Take the 2-minute tour ×
English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. It's 100% free, no registration required.

In English there are at least two ways to express negation, for example:
— I don't have money
— I have no money

or
— No objects were found
— Objects were not found

or
— No restrictions are applied
— Restrictions are not applied

Questions:

  1. What is the difference between these two forms?
  2. Is it only the matter of style or there is more significant differences in the meaning of the sentences?
  3. When should we use the first-one form and when the second?
  4. Does these two forms stress a difference between British and US English?
share|improve this question
    
The first negative sentence is ungrammatical. It should read: I don't have money OR I don't have any money. In which case there are three ways to express the negative. Money is an uncountable noun it should not be preceded by "a". OK, you have specified there are at least two ways to express the negative in English. But why did you choose one over the other? –  Mari-Lou A Aug 2 '13 at 7:02
1  
It's also worth noting that some of these examples may not mean the same thing. What if a store employee is tasked with looking through the lost-and-found bin for a customer's missing wallet and jacket? "Objects were not found" means that the specific items (wallet, jacket) were not found. "No objects were found" might be taken to mean that the lost-and-found box is empty. I suppose this might be a tricky case since it depends on context, however. –  user22138 Aug 2 '13 at 12:56
1  
Then there's litotes, known for its back-handed positivity (or negation of the positive through negativity). My favorite is Jesus' quotation of a proverb that was common in first-century Palestine: "A prophet is not without honor except in his own country." –  rhetorician Aug 24 '13 at 15:28

2 Answers 2

There are many differences between the couplets you mentioned, but it's hard to find a general rule that governs those differences. The root cause is, as Zibbobz mentions, that the negation is applied to different parts of the sentence, but the result is different in every case.

For instance, in your third example, first sentence, there are no restrictions which are applied, as opposed to the second sentence, where it's implied that restrictions do exist, but are not applied. In this case, it's because "Restrictions" are the subject of the sentence.

Your second exampleis a bit similar. "Objects were not found" could imply that the objects that were known to be there weren't found, as opposed to the first, which just implies that nothing was found, without implying anything about their existence.

In your first example, however, both sentences are more similar, but could still have nuances. The first might imply that you don't have money for something specific, or not have money on you at the moment, while the second might imply more of a general condition. Again, these are nuances, and can change depending on context.

So the answers to your question are:

  1. The difference depends on the sentence.
  2. Yes, the difference is more than stylistic
  3. Depending on what you want to convey. Language can be tricky.
share|improve this answer

What we have here is a case of different parts of speech.

In the first case, "don't" (do not) is used to modify the verb "have", and "no" is used to modify the noun money.

In the second case, the word "no" is used to modify the verb "objects", and the word "not" is used to modify the verb "found".

And in the last case, the word "no" is used to modify the noun "restrictions", and the word "not" is used to modify the verb "applied".

What this boils down to is no and not are different parts of speech.

"No" is an adjective, and can modify a noun or a verb. "No Shirts" is valid, as is "No Running". It is an adjective.

"Not" is an adverb, and can modify a verb, adjective or other adverb. "Not wearing a shirt", "That shirt is not purple", "that person is not very good ('very' is being modified here)".

This means that, occasionally, the two will intersect. "No wearing shirts" and "Not wearing shirts" are both valid, but mean different things. "No" in this case is an instruction, and "Not" in this case describes the status of the individual without a a shirt. So not only are they different parts of speech, but the words themselves mean different things, despite both being negations.

share|improve this answer
1  
Apparently this answer was not very well-recieved. Could someone please tell me why? I'm genuinely curious how I got this wrong. –  Zibbobz Aug 26 '13 at 13:05

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.