too or either

[phung]

Hi everybody,

Please help me with the use of too in the sentence below:

“Children should spend only a small part of their free time playing video games. They mustn’t forget to do other things, too.”

I think it should be either. I am very confused because the sentence is from an English textbook!

Please help me and correct me if I am wrong. Thank you very much.

 

[Soup]

Hello phung,

Children should spend only a small part of their free time playing video games. They mustn’t forget to do other things, too. :tick:


​

It means that children should spend their free time doing more than just playing video games. They should (also) do other things too.

 

[phung]

Hello Soup,
Thank you so much for your explanation. Now, I realize that, to deal with the question, native speakers focus on the meaning of the two sentences, not on the grammar structure mustn’t…either of the second sentence as I do.

But I still think that the two sentences sound rather odd, or unnatural. What do you think if I rewrite them as follow:

Children should not spend most of their free time playing video games. They must remember to do other things,too/either.

Children should not spend most of their free time playing video games. They mustn't forget to do other things,too/either.

or it’s better to write:

Children should spend only a small part of their free time playing video games. They must remember to do other things, too.

I would like to know your opinion. Thank you so much again.

 

[5jj]

Children should not spend most of their free time playing video games. They must remember to do other things, too/[STRIKE]either[/STRIKE].

Children should not spend most of their free time playing video games. They mustn't forget to do other things, too/[STRIKE]either[/STRIKE]. Soup's explanation works for this.

Children should spend only a small part of their free time playing video games. They must remember to do other things, too.

These are fine - but the original sentence is neither odd nor unnatural.

 

[phung]

Dear teachers,

Thank you so much for your answers. How interesting they are!

For a long time, I have been taught to use too/so in affirmative statements and either/neither in negative statements, to show similar or equal experiences.

For example:

I like music. He likes music, too.
She isn’t happy. He isn’t either.

So, I bear in my mind that I must apply the same grammar to the sentences I posted, and it turned out that I was wrong!

Why can’t we use either instead of too in the sentences I posted? Is the use of too in the sentences I posted totally different from what I have been taught?

Would you please clarify this for me? Are there any differences in grammar category?

I wish you good health and thank you so much again.

 

[Coolfootluke]

Dear teachers,

Thank you so much for your answers. How interesting they are!

For a long time, I have been taught to use too/so in affirmative statements and either/neither in negative statements, to show similar or equal experiences.

For example:

I like music. He likes music, too.
She isn’t happy. He isn’t either.

So, I bear in my mind that I must apply the same grammar to the sentences I posted, and it turned out that I was wrong!

Why can’t we use either instead of too in the sentences I posted? Is the use of too in the sentences I posted totally different from what I have been taught?

Would you please clarify this for me? Are there any differences in grammar category?

I wish you good health and thank you so much again.

I am not a teacher.

What you were wrong about was the sense of the sentence. "Either" refers to "forget". With "either", the sentence would mean that they must not forget to do other things in addition to not forgetting to ... what? Nothing. The sentence does not mean that there are two things to remember.

"Too" refers to "other things". They must not forget to do other things in addition to the thing you already mentioned---the playing of games.

 

[Soup]

Why can’t we use either instead of too in the sentences I posted

Because you're focusing on the wrong verb. The agreeing idea is positive, not negative:


[1] Children should play video games, but they mustn't forget to do other things too.

• play video games and do other things either :cross:
• play video games and do other things too :tick:

 

[Khosro]

For a long time, I have been taught to use too/so in affirmative statements and either/neither in negative statements, to show similar or equal experiences.

For example:

I like music. He likes music, too.
She isn’t happy. He isn’t either.

So, I bear in my mind that I must apply the same grammar to the sentences I posted, and it turned out that I was wrong!

Why can’t we use either instead of too in the sentences I posted? Is the use of too in the sentences I posted totally different from what I have been taught?

QUOTE]

Take another look at your original example:

"Children should spend only a small part of their free time playing video games. They mustn’t forget to do other things, too"


"They mustn't forget to do other things , too." Let's break up this sentence into two sentences to clarify its meaning:

"They should do other things too. They mustn't forget this."

See? Now you have got the "too" in an affirmative statement. You can't say:"They should do other things either". As coolfootluke said "too" refers to "other things" and "either" refers to "forget". I give you an example of how we can use "either" in a similar situation:

"Children mustn't forget to wash their hands before meal. They mustn't forget to brush their teeths, either."

You can use "too" as well:

"Children must wash their hands before meal. They must brush their teeth, too."

 

[phung]

Dear teachers,

I would like to thank you all for your time and your useful comments, especially Soup and fivejedjon. I think that, as an English learner, I have learnt a lot from you.

However, there is something I am still not sure about, and I need to have your confirmation, so that I can make a rule for myself. I would like to express my point below. Please correct me if I am wrong.

1. In the pairs of sentences below, we imply the comparison or the similarity between two people or two things.

I like music. He likes music, too.
(Positive statement + positive statement ....too)

She isn’t happy. He isn’t, either.
(Negative statement + negative statement ....either)

2. In the sentence I originally posted, I notice that there is a difference in meaning. In this sentence we do talk about requirement or giving advice.

“Children should spend only a small part of their free time playing video games. They mustn’t forget to do other things, too.”

The sentences imply that there are two things the children must/should do:

Play less video game + do other things ... too
Positive statement + Positive statement ... too

Despite the fact that the form of the verbs in the pair may be affirmative or negative, we focus only on the idea.

Am I correct up to now? If yes, please tell me.

3. If all my theory I have presented is correct up to now, I would like to continue that I am not sure about Khosro’s explanation:

"Children mustn't forget to wash their hands before meal. They mustn't forget to brush their teeths, either."

Please forgive me, Khosro, but my opinion is that the verb forget has a negative meaning, and that not forget means remember so I think I can apply Soup’s opinion as follow:

Children should:

Wash their hands before meals + brush their teeth ...... too
Positive statement + Positive statement .. too

I would like to have your opinion. I wish you all good health and thank you again.

 

[5jj]

1.
I like music. He likes music, too.
(Positive statement + positive statement ....too)

She isn’t happy. He isn’t, either.
(Negative statement + negative statement ....either)

2.
Play less video game + do other things ... too
Positive statement + Positive statement ... too

Despite the fact that the form of the verbs in the pair may be affirmative or negative, we focus only in the idea. Am I correct up to now? If yes, please tell me. Not really. In your examples above, the choice between 'too' and 'either' depends on the form of the verb.

3. If all my theory I have presented is correct up to now, I would like to continue that I am not sure about Khosro’s explanation:

"Children mustn't forget to wash their hands before meal. They mustn't forget to brush their teeths, either."

Please forgive me, Khosro, but my opinion is that the verb forget has a negative meaning, and that not forget means remember so I think I can apply Soup’s opinion as follow:

Children should:

Wash their hands before meals + brush their teeth ...... too
Positive statement + Positive statement .. too

Consider these sentences:

1. Children should rememember to do their home work. They should remember to tidy their rooms, too.
2. Children shouldn't forget to do their homework. They shouldn't forget to tidy their rooms, either. Thinking of 'forget'as having negative meaning isn't helpful here.
3. Children should spend only a small part of their free time playing video games. They mustn’t forget to do other things, .?..

#1 and #2 convey approximately the same message. However, #1 is affirmative + afirmative, too, # 2 is negative # negative, either.

In #3 we have affirmative + negative .?. The affirmative/negative form of the verb does not lead us automatically to a too or either, so our choice depends on our subconscious analysis of the message, which is that they should (affirmative) spend (a) little time playing and (b) do other things. So, affirmative message + affirmative mesage, too.

It would be possible to argue that the messages can be analysed thus: they (a) should spend not much (negative) time and (b) mustn't (negative) forget to do other things. So, negative message + negative message, either. This interpretation is theoretically possible, but the overall affirmative idea that the children should do (not just remember or forget to do) two things is more important.

Having said all that, I should add the depressing (for you) news that in normal conversation we often do not think things through as logically as that. You may well hear things said that are not in accordance with the ideas I have outlined.

 

[5jj]

Since my last post, I have been discussing this with a colleague. We came up with lots of possible situations, and finally concluded that it was impossible to give a clear answer. Things that clouded the issue included:

1. You must spend little/less/no time on... Is this affirmative or negative?
2. You mustn't forget to... Is this negative (not forget) or affirmative (remember)?
3. A: You must read more French books.
B: You must speak more German, too.
Does speaker B intend the 'and also' idea of 'too' to apply to 'speak' or to 'German' or to both?
4. 'Should', unlike 'must' frequently suggests the idea that the the obligation/suggestion/conclusion may not be carried out. Does this negative implication affect the speaker's choice between 'too' and 'either', especually if other factors (such as those in #1-3) are involved?

Some of these questions may appear silly, and some of the answers you come up with may appear obvious, but we thought that they might, subconsciously, have an effect on the words the speaker finally produced.

If we are right, then it does not help you produce an utterance that will appear natural to all native speakers who hear it, but it does explain why you will sometimes hear utterances that are 'wrong' by all the rules that you have learnt.

 

[Soup]

Dear teachers,

I would like to thank you all for your time and your useful comments, especially Soup and fivejedjon. I think that, as an English learner, I have learnt a lot from you.

However, there is something I am still not sure about, and I need to have your confirmation, so that I can make a rule for myself. I would like to express my point below. Please correct me if I am wrong.

1. In the pairs of sentences below, we imply the comparison or the similarity between two people or two things.

I like music. He likes music, too.
(Positive statement + positive statement ....too)

She isn’t happy. He isn’t, either.
(Negative statement + negative statement ....either)

2. In the sentence I originally posted, I notice that there is a difference in meaning. In this sentence we do talk about requirement or giving advice.

“Children should spend only a small part of their free time playing video games. They mustn’t forget to do other things, too.”

The sentences imply that there are two things the children must/should do:

Play less video game + do other things ... too
Positive statement + Positive statement ... too

Despite the fact that the form of the verbs in the pair may be affirmative or negative, we focus only in the idea.

Am I correct up to now? If yes, please tell me.

3. If all my theory I have presented is correct up to now, I would like to continue that I am not sure about Khosro’s explanation:

"Children mustn't forget to wash their hands before meal. They mustn't forget to brush their teeths, either."

Khosro's example is fine. The agreeing idea (the parallel construct) is mustn't forget, a negative, which is why either is used:

• Children mustn't forget to wash their hands and
• children mustn't forget to brush their teeth either.

Parallel constructs are the same, which is why should spend | mustn't forget cannot be a parallel or agreeing idea. They are different (unlike, like music and don't like music, wherein in the parallel construct is like music.

In your original example the agreeing idea is the phrase spend time, a verb phrase that takes either a gerund or an infinitive as its object:

1. Children should
   1. spend time playing video games. gerund
      
2. Children mustn't forget to
   
   1. spend time doing other things too. gerund
3. Children mustn't forget to
   
   1. (spend time to)do other things too. infinitive

In 3., the parallel construct spend time is omitted yet understood. It's awkward as well. There are too many to-infinitives in to spend time to do.


Look for a parallel construct. That's your key.

 

[Soup]

Here's a great example; John Lennon's use of too here:

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
(Imagine there's) Nothing to kill or die for
And (imagine there's) no religion too

​

If the assumption is that the agreeing idea is negative (Imagine there's no) and the positive tag too explained away as being a matter of speaker choice, then what does the speaker (Lennon) base his choice on? Learners want to know that. Explanations such as "It's artistic license", "It's dialect", "It's bad grammar", "Because that's what the speaker felt like saying" don't explain why speakers choose too instead of either. There's a rule. And the rule is rather quite simple in its design: if the parallel construct is positive, use too and if it's negative use either. The parallel construct is positive (imagine there's) here:

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
(Imagine there's) Nothing to kill or die for
And (imagine there's) no religion too


​

Imagine + no countries
Imagine + nothing to kill or die for
Imagine + no religion too

 

[5jj]

what does the speaker (Lennon) base his choice on? Learners want to know that. Explanations such as "It's artistic license", "It's dialect", "It's bad grammar", "Because that's what the speaker felt like saying" don't explain why speakers choose too instead of either. There's a rule. And the rule is rather quite simple in its design: if the parallel construct is positive, use too and if it's negative use either.

Your 'rule' is indeed rather simple in design; in real life, however, when the negative-ness of what is being said is not always immediately obvious, then "Because that's what the speaker felt like saying" is sometimes the only answer.

In writing, when we have time to think about what is appearing in print and how the reader may interpret our words, we may well follow the 'rule', or choose a different construction. It is almost certainly a good idea to recommend that learners follow the 'rule'.

However, I see no point in pretending that everybody say what they 'should' in normal conversation. We very often start saying something, and then complete it in a way that accords with what is in our minds, not with the words we have actually uttered.

 

[Soup]

..., when the negative-ness of what is being said is not always immediately obvious, then "Because that's what the speaker felt like saying" is sometimes the only answer.

I'm not not disagreeing with you. Did you have an example in mind?

 

[engee30]

I'm not not disagreeing with you. Did you have an example in mind?

One should be careful how s/he actually uses negative, or broad negative, expressions:

not - neg1
not - neg2
disagree - neg3
(neg1 + neg2) + neg3 = (pos1) + neg3 = negative meaning

not - neg1
disagree - neg2
neg1 + neg2 = positive meaning

based on a mathematical formula

 

[5jj]

I'm not not disagreeing with you. Did you have an example in mind?

Well, my colleague's first response to the OP: "Children should spend only a small part of their free time playing video games. They mustn’t forget to do other things, .?." was 'either'.

(neg1 + neg2) + neg3 = (pos1) + neg3 = negative meaning [...]
based on a mathematical formula

The once correct emphatic double, or even triple, negative has been largely driven out of formal language by people who felt that language should follow mathematical/logical rules. However, it survives in what many people would feel is 'substandard' language. 'It is me' has survived such misguided efforts, as have many other natural expressions. Languages were not constructed logically.

 

[engee30]

The once correct emphatic double, or even triple, negative has been largely driven out of formal language by people who felt that language should follow mathematical/logical rules. However, it survives in what many people would feel is 'substandard' language. 'It is me' has survived such misguided efforts, as have many other natural expressions. Languages were not constructed logically.

So, according to your words, should I assume that Soup did actually agree with you on that issue, or didn't she? :?:

 

[5jj]

So, according to your words, should I assume that Soup did actually agree with you on that issue, or didn't she? :?:

I do not agree entirely with the opinions that Soup appeared to express in post #13. I got the impression that she was suggesting that there was a rule and that it should always be followed. I inferred from this that she considered that utterances which did not follow the rule are 'incorrect'.

However, I may be wrong in my interpretation of her words. Let's wait to see what Soup has to say - it is not for me to say whether or not she agrees with me.

 

[Khosro]

Now, I realize that, to deal with the question, native speakers focus on the meaning of the two sentences, not on the grammar structure mustn’t…either of the second sentence as I do.

Yes. They do, as long as the "parallel construct" (soup's phrase for it and perhaps an accepted grammar term) does not force us to use "either".

It means that children should spend their free time doing more than just playing video games. They should (also) do other things too.

It means that children should spend their free time doing more than just playing video games. They should (also) do other things too.

Khosro's example is fine. The agreeing idea (the parallel construct) is mustn't forget, a negative, which is why either is used:

• Children mustn't forget to wash their hands and
• children mustn't forget to brush their teeth either.

Parallel constructs are the same, which is why should spend | mustn't forget cannot be a parallel or agreeing idea.

My problem with this last quotation from soup is that he/she implicitly equals "the agreeing idea" with "the parallel construct". What makes fivejedjon's friend to choose "either" is that for him/her (and for me as well) the agreeing idea still counts even when there is no "parallel construct", as there is no parallel construct in phung's first sentence as there is in "children mustn't forget to wash their hands and ...". In the latter sentence we are not allowed to use too because the parallel construct forces us to use either. But in my opinion in phung's first sentence we are allowed to use too and either both. Ofcourse I prefer "too" because it comes immediately after "other things" and as both soup and coolfootluke mentioned it naturally refers to "other things in addition to playing computer games.

And the parallel construct should be pure,so that it can really force us to use "either", which can not in the case of "imagine" song.