Skip to main content
replaced http://english.stackexchange.com/ with https://english.stackexchange.com/
Source Link

It means "[The] function is non-negative at all of the vertices in the structure S and positive at some vertex". The of isn't necessary though it may help to clarify the meaning.

There may be some confusion between the phrases not negative at all and non-negative at all. Some examples may help to clarify what I mean. Note that these sentences do not have the same meaning as your original sentence.

This sentence asserts that the function is never negative.

The function is not negative at all.

It could also be written as

The function is not at all negative.

The phrase at all serves to emphasize not.

However in your sentence the phrase at all refers to the set of vertices. It could be written as

The function is not negative at all the vertices ...

(Though, as jwpat points out, there are better ways to say this.)

If it were reordered it would not make sense. Thus at all is not serving to emphasize not.

*The function is not at all negative the vertices ...

This questionquestion discusses the difference between at all and not at all.

It means "[The] function is non-negative at all of the vertices in the structure S and positive at some vertex". The of isn't necessary though it may help to clarify the meaning.

There may be some confusion between the phrases not negative at all and non-negative at all. Some examples may help to clarify what I mean. Note that these sentences do not have the same meaning as your original sentence.

This sentence asserts that the function is never negative.

The function is not negative at all.

It could also be written as

The function is not at all negative.

The phrase at all serves to emphasize not.

However in your sentence the phrase at all refers to the set of vertices. It could be written as

The function is not negative at all the vertices ...

(Though, as jwpat points out, there are better ways to say this.)

If it were reordered it would not make sense. Thus at all is not serving to emphasize not.

*The function is not at all negative the vertices ...

This question discusses the difference between at all and not at all.

It means "[The] function is non-negative at all of the vertices in the structure S and positive at some vertex". The of isn't necessary though it may help to clarify the meaning.

There may be some confusion between the phrases not negative at all and non-negative at all. Some examples may help to clarify what I mean. Note that these sentences do not have the same meaning as your original sentence.

This sentence asserts that the function is never negative.

The function is not negative at all.

It could also be written as

The function is not at all negative.

The phrase at all serves to emphasize not.

However in your sentence the phrase at all refers to the set of vertices. It could be written as

The function is not negative at all the vertices ...

(Though, as jwpat points out, there are better ways to say this.)

If it were reordered it would not make sense. Thus at all is not serving to emphasize not.

*The function is not at all negative the vertices ...

This question discusses the difference between at all and not at all.

Corrected formatting and acknowledged the awkwardness of the sentence construction in the second to last example..
Source Link

It means "[The] function is non-negative at all of the vertices in the structure S and positive at some vertex". The ofof isn't necessary though it may help to clarify the meaning.

There may be some confusion between the phrases not negative at allnot negative at all and non-negative at allnon-negative at all. Some examples may help to clarify what I mean. Note that these sentences do not have the same meaning as your original sentence.

This sentence asserts that the function is never negative.

The function is not negative at all.

The function is not negative at all.

It could also be written as

The function is not at all negative.

The function is not at all negative.

The phrase at allat all serves to emphasize notnot.

However in your sentence the phrase at allat all refers to the set of vertices. It could be written as

The function is not negative at all the vertices ...

The function is not negative at all the vertices ...

(Though, as jwpat points out, there are better ways to say this.)

If it were reordered it would not make sense. Thus at allat all is not serving to emphasize notnot.

*The function is not at all negative the vertices ...

*The function is not at all negative the vertices ...

This question discusses the difference between "at all"at all and "not at all"not at all.

It means "[The] function is non-negative at all of the vertices in the structure S and positive at some vertex". The of isn't necessary though it may help to clarify the meaning.

There may be some confusion between the phrases not negative at all and non-negative at all. Some examples may help to clarify what I mean. Note that these sentences do not have the same meaning as your original sentence.

This sentence asserts that the function is never negative.

The function is not negative at all.

It could also be written as

The function is not at all negative.

The phrase at all serves to emphasize not.

However in your sentence the phrase at all refers to the set of vertices. It could be written as

The function is not negative at all the vertices ...

If it were reordered it would not make sense. Thus at all is not serving to emphasize not.

*The function is not at all negative the vertices ...

This question discusses the difference between "at all" and "not at all".

It means "[The] function is non-negative at all of the vertices in the structure S and positive at some vertex". The of isn't necessary though it may help to clarify the meaning.

There may be some confusion between the phrases not negative at all and non-negative at all. Some examples may help to clarify what I mean. Note that these sentences do not have the same meaning as your original sentence.

This sentence asserts that the function is never negative.

The function is not negative at all.

It could also be written as

The function is not at all negative.

The phrase at all serves to emphasize not.

However in your sentence the phrase at all refers to the set of vertices. It could be written as

The function is not negative at all the vertices ...

(Though, as jwpat points out, there are better ways to say this.)

If it were reordered it would not make sense. Thus at all is not serving to emphasize not.

*The function is not at all negative the vertices ...

This question discusses the difference between at all and not at all.

Clarified the purpose of the examples..
Source Link

It means "[The] function is non-negative at all of the vertices in the structure S and positive at some vertex". The of isn't necessary though it may help to clarify the meaning. 

There may be some confusion between the phrases not negative at all and non-negative at all vertices. Some examples may help to clarify what I mean. Note that these sentences do not have the same meaning as your original sentence.

This sentence asserts that the function is never negative.

The function is not negative at all.

It could also be written as

The function is not at all negative.

The phrase at all serves to emphasize not.

However in your sentence the phrase at all refers to the set of vertices. It could be written as

The function is not negative at all the vertices ...

If it were reordered it would not make sense. Thus at all is not serving to emphasize not.

*The function is not at all negative the vertices ...

This question discusses the difference between "at all" and "not at all".

It means "[The] function is non-negative at all of the vertices in the structure S and positive at some vertex". The of isn't necessary though it may help to clarify the meaning. There may be some confusion between the phrases not negative at all and non-negative at all vertices. Some examples may help.

This sentence asserts that the function is never negative.

The function is not negative at all.

It could also be written as

The function is not at all negative.

The phrase at all serves to emphasize not.

However in your sentence the phrase at all refers to the set of vertices. It could be written as

The function is not negative at all the vertices ...

If it were reordered it would not make sense.

*The function is not at all negative the vertices ...

This question discusses the difference between "at all" and "not at all".

It means "[The] function is non-negative at all of the vertices in the structure S and positive at some vertex". The of isn't necessary though it may help to clarify the meaning. 

There may be some confusion between the phrases not negative at all and non-negative at all. Some examples may help to clarify what I mean. Note that these sentences do not have the same meaning as your original sentence.

This sentence asserts that the function is never negative.

The function is not negative at all.

It could also be written as

The function is not at all negative.

The phrase at all serves to emphasize not.

However in your sentence the phrase at all refers to the set of vertices. It could be written as

The function is not negative at all the vertices ...

If it were reordered it would not make sense. Thus at all is not serving to emphasize not.

*The function is not at all negative the vertices ...

This question discusses the difference between "at all" and "not at all".

Source Link
Loading