It's potentially ambiguous.

 

[Tdol]

#2 suggests that if you do have a meeting with him, you are restricted in what you can talk about. I'd say it means the opposite of your post.

 

[Tarheel]

Are we talking about a real life situation here?

 

[navi tasan]

Thank you all very much.

No. It is not a real life situation. But what would that change? Grammar is grammar, right?

Gratefully,
Navi

 

[emsr2d2]

We generally like to think that we're helping people either with real-life situations in which they are actively going to use what we suggest, or with preparing for tests or exams.
What prompted you to come up with your original two sentences?

 

[5jj]

Navi is interested in (potentially) ambiguous sentences.

 

[Tdol]

He is a hairsplitter of split hairs, which is what his threads are about.

 

[Rover_KE]

Theoretical questions like this seem to me to belong more appropriately here in General Language Discussions., whose purpose is 'An area for general discussions about the English language'.

I've moved it.