# Casi no veo a nadie en esta sala de chat



## Gamen

Hi everybody!

Is it possible to state as a grammatical rule that the adverbs "hardly" "scarcely" and "barely" must be used only with affirmative (or positive) particles while "almost", "nearly" and "practically" can be used both with positive and negative particles?

So, I understand that if I want to express in English "casi no veo a nadie en esta sala de chat", I have different possibilities in English depending on whether the sentence is negative or positive:


HARDLY / BARELY / SCARCELY
*Positive (statement)*
I hardly / barely (or scarcely) *see anybody* in this chat room.
*Negative (statement)*
NOT POSSIBLE 
I hardly / barely / scarcely don't see anybody in this chat room
I hardly / barely / scarcely see nobody in this chat room (not possible either)

ALMOST / NEARLY / PRACTICALLY
*Positive (statement)*  Possible but with another example. Example of reference does not apply
I'm almost finishing my work
I'm nearly (or practically) finishing my work 
*Negative (statement)*
 I almost (nearly or practically)* see nobody* in this chat room or I *don't see* almost (nearly or practically) *anybody* in this chat room 


I wait for comments that confirm or not my statement.
Thank you.


----------



## kayokid

Gamen said:


> Hi everybody!
> 
> Is it possible to state as a grammatical rule that the adverbs "hardly" "scarcely" and "barely" must be used only with affirmative (or positive) particles while "almost", "nearly" and "practically" can be used both with positive and negative particles?
> 
> So, I understand that if want to express in English "casi no veo a nadie en esta sala de chat", I have different possibilities in English depending on whether the sentence is negative or positive:
> 
> 
> HARDLY / BARELY / SCARCELY
> *Positive (statement)*
> I hardly / barely (or scarcely) *see anybody* in this chat room.
> *Negative (statement)*
> NOT POSSIBLE
> I hardly / barely / scarcely don't see anybody in this chat room
> I hardly / barely / scarcely see nobody in this chat room (not possible either)  You are right. These sentences are grammatically incorrect.
> 
> ALMOST / NEARLY / PRACTICALLY
> *Positive (statement)*  Possible but with another example. Example of reference does not apply
> I'm almost finishing my work
> I'm nearly (or practically) finishing my work   These sound awkward to me. See below.
> *Negative (statement)*
> I almost (nearly or practically)* see nobody* in this chat room or I *don't see* almost (nearly or practically) *anybody* in this chat room
> 
> 
> I wait for comments that confirm or not my statement.
> Thank you.



I would say:
I'm almost finished with my work.
and
I'm nearly/practically finished with my work.

Also:
I see nobody that is know in this room./I see nobody in this room that I know.
or better
I don't see anybody that I know in this room./I don't see anybody in this room that I know.

Hope this helps.


----------



## duvija

kayokid said:


> I would say:
> I see nobody that *I* know in this room./I see nobody in this room that I know.
> or better
> I don't see anybody that I know in this room./I don't see anybody in this room that I know.
> 
> Hope this helps.



Plus the lovely metaphor about "seeing" somebody/something in a "chat room"...


----------



## Jesusoulz

I'd always go for "I hardly see anybody...".

En español se daña toda la estructura negativa cuando se usa nadie, pero eso no pasa en inglés. Por ejemplo:

_No invité a nadie a la fiesta._ (Decir "alguien" sería más razonable, porque si no invitaste a "nadie", por cancelación de negaciones, sí invitaste a "alguien".)

_I didn't invite anybody to the party._ (En inglés no pasa esto.)

Hay algunas excepciones, pero sólo en ciertas regiones. Por ejemplo: alguien del sur de EEUU podría decir "_I didn't invite nobody to the party_" y se le entendería, pero no sería correcto_._


----------



## Gamen

Yes, I agree with you jesusoulz. If we say "no invité a nadie" we negate twice unnecesarily. You always invite "someone" not "no-one. If later it turns out that nobody goes, that's a totally different thing. So, to me it is also reasonable to say "no invité a alguien", but in Spanish it would not be grammatically correct, though.

Returning to my first inquiry, is not correct to use the negation with "almost" at all, in no context:
(see my example below, is it right?)

I almost (nearly or practically)* see nobody* in this chat room 
or I *don't see* almost (nearly or practically) *anybody* in this chat room 

I await your comments!


----------



## Jesusoulz

In most cases, "I see almost nobody in this chat room" is the same as "I barely see anybody in this chat room".

Though  I think there could be a small nuance between the two in some contexts.  Like the first one could mean only one occurrence of the action "to  see", that is: you joined the chat room, saw "almost nobody" there  and then left; whereas the second one could mean you have multiple  occurrences of "to see", that is: you're always in the chat room and you  "barely see anybody" there. This is due to the placement of the adverb.

I  don't think the second one ("I don't see almost anybody in this chat  room") is right, because you can't see "almost anybody". "Anybody" is a  'minority pronoun', so to speak; likewise, "everybody" and "nobody"  are 'majority pronouns'. So you can put 'minority pronouns' together with adverbs that express minority (barely, hardly), but not with adverbs that express majority (almost), and viceversa for 'majority pronouns'. It's the same in spanish: "_casi alguien_" doesn't make sense and neither does "_apenas nadie_".


----------



## Gamen

Ok very clear.
I had placed "almost" incorrectly in my example. The correct is: I see almost anybody...

The other example is not correct: "I don't see almost anybody". But it is correct: "I barely see anybodoy" or, I see hardly anybody or scarcely anybody. Is that right?

Regarding, "practically", does it happen the same as "almost"?
I can use it with the verb in affirmative but not in negative mode, right?
So, I can say: "I practically see nobody" but I cannot say "I don't practically see anybody." Is that so?


----------



## kayokid

Thanks for the correction, duvija!

I guess a little more proof-reading would be in order.


----------



## Jesusoulz

Gamen said:


> Ok very clear.
> I had placed "almost" incorrectly in my example. The correct is: I see almost anybody...
> 
> The other example is not correct: "I don't see almost anybody". But it is correct: "I barely see anybodoy" or, I see hardly anybody or scarcely anybody. Is that right?
> 
> Regarding, "practically", does it happen the same as "almost"?
> I can use it with the verb in affirmative but not in negative mode, right?
> So, I can say: "I practically see nobody" but I cannot say "I don't practically see anybody." Is that so?



Your conclusion is right, but there's a flaw in the clause that you draw it from. It is not that you can't say "practically anybody" or "almost anybody" because of the verb being negative, but because these two words are incompatible (by the way, I mean "anybody" in its "_alguien_" meaning; for its "_cualquiera_" meaning none of this counts).

Veámoslo en español:

Tenemos dos adverbios: casi (_almost, practically_) y apenas (_hardly, barely_).
Tenemos dos pronombres: alguien (_anybody_) y nadie (_nobody_).

Es muy común decir "casi nadie" o "apenas algunos" ("alguno" como forma indefinida de "alguien"), mientras que no tiene sentido decir "casi alguno", "casi alguien" o "apenas nadie".

Entonces:

"Casi" es compatible con "nadie", porque "nadie" indica una totalidad (total ausencia de personas) y "casi" indica que esa totalidad está muy cerca de cumplirse. Asimismo, "apenas" es compatible con "alguien" o "algunos" porque estas palabras indican un individuo o una minoría dentro de un grupo de personas y "apenas" indica que esa minoría está cerca de cumplir la totalidad opuesta a la de su significado: "nadie" (que es la totalidad opuesta a "todos").

Está un poco complicado, lo sé. Y el hecho de que no lo pueda simplificar más me hace pensar que tal vez comprendo el tema menos de lo que creía. Así suele pasar con el lenguaje: cuando crees que lo tienes dominado se da vuelta y te revuelca por el suelo.


----------



## L'Inconnu

Gamen said:


> I see almost anybody...


Un poco raro, casi igual con "Yo veo casi a caulquiera". "Yo veo casi todos" =  "I see almost everyone"





Gamen said:


> "I barely see anybody" or, I see hardly anybody or scarcely anybody.





Gamen said:


> "I practically see nobody"


For some reason the above phrase sounds  better like this:"I see _practically_ no one" or "I see _almost_ nobody". I prefer the adverb _after_ the verb. 



Gamen said:


> "I don't practically see anybody."


You can indeed say this, but, again, I like the adverb after the verb. 

"I don't see _practically_ anyone."

You can use 'practically' and 'almost' in affirmative statements. However, you can't use 'almost'  in negative ones. 

"I can see _almost_ everything" = "I can see _practically_ everything."

"I can't see _almost_ anything"  
"I can't see _practically_ anything"


----------



## L'Inconnu

Jesusoulz said:


> "Casi" es compatible con "nadie", porque "nadie" indica una totalidad (total ausencia de personas) y "casi" indica que esa totalidad está muy cerca de cumplirse. Asimismo, "apenas" es compatible con "alguien" o "algunos" porque estas palabras indican un individuo o una minoría dentro de un grupo de personas y "apenas" indica que esa minoría está cerca de cumplir la totalidad opuesta a la de su significado: "nadie" (que es la totalidad opuesta a "todos").


Claro


----------



## Jesusoulz

That literally made me laugh out loud. I almost spilled the water I was drinking all over my laptop. I blame you!


----------



## Gamen

Perfect jesusoulz and l'inconnu!
They were very useful your explanations. You were very clear. I know Jesusoluz that sometimes language entangles or rolls you up and you don't find the way out. The same happens to me, but you came out with flying colours though. 
Through the comparison with Spanish, I got it better. This time was useful.
Thanks to that I understoof the following:

1)
I don't see almost anybody incorrect = No veo casi a alguien (wrong)
I see almost nobody = correct = No veo a casi nadie (correct)
I can't see almost anybody incorrect = Casi no puedo ver a nadie (wrong)

2) Now then. I can't use negative particles with "nearly", isn't it?
I nearly never go to the cinema (not correct)
I nearly see nobody here (not correct)
I nearly have no money (not correct)

It is preferable to say:
I almost never go to the cinema or I hardly / barely / scarcely ever go to the cinema
I see almost nobody here or I hardly / barely / scarcely see anybody here
I almost have no money or I hardly / barely / scarcely have any money

3) "Don't", "doesn't", "didn't", "can't" are incompatible with almost and nearly.

4) I can use "no", "nobody", "nothing", "never" with almost, but not with nearly.

There are nearly 30 pupils in the class (correct)
but
there's nearly no-one in the class (incorrect)

Could you confirm the accuracy of these statements?
Thank you!


----------



## AquisM

Sí, tienes razón.


----------



## L'Inconnu

Gamen said:


> 1) I see almost nobody = correct = No veo a casi nadie (correct)


 The above sentence may be grammatically correct, however, many Americans would say:

I _can_ hardly see anyone.

Still others would say: "I _can't_ hardly see anyone", but I'm not sure if this is correct English. Note that 'not anyone' = 'nobody', so there is an argument in favor of this usage. And, it does match better with Spanish.





Gamen said:


> I almost never go to the cinema*,* or I hardly / barely / scarcely ever go to the cinema
> I see almost nobody here*,* or I hardly / barely / scarcely see anybody here
> I have _almost_ no money*,* or I hardly / barely / scarcely have any money





Gamen said:


> There are nearly 30 pupils in the class (correct)


----------



## Jesusoulz

Gamen said:


> Perfect jesusoulz and l'inconnu!
> They were very useful your explanations. You were very clear. I know Jesusoluz that sometimes language entangles or rolls you up and you don't find the way out. The same happens to me, but you came out with flying colours though.
> Through the comparison with Spanish, I got it better. This time was useful.
> Thanks to that I understoof the following:
> 
> 1)
> I don't see almost anybody incorrect = No veo casi a alguien (wrong) Correcto
> I see almost nobody = correct = No veo a casi nadie (correct) Correcto
> I can't see almost anybody incorrect = Casi no puedo ver a alguien (wrong) Correcto
> 
> 2) Now then. I can't use negative particles with "nearly", isn't it?  "Nearly" is the same as "almost", so you can definitely use it like you'd use "almost"
> I nearly never go to the cinema (not correct) This would mean "_casi nunca voy al cine_"
> I nearly see nobody here (not correct) This would literally mean "_casi veo a nadie aquí_" o "_veo a casi nadie aquí_", but since spanish has this '_nadie_ glitch' it translates into "_casi no veo a nadie aquí_"
> I nearly have no money (not correct) This would mean "_casi no tengo dinero_"
> 
> Si analizamos las palabras que el adverbio está modificando ("nunca", "nadie" y "no", respectivamente), todas son totalidades: "nunca" es una totalidad de tiempo y su opuesto es "siempre"; "nadie" es una totalidad de personas y su opuesto es "todos"; "no" es una totalidad de posibilidades o proposiciones y su opuesto es "sí".
> 
> "Casi" está allí para decir que estas totalidades están cerca de cumplirse.
> ____________________
> 
> It is preferable to say: :
> I almost never go to the cinema or I hardly / barely / scarcely ever go to the cinema Correcto
> I see almost nobody here or I hardly / barely / scarcely see anybody here Correcto
> I almost have no money or I hardly / barely / scarcely have any money Correcto
> 
> 3) "Don't", "doesn't", "didn't", "can't" are incompatible with almost and nearly.
> 
> 4) I can use "no", "nobody", "nothing", "never" with almost, but not with nearly.  See my explanation on #2
> There are nearly 30 pupils in the class (correct) Correcto
> but
> there's nearly no-one in the class (incorrect) This would mean "casi no hay nadie en la clase" and it is correct
> 
> Could you confirm the accuracy of these statements?
> Thank you!


----------



## L'Inconnu

Gamen said:


> I can't use negative particles with "nearly", isn't it?
> I nearly never go to the cinema (not correct)
> I nearly see nobody here (not correct)
> I nearly have no money (not correct)


All the above sentences sound very odd to me. Here's what I would say:

I hardly ever go/I almost never go
I see/can't see hardly any one/I see almost no one
I have hardly any money/I have almost no money

Notice the position of the adverbs 'hardly' and 'almost'


----------



## Gamen

Ok. Thank you very much L'inconnu and jesusoulz. It is very clear now for me.
My doubt regarding *"nearly"* was due to the fact that I had been told that It couldn't be used with "no", "nobody", "never", "no-one", but definitely *you can*, as you do with "almost". In this sense, "almost" and "nearly" are interchangeable as they are "scarcely", "barely" and "hardly" for its part.
I appreciate all your comments and remarks!


----------



## Gamen

yes, I agree with you L'inconnu. The phrases combining "nearly" on the one hand and "never", "nobody" on the other, don't make a good match, at least, they don't sound very well to the ears, isn't it? 

So, I ask: Is it better to avoid that combination nearly-mo, nealy-nobody, nearly-never?

Some are of the opinion that I can say "nearly" never or "nearly nobody" and some are of the opinion that I shouldn't. Is there any strict grammatical rule regarding this isssue?


----------



## loudspeaker

loudspeaker said:


> Nearly is not often used with 'never', 'no-one', 'nobody', 'nowhere', 'nothing', 'no' and 'none'. Instead, we use 'almost', or we use 'hardly' with a non-negative form.
> 
> Almost no money/hardly any money.
> Almost nobody/hardly anybody.



http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=2000204



Gamen said:


> So, I ask: Is it better to avoid that combination nearly-mo, nealy-nobody, nearly-never?
> Some are of the opinion that I can say "nearly" never or "nearly nobody" and some are of the opinion that I shouldn't. Is there any strict grammatical rule regarding this isssue?



¿Pero no me dijiste que te había quedado claro? 
No sé de dónde sacas que hay gente que dice que se debe decir 'nearly never' o 'nearly nobody'. En este hilo nadie lo ha, ni tan siquiera, sugerido.


----------



## kalamazoo

You can say "I almost didn't see you" or "I nearly didn't see you" so I don't think "almost" and "nearly" are per se incompatible with negative verbs.  The problem is when trying to use them with words like anyone or no one, in which case they are incompatible.


----------



## Jesusoulz

It's certainly polemic:

Why is "nearly no" nearly not?: http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/004604.html
Nearly no: a gnarly knot: http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/004613.html

I think they're interchangeable; the fact that "nearly" is less common is what makes it feel uncomfortable. Plus, the definitions for each word point directly at each other.

I know many cases of words and expression that don't sound right at all but are in fact alright; "specificity", for example ("_especificidad" _in spanish, which sounds even worse).


----------



## L'Inconnu

kalamazoo said:


> You can say "I almost didn't see you" or "I  nearly didn't see you" so I don't think "almost" and "nearly" are per se  incompatible with negative verbs.  The problem is when trying to use  them with words like anyone or no one, in which case they are  incompatible.



It is clear that English speakers have a  strong preference for phrases such as 'almost never' over 'nearly  never', but the question is why? First of all, 'never' is not something  that is negative. Rather it is something that happens zero times.  Likewise, 'nobody' means zero people = 'No one' = 'Not one person'. In  contradistinction, 'everybody' corresponds to one, one whole group of  people. Clarifying this point, however, isn't enough to explain our  preference for 'almost' in cases where zero is the limit that we are  approaching. 

Notice, however, that 'nearly' is derived from the  word 'near', which is a physical concept. Something you could litterally  measure with a yardstick. It follows that when we are talking about  something we can literally see, 'nearly' gains credibility. 

"Nearly everyone"  (we see a room filled with people) 
"Almost no one"  (hard to imagine, unless we are talking about a ghost) 

Even a phrase like "I see almost nobody" sounds odd to me. How can you see nobody? More natural is "I see only a few people"


----------



## L'Inconnu

Gamen said:


> So, I ask: Is it better to avoid that combination nearly-mo, nealy-nobody, nearly-never?
> Some are of the opinion that I can say "nearly" never or "nearly nobody" and some are of the opinion that I shouldn't. Is there any strict grammatical rule regarding this isssue?


There isn't any gramatical rule that I know of. However, "when in Rome..."


----------



## Gamen

Thank you for all your explanations and support in this matter, jesusoulz and L'Inconnu. They really helped me a lot to immerse into this issue and understand it closely and in depth.

I conclude that, there's no express rule forbidding the use of "nearly" together with "never", "almost", "no-one" and "no", but deep inside there's something saying it doesn't sound quite well. Most of you, without going any further, has perceived something like that. I confess that, despite of being non native, It didn't sound well either to me "nearly never" etc. Maybe as a result of the cacophony near / nev. There's something sounding badly in that word combination that might make you think there's something wrong. Many times the grammatical rules prohibit combinations based on "pronunciation or cacophony conflicts", which end up by deciding what it can be said or not, what it is wrong or right, etc.


----------



## Jesusoulz

I concur.

And it's always a pleasure to be of any help. Thanks to you, too, for bringing this up. I'd dare say I learned as much as you.


----------

