No A or B

Question

HiWhich is better?"No drinking and eating""No drinking or eating""No drinking nor eating"

Usenet · Accepted Answer

[nq:1]Hi Which is better? "No drinking and eating" "No drinking or eating" "No drinking nor eating"[/nq]
I prefer occasional drinking and eating to any of those alternatives.

But if you mean that (in some limited context, I hope) neither drinking nor eating are permitted, the second choice expresses it best.

rzed

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]Which is better? "No drinking and eating" "No drinking or eating" "No drinking nor eating"[/nq]
[nq:1]I prefer occasional drinking and eating to any of those alternatives. But if you mean that (in some limited context, I hope) neither drinking nor eating are permitted, the second choice expresses it best.[/nq]
I have always preferred the third choice, but there are those who have gotten upset with me for that. They had no call to be that, as both /or/ and /nor/ are acceptable in your statement, the /or/ being more popular, but not wrong.
I quote AHD4:USAGE NOTE: When using neither in a balanced construction that negates two parts of a sentence, nor (not or) must be used in the second clause: She is neither able nor (not or) willing to go. Similarly, when negating the second of two negative independent clauses, nor (not or) must be used: He cannot find anyone now, nor does he expect to find anyone in the future; Jane will never compromise with Bill, nor will Bill compromise with Jane. Note that in these constructions, nor causes an inversion of the auxiliary verb and the subject (does he .

will Bill .). However, when a verb is negated by not or never, and is followed by a verb phrase that is also to be negated (but not an entire clause), either or or nor can be used: He will not permit the change, or (or nor) even consider it. In noun phrases of the type no this or that, or is actually more common than nor: He has no experience or interest (less frequently nor interest) in chemistry. Or is also more common than nor when such a noun phrase, adjective phrase, or adverb phrase is introduced by not: He is not a philosopher or a statesman.

They were not rich or happy. See Usage Notes at neither, or1.

Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]I prefer occasional drinking and eating to any of those ... nor eating are permitted, the second choice expresses it best.[/nq]
[nq:1]I have always preferred the third choice, but there are those who have gotten upset with me for that. They had no call to be that, as both /or/ and /nor/ are acceptable in your statement, the /or/ being more popular, but not wrong.[/nq]
I screwed that up the /nor/ is not wrong.

Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/

Usenet · Answer

>
>
>
Unscrewing a little more:
"... /or/ being more popular,
but /nor/ is not wrong.
Should we unscrew even more
can we mix "being" and "is" like this?
Richard Maurer To reply, remove half
Sunnyvale, California of a homonym of a synonym for also.

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]> ... popular, but /nor/ is not wrong. Should we unscrew even more can we mix "being" and "is" like this?[/nq]
Don't consider them as being mixed, and all will be OK.
Skitt (in Hayward, California)
www.geocities.com/opus731/

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]Hi Which is better? "No drinking and eating" "No drinking or eating" "No drinking nor eating"[/nq]
"No food or drink allowed."
It helps if there is a picture representing what's not permitted. .

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]Hi Which is better? "No drinking and eating" "No drinking or eating" "No drinking nor eating"[/nq]
[nq:1]"No food or drink allowed."[/nq]
Which is different, as it bars patrons who are merely carrying food or drink (as, say, a bottle of water), but not consuming it. Which is sometimes reasonable.

Evan Kirshenbaum + HP Laboratories >Whatever it is that the government
1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 >does, sensible Americans would preferPalo Alto, CA 94304 >that the government do it to somebody

http://www.kirshenbaum.net/

Usenet · Answer

rzed filted:
[nq:2]Hi Which is better? "No drinking and eating" "No drinking or eating" "No drinking nor eating"[/nq]
[nq:1]I prefer occasional drinking and eating to any of those alternatives. But if you mean that (in some limited context, I hope) neither drinking nor eating are permitted, the second choice expresses it best.[/nq]
The second choice is ambiguous because there is no agreement among English speakers whether "or" is inclusive or exclusive...from an earlier discussion here:
If a child is told "you may have a cookie or a candy bar", it generally excludes the possibility of having one of each...but if your boss sends a memo saying "if you show up for work drunk or naked, I'll fire you", it is generally best not to test the interpretation by showing up both drunk and naked..

The clearest solution to the original problem is to establish two separate prohibitions: "No drinking. No eating."
..r

Usenet · Answer

1 > "No drinking and eating"The action is to "drink and eat":
You can eat, or you can drink, but you may not do both at the same time.
2 > "No drinking or eating"The action is to "drink or eat":
You may not drink. You may not eat.
(Perhaps you are permitted to do both simultaneously? But that would be a bit difficult).
3 > "No drinking nor eating"As 2 above.
4 "Eating and drinking (are) forbidden"These two actions are forbidden.
5 "It is forbidden to eat, drink or any subsequent combination thereof."No doubt about the intended meaning, but how far do you want to go? It doesn't really matter which you write, everyone will still understand. If I were to write a notice to this effect I would choose 2 > "No eating or drinking". If I wanted to be more stern I would choose 4 "Eating and drinking forbidden".

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]rzed filted:[/nq]
[nq:2]I prefer occasional drinking and eating to any of those ... drinkingnor eating are permitted, the second choice expresses it best.[/nq]
On reviewing that statement, I suppose it should read "neither drinking nor eating is permitted".
[nq:1]The second choice is ambiguous because there is no agreement among English speakers whether "or" is inclusive or exclusive...from an ... drunk and naked.. The clearest solution to the original problem is to establish two separate prohibitions: "No drinking. No eating."[/nq]
Although I applaud the creative spirit of one who, by both eating and drinking at the same time, would avoid the "no drinking or eating" prohibition, I find it difficult to imagine how both are to be done simultaneously. In most cases, people who are doing both are interleaving the two actions; any time they are doing either they are violating one prohibition or the other.

rzed

No A or B

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions