0
Debpriya De Posted 15 years ago
Grammar

Role of "not"

"I told him not to come at 7."
What is the role of "not" in this sentence ?
According to dictionaries, "not" is an adverb. But what does it modify to become an adverb ?
  

Top answer

It's an adverb modifying the infinitive to come . Infinitives are verb forms. CJ

  • It's an adverb modifying the infinitive to come .
  • Infinitives are verb forms.
  • CJ
Free · every Monday

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.

10 Answers
0
It's an adverb modifying the infinitive to come. Infinitives are verb forms.

CJ
0
Thanks CJ,

--- absent yourself (from sth) (formal): to not go to or be in a place where you are expected to be:He had absented himself from the office for the day.-----

I found this entry in the OALD. Why do we say "to not go" instead of "not to go" ?
"to not go" only modifies the verb "go" whereas "not to go" modifies the entire infinitive phrase.
Wouldn't this
0
Debpriya De to not go
When you place any word between the to of an infinitive and the verb, you have "split an infinitive". The split infinitive has been considered a grammatical error for quite a long time; however, because it is used so often, some authorities are now inclined to accept it as correct.

In my opinion split infinitives like
0
CalifJim
Debpriya De
The split infinitive has been considered a grammatical error for quite a long time; however, because it is used so often, some authorities are now inclined to accept it as correct. According to some, there are cases where the meaning changes, but that doesn't apply in this case. You might be able to use the se
0
CalifJim The split infinitive has been considered a grammatical error for quite a long time; however, because it is used so often, some authorities are now inclined to accept it as correct. That's not the only reason it is accepted as correct.

'not to verb' and 'to not verb' have distinct grammatic roles.



I did that not to save mo
0
What's wrong with

1) I did that in order not to waste time.

or

2) I did that so as not to waste time.

?

Why would you need

3) I did that in order to not waste time.

to get that meaning across?

I fail to see any subtle difference of meaning between 1) and 3).

CJ
0
I have to leave now; I will respond later.
0
CalifJimWhat's wrong with

1) I did that in order not to waste time. It just doesn't sound like the best choice to me. 'in order to' is a set phrase that sounds most natural.

Of course "in order" is not needed, but I put it there in brackets to indicate what the natural-sounding sequence of words is, at least to me.



or2) I did that s
0
canadian45What I am contending is that 'to not verb' not only is not wrong or inelegant, but it is actually better than 'not to verb' in some situations.
De gustibus non est disputandum. [H]

CJ
0
In matters of taste there is no dispute. Emotion: hmm

Related Questions