0
Moon7296 Posted 13 years ago
Grammar
not a sound was to be heard.
1. Not a sound was to be heard.
2. Not a sound was heard.
3. No sound was to be heard.
4. No sound was heard.
Q) When I first saw #1, I thought #2 sounds better. What do you think?
What about #3 and 4?
2. Not a sound was heard.
3. No sound was to be heard.
4. No sound was heard.
Q) When I first saw #1, I thought #2 sounds better. What do you think?
What about #3 and 4?
Top answer
T my native ear, they all mean the same. #1 & 3 seem a bit more poetic than the other two (especially #1).
- T my native ear, they all mean the same.
- #1 & 3 seem a bit more poetic than the other two (especially #1).
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
14 Answers
0
T my native ear, they all mean the same. #1 & 3 seem a bit more poetic than the other two (especially #1).
00
1. Not a sound was to be heard.
2. Not a sound was heard.
There's no real difference. Perhaps #2 makes it clearer that someone was listening.
3. No sound was to be heard.
4. No sound was heard.
'Not a . . . is more emphatic than 'no'
2. Not a sound was heard.
There's no real difference. Perhaps #2 makes it clearer that someone was listening.
3. No sound was to be heard.
4. No sound was heard.
'Not a . . . is more emphatic than 'no'
00
Clive1. Not a sound was to be heard.2. Not a sound was heard.There's no real difference. Perhaps #2 makes it clearer that someone was listening.Wow.. that's interesting point but difficult
00
I have a doubt.
We use was to be in this way too.Like
He was to go there but he is not going there now.So this describes future.
Similarly when we say Not a sound was to be heard does this tell about future or about past that no sound was heard?
Thanks so much.
We use was to be in this way too.Like
He was to go there but he is not going there now.So this describes future.
Similarly when we say Not a sound was to be heard does this tell about future or about past that no sound was heard?
Thanks so much.
00
Consider this.
Mary came home.
Dinner was cooked. Could mean it was already cooked.
Dinner was to be cooked. Sound like nobody had cooked it yet.
But I don't want to push my comment about the
Mary came home.
Dinner was cooked. Could mean it was already cooked.
Dinner was to be cooked. Sound like nobody had cooked it yet.
But I don't want to push my comment about the
00
Thanks clive.
Look at this
Prime minister has cancelled his visit,he was to go tomorrow.
Is this right?
Look at this
Prime minister has cancelled his visit,he was to go tomorrow.
Is this right?
00
0
dishantPrime minister has cancelled his visit,he was to go tomorrow.No. You have a comma splice, and you are missing an article.
Is this right?
00
0
dishantCould you not have corrected it?I was hoping that maybe you could make an effort to correct it yourself using the tips I gave. Where do you think an article might be missing? Have you done any research on comma splices?
0
Related Questions