-1
  1. ...so that they all turn into failures, not that they don't already are.
  2. ...so that they all turn into failures, not that they aren't already.
3
  • They can't both be failures and at the same time turn into them, whatever the grammar. – Edwin Ashworth May 8 '20 at 16:27
  • Neither one is a sentence. We need to see the rest. – Hot Licks May 8 '20 at 16:51
  • (But the first is incorrecter than the second.) – Hot Licks May 8 '20 at 16:52
1

The first sentence translates to

So that they all turn into failures, not that they do not already are

This does not make sense at all and is wrong.

The second sentence translates to

So that they all turn into failures, not that they are not (failures) already

This is correct.

Note that with slight modification, the first sentence can be made correct. Consider

So that they all turn into failures, not that they not already are (failures)

This is also correct.

3
  • Thank you for your response; however, though I know that "do" does not usually couple up with "be", I was thinking of the use in imperative sayings such as "do be quiet pls" or "don't be shy, just try it for once". – Jaden Wong May 6 '20 at 3:50
  • Maybe the above usage is strictly only allowed in imperative structure? – Jaden Wong May 6 '20 at 3:51
  • Thank you so much! I've always wondered if "do" can be used along with "be" outside of imperative sentences. – Jaden Wong May 6 '20 at 5:16

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