Were no or were not
- Thread starter diplomacy
- Start date
- Views : 13,873
- Status
bhaisahab
VIP Member
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2008
- Member Type
- Retired English Teacher
- Native Language
- British English
- Home Country
- England
- Current Location
- Ireland
1/ is the most natural.
TheParser
VIP Member
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2009
- Member Type
- Other
- Native Language
- English
- Home Country
- United States
- Current Location
- United States
***** NOT A TEACHER *****
(1) As I understand it,
(a) "There were no spectators at the match" is considered stronger than " There were not any spectators at the match."
(2) For example, if you asked a friend for a loan, which answer do you think would be the ruder:
(i) I have no money. Go away!
(ii) Oh, I'm so sorry, but I do not have any money. (Notice the distance between the negative word "not" and the noun "money.")
(1) As I understand it,
(a) "There were no spectators at the match" is considered stronger than " There were not any spectators at the match."
(2) For example, if you asked a friend for a loan, which answer do you think would be the ruder:
(i) I have no money. Go away!
(ii) Oh, I'm so sorry, but I do not have any money. (Notice the distance between the negative word "not" and the noun "money.")
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2009
- Member Type
- English Teacher
- Native Language
- British English
- Home Country
- UK
- Current Location
- UK
The rudeness or otherwise of those statements has less to do with the distance of the negative word from the word money, and more to do with the fact that #1 is abrupt and says "Go away!" but #2 starts with "I'm sorry".
I'm sorry, I have no money = I'm sorry I haven't got any money = I'm sorry, I don't have any money.
- Status
Similar threads
