The correct usage of 'Not only' in the beginning of a negative sentence

Question

Am I using Not only . . . but also correctly?

1. Not only have these conditions been not prepared in developed countries, but developing countries also have not accepted them.
   
2. Not only have not these conditions been prepared in developed countries, but also have developing countries not accepted them.
   
3. Not only have these conditions not been prepared in developed countries, but (also) in developing countries.
   

Could you tell me which sentence is correct, where the right location of not in the above examples is, and whether we can ignore the verb after but also like example 3?

In the end, do you have any better idea for writing the mentioned example less casually?

Answer 1

Regarding your primary question of the position of 'not' following a sentence that starts with 'Not only..', the third option seems correct. Because, the verb to be negated is 'been prepared' and therefore, the position of 'not' would be right before it.

But I have my doubts whether the 'Not only..but also' sentence structure is the right choice to convey the meaning you wish to convey.

Something like...

These conditions have neither been prepared in developed countries, nor been accepted in developing countries

...feels much less complex, but conveys pretty much the same meaning as far as I understand

Edit : And as @nonchip said, omitting the 'also' doesn't seem to be good idea.

Answer 2

the third sentence is correct, but I'd avoid omitting the "also". ignoring the verb eliminates information, because the developing countries are not refusing to prepare, but accept them.

Answer 3

Sentence (3) seems to have a different intended meaning from (1) and (2).

There is a complication in changing from a passive to an active construction when moving from the 'not only' to the 'but also' strings.

Sachin's rewrite is vastly better.

Answer 4

I find sentences 1 & 2 awkward (at best) because of the positioning of "not":

1. Not only have these conditions been not prepared in developed countries, but developing countries also have not accepted them.
2. Not only have not these conditions been prepared in developed countries, but also have developing countries not accepted them.

As @EdwinAshworth has commented, sentence 3 has a different meaning because the other two sentences refer to acceptance by developing countries, whereas the last sentence refers (implicitly) to preparation by developing countries:

3- Not only have these conditions not been prepared in developed countries, but (also) in developing countries.

Although I'm not 100% certain what you're trying to say, my suggestion of rewording while retaining your words as closely as possible, would be to adopt the first part of your sentence 3, with a modified version of the last part of your sentence 1:

Not only have these conditions not been prepared in developed countries, but neither have developing countries accepted them.
Not only have these conditions not been prepared in developed countries, but neither have they been accepted by developing countries.

Of those, I prefer the latter because the second part more closely reflects the first part:

Not only have these conditions not been prepared in developed countries, but neither have [the conditions] been accepted by developing countries.

Answer 5

I would argue all of these are wrong. They never establish a subject, but it is implied. Not only... is an adverbial clause followed by a conjunction with a predicate.