English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

There are many such problems for which a greedy approach provides an optimal solution much more quickly than would a dynamic-programming approach.

This is from Page 321, Introduction to Algorithms 2nd Edition.

I know omitting "would" could convey somewhat different meaning. I thought even with "would" I would place it in the sentence as "...quickly than a dynamic-programming approach would".

Does the inversion means an emphasis here?

share|improve this question
up vote 5 down vote accepted

I'd say it was purely a matter of style. The writer may have felt that to put 'would' at the end of the sentence would have meant asking the reader to wait too long for it.

share|improve this answer

Comparative and superlative constructions trigger Negative Polarity items, and one such NPI is the enabling of auxiliary inversion, e.g:

  • I have seldom seen such a thing ~ Seldom have I seen such a thing.
  • I have frequently seen such a thing ~ *Frequently have I seen such a thing.

Inversion here just functions to get the modal up a little closer in the sentence to the implicit negation in the comparative. It's not so much "emphasis" as it is an expression of closer semantic relation.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


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.