[Grammar] "Not only but also" sentence

[shanghailuv]

Gurus,

Before posting this thread, I actually did a search for it in this forum but could not locate any which could exactly answer to my question. So, i am posting here...hope you guys do not mind.

I am confused a bit by the usage of "not only but also" in sentences. I have seen such variations in the English news portals. Not sure which is correct.

"It not only helps the children grow healthily, but develop their soft skills." - It is without "also"

"It helps the children not only grow healthily, but also develop their soft skills."- It is with "also" but location of "not only" before the main verb.

So, does it mean that the requirement of "also" depends on the location of "not only"?

I thought regardless of the location of 'not only', "also" is also required in second clause.

Please help.

 

[MikeNewYork]

In most cases (and possibly all cases) "not only" requires "but also".

 

[Matthew Wai]

"Not only Peter did it, John did it too."
Is it an exceptional case?

 

[shanghailuv]

Dear 5jj, would you please explore it a bit, if you disagree with that MikeNewYork has said?

 

[MikeNewYork]

No, but "too" substitutes for "also".

 

[5jj]

Mike wrote In most cases (and possibly all cases) "not only" requires "but also".

I don't agree, that's all. There are hundreds of examples of 'not only' sentences without 'but also' in COCA.
​

 

[MikeNewYork]

I was talking about the construction as a "correlative conjunction". My guess is there are countless examples of that. Looking up "not only" by itself does not speak to that issue.

 

[5jj]

Mike, I simply did not agree with the what you said in post no.2. I still don't.

 

[MikeNewYork]

That's fine.

 

[shanghailuv]

When I saw the following link, I got confused. "also" 's presence is decided by the location of "not only". Please see the link

http://www.dailywritingtips.com/5-tips-for-fixing-“not-only-but-also”-errors/

I am not sure if I should follow the rule given in there.

 

[MikeNewYork]

As you have read in the liink, the construction "not only...but also" causes a lot of problems. In general, I agree with the sentiments expressed in the web page.

 

[Barb_D]

Most people will not notice the lack of parallelism in a not only/but also construction any more than they do a dangling modifier.

i notice it. Others writers will notice it. Editors will notice it. And even so, almost none of us will fail to understand the intended meaning

 

[tzfujimino]

I was talking about the construction as a "correlative conjunction". My guess is there are countless examples of that. Looking up "not only" by itself does not speak to that issue.

I understand what you mean, and I agree with 5jj that there are many examples of 'not only' sentences without 'but also'.
I teach my students that 'also' is not required in that construction - it's optional.
However, in these two dictionaries, which I've just consulted, 'but' is optional:
http://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/not#not__60
http://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/not#p008-000247304

Interesting.

 

[MikeNewYork]

As I said earlier, "not only" can occur in a number of uses. But when it is used as part of a coordinating conjunction it is (or should be) followed by "but also". Your links do not dispute that.

 

[5jj]

Nor do they confirm it.

 

[MikeNewYork]

Agreed.