1

I had written sentence like this:

However, this approach does not easily allow us to calculate confidence intervals for population growth and other derived quantities, since this way we do not obtain the joint distribution.

But one academic professor (non-native English speaker, but very experienced) corrected it and changed "and" to "neither":

However, this approach does not easily allow us to calculate confidence intervals for population growth neither other derived quantities, since this way we do not obtain the joint distribution.

To me, it doesn't sound correct. Can "neither" be used this way? Should there be "nor" instead? Or was my "and" the best? What is the best way to write this?

Note: this is grammatically slightly different than the usual use for neither-nor, because here it doesn't separate sentences, but two different objects in one negative sentence. But perhaps it could still be used somehow?

7
  • 1
    Correcting awful corrections from superiors is a danger in academics. The original makes sense, and nor is better, but neither is in the wrong place. Commented Oct 30, 2022 at 13:03
  • 1
    Just change neither to nor, which works fine. That's probably what your supervisor meant, anyway. Commented Oct 30, 2022 at 13:08
  • It's not a nice sentence. I'd change easy for difficult and adjust accordingly, losing the negation. Commented Oct 30, 2022 at 13:20
  • However, this approach does not easily allow us to calculate confidence intervals for either population growth or other derived quantities, since this way we do not obtain the joint distribution. Commented Oct 30, 2022 at 14:47
  • And is correct. Take out the negative to see: This approach allows us to calculate confidence intervals for population growth and other derived quantities. Your final clause could use some help though. Try: since it does not yield a joint distribution. (The antecedent for it is approach.) Commented Oct 30, 2022 at 15:51

1 Answer 1

1

Your sentence can be modified to use 'neither-nor' like this-

However, this approach neither easily allows us to calculate confidence intervals for population growth nor does it for other derived quantities, since this way we do not obtain the joint distribution.

The academic professor's correction is wrong, since his sentence means- '..none of the other derived quantities', which isn't correct as per the context of your sentence.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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