Skip to main content
19 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jul 13 at 3:04 comment added user182601 Strictly speaking, in math and logic, this is indeed illogical and incorrect. It "should" instead be Not all is lost. This is similar to how people might say everybody is not a genius when they "should" instead say not everybody is a genius. But, "Natural languages are not formal mathematical logic"---see english.stackexchange.com/questions/15935/…
Apr 17, 2020 at 15:00 history tweeted twitter.com/StackEnglish/status/1251163529656315904
Apr 17, 2020 at 12:44 answer added ReRo timeline score: -1
Sep 16, 2016 at 7:39 comment added Fritz Thanks, this question bothered me for ages. Also, here's an ngram chart with the terms: books.google.com/ngrams/…
Nov 15, 2015 at 15:06 answer added peter timeline score: -2
Nov 14, 2015 at 19:28 answer added peter timeline score: -2
Dec 9, 2014 at 18:56 vote accept John Smith
Oct 30, 2014 at 20:58 answer added rw-nandemo timeline score: 0
Nov 19, 2013 at 10:53 answer added Gilles Gateau de Poisson timeline score: 0
Mar 10, 2012 at 16:25 review Suggested edits
Mar 10, 2012 at 16:26
Nov 23, 2011 at 22:36 comment added GEdgar As a mathematician, I would agree that "All is not lost" and its ilk can be ambiguous. But (outside of technical fields) who objects to ambiguous language?
Nov 23, 2011 at 18:52 answer added Dan Wray timeline score: 1
Jul 24, 2011 at 7:09 comment added Shen I have a similar question. How about "everything is not lost"? Is it the same as "nothing is lost" or "all is not lost"?
Dec 5, 2010 at 22:26 vote accept John Smith
Dec 9, 2014 at 18:56
Dec 5, 2010 at 9:57 history edited RegDwigнt CC BY-SA 2.5
typos, tags
Dec 5, 2010 at 4:15 answer added Hellion timeline score: 11
Dec 5, 2010 at 3:55 answer added Robusto timeline score: 19
Dec 5, 2010 at 3:00 answer added VonC timeline score: 4
Dec 5, 2010 at 2:20 history asked John Smith CC BY-SA 2.5