# Same word for "no" and "not"



## Whodunit

This thread in the Portuguese forum inspired me to open a new thread.

Do you use the same word for "no" and "not" in your language? Example sentences:

Do you want to go home? - *No*. I do *not* want to go home.

In German, we use "nein" for "no" and "nicht" for "not," so it's just like in English. However, in some Romance languages, they have the same word for "no" and "not."


_ Note: I'm not referring to the other meaning of "no" as in "I have no siblings."_


----------



## robbie_SWE

_In Romanian we use the same word "nu" to say no/not. In your example it would look like this: 

Vrei să mergia acasă? *Nu*, (eu) *nu* vroiam să merg acasă. 

In Swedish, on the other hand, is quite similar to German and English. 

Vill du gå hem? *Nej*, jag vill *inte* gå hem. 
_ 
 robbie


----------



## Chazzwozzer

In *Turkish*, we use different words for _no_ and _not_.
*hayır*(_*yok*_ is used colloquially as well): no
*değil:* not

*Hayır*, bu benim bilgisayarım *değil*.
_*No*, this is *not *my computer._

However, we use *-ma/-me/-mi/-mı*_(vowel harmony, you know)_in the verbs. So, *değil *is omitted.

Eve gitmek istiyor musun? *Hayır*, eve gitmek iste*mi*yorum.
_Do you want to go home? *No*, I do *not* want to go home._


----------



## Frank06

Hi,


Whodunit said:


> http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=250501Do you use the same word for "no" and "not" in your language? Example sentences:
> Do you want to go home? - *No*. I do *not* want to go home.



*Dutch* comes very close to _German_:
*nee* (or *neen*) - _nein_ - no
*niet* - _nicht_ - not

Groetjes,

Frank


----------



## Etcetera

Hi Whodunit! 


Whodunit said:


> http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=250501Do you want to go home? - *No*. I do *not* want to go home.


In Russian, we too have two words - не and нет. The example sentence can be translated like that:
- Ты хочешь домой?
- *Нет*. Я *не *хочу идти домой.
So, in this sentence, нет means the same as the English 'no', and не - the same as 'not'.


----------



## Cecilio

Hello everybody. In Spanish we only have one word, and a very short one: "no". Example:

             -¿Tienes hermanos? - No, no tengo hermanos.


----------



## Tekeli-li! Tekeli-li!

In Czech:
Chceš (jít) domů? - *Ne*, *ne*chci.

As you can see, there is only one "ne", which takes the form of a prefix when it modifies verbs. On the other hand:

I want a red car, and *not* a yellow one. - Chci červené auto a *ne* žluté.

In speech, the stand-alone "ne" is usually a bit more emphatic than the affixed kind.


----------



## Mutichou

In French, we say "non" for "no" and "ne...pas" for "not".
In Italian, "no" is "no" and "not" is "non".
And in Spanish, "no" means both.


----------



## cherine

Whodunit said:


> Do you use the same word for "no" and "not" in your language? Example sentences:
> Do you want to go home? - *No*. I do *not* want to go home.


My first reaction was "no"  as I had in mind the word laysa ليس then after reading your sentence, I changed my mind.
YES, we can use the same word "laa" لا for both no and not.
hal turiidu 'dh-dhihaaba lilbayti ? -*laa*, *laa* uridu 'dh-dhihaaba lilbayti.
هل تريد الذهاب للبيت ؟ - *لا*،* لا* أريد الذهاب للبيت.


----------



## Whodunit

cherine said:


> My first reaction was "no"


 
Well, it is hard to generalize whether or not there are different words for "no" and "not" in Arabic, anyway. There are also lam, lan, maa, (ghair,) and your laysa to negate something.


----------



## Hakro

Finnish:
no = *ei*
not = depends on the subject of the sentence:
- No, I do not want to go home = *Ei*, minä *en* halua mennä kotiin
- No, he does not want to go home = *Ei*, hän *ei* halua mennä kotiin
So in Finnish 'no' and 'not' are the same word only in the third person  singular.


----------



## Ilmo

Hakro said:


> Finnish:
> no = *ei*
> not = depends on the subject of the sentence:
> - No, I do not want to go home = *Ei*, minä *en* halua mennä kotiin
> - No, he does not want to go home = *Ei*, hän *ei* halua mennä kotiin
> So in Finnish 'no' and 'not' are the same word only in the third person singular.


 
Actually in Finnish there is a "negation verb" that is, however, conjugated only in the present tense.
The "normal" negation word "ei" is the form 3rd person singular.
When the negation word is used, the ordinary verb remainsw in the same form despite of conjugation.
Example, the present tense of "to be" (=olla):
(minä) olen
(sinä) olet
hän on
(me) olemme
(te) olette
(he) ovat
And negated (I'm not)
(minä) en ole
(sinä) et ole
hän ei ole
(me) emme ole
(te) ette ole
he eivät ole
The pronouns in parenthesis are not nocessary to utter.


----------



## linguist786

In *Urdu/Hindi*, it's the same word - "nahiiN" 

Kyaa tum ko ghar par jaanaa hai? NahiiN, mujhe nahiiN jaanaa hai.
_Do you have to go home? No, I do not have to go._

In *Gujarati*, it's not the same word 
(no = _naa_. not = _nathii_)

(using example above)
Tanay gharay javaanu Che? Naa, manay nathii javaanu.
_Do you have to go home? No, I do not have to go._


----------



## betulina

Catalan works like Spanish in this case: we only have *no*.

_Do you want to go home? - *No*. I do*n't* want to go home.
_Vols anar a casa? - *No*. *No *vull anar a casa.


----------



## Etcetera

In Piedmontese (which is a Romance language) there are two different words:  *nó *stands for 'no', and *nen *for 'not'

 For example:  Nó, i sai nen. - No, I do not know.


----------



## J.F. de TROYES

In Chinese there is no difference between "no" and "not" : the same word  " *不* " ( bu4 ) may be used either on its own or in front of a verb :
             "     *不* , 谢谢 "   (  Bu4, xie4xie ) - No, thank you.   
                             "    我 *不* 要 回 家 " ( Wo3 bu2 yao4 hui2 jia1 )- I don't want to go back home.
 
But "* 不*  "    can't be used with some words, chiefly with   "  有  " (to have, there is   )  and  "not" is translated in this case by   "没" (meï):
 
                "有茶" (you3 cha2) - There is tea.
                " *没* 有 咖啡 " (meï2 you3 ka1fei1)- There's no coffee.


----------



## J.F. de TROYES

I'd like to go from the Far East to South America ,in Quechua :
"NO" is " MANA"  and   "NOT" is "MANA + -CHU" like "NE + PAS" in French.
"Rikuni" means "I know"; " *Mana* rikuni*chu"* means " I don't know".


----------



## Whodunit

J.F. de TROYES said:


> In Chinese there is no difference between "no" and "not" : the same word " 不 " ( bu4 ) may be used either on its own or in front of a verb :
> " 不 , 谢谢 " ( Bu4, xie4xie ) - No, thank you.
> " 我不要回家 " ( Wo3 bu2 yao4 hui2 jia1 )- I don't want to go back home.


 
I just checked, and you seem to be correct that 不 can be read as both bu2 and bu4. So, there's a difference in pronunciation to differentiate "no" (bu4) and "not" (bu2), but the character (不) is the same, right?


----------



## avalon2004

The words are different in Greek. The best way to demonstrate this is in the following examples:

I'm *not* happy - *Δεν *είμαι ευτυχισμένος
*Not *me - *Όχι *εγώ
*No*, I do*n't* want to go- *Όχι*, *δε* θέλω να πάω
Let's *not* speak about it- Ας *μη* μιλήσουμε γι΄αυτό
Do*n't *tell her!- *Μην *της το πεις!
*No!* _(stop! watch out! don't! etc..)_- *Μη! *
_
In general, *δεν *is used with verbs, *όχι *is usually "no" and *μην* is used with imperatives and the subjunctive._


----------



## MingRaymond

Whodunit said:


> I just checked, and you seem to be correct that 不 can be read as both bu2 and bu4. So, there's a difference in pronunciation to differentiate "no" (bu4) and "not" (bu2), but the character (不) is the same, right?


 
Hello Whodunit,

In Mandarin, when 不 is followed by a character which is tone4, the originally tone (tone4) will become tone2, so 不要 is bu2yao4, but 不好 bu4hao3.

Ming


----------



## Whodunit

MingRaymond said:


> Hello Whodunit,
> 
> In Mandarin, when 不 is followed by a character which is tone4, the originally tone (tone4) will become tone2, so 不要 is bu2yao4, but 不好 bu4hao3.
> 
> Ming


 
But it's "bu4, xie4 xie4," (不，谢谢) too. Three times tone 4?


----------



## Thomas1

Whodunit said:


> But it's "bu4, xie4 xie4," (不，谢谢) too. Three times tone 4?


 
I think it's because there's a comma between 不 and 谢 so this gives you a pause in speach and you pronounce 不 with tone 4. If there's no any interruption you pronunce it with tone 2.


As for your original question in Polish we would use one word for two English--nie.

Tom


----------



## MingRaymond

Thomas1 said:


> I think it's because there's a comma between 不 and 谢 so this gives you a pause in speach and you pronounce 不 with tone 4. If there's no any interruption you pronunce it with tone 2.
> 
> 
> 
> Tom


 
You are right. And this changing tone 4 to tone 2 rule is also applied in the word 一 (one), so 一個(yi2ge4)。The changing tone of 不 and 一 is called 一不變調.


----------



## Namakemono

Japanese has many words for "no", but they're all used as an isolated negation. 
Ie ni kaerimasu ka? Iie, kaerimasen.
(Will you go home? No, I will not.)
As you can see, in Japanese the negative is in the verb, so they don't need a separate word like "not" in English or "ikke" in Danish.


----------



## Whodunit

Namakemono said:


> Japanese has many words for "no", but they're all used as an isolated negation.
> Ie ni kaerimasu ka? Iie, kaerimasen.
> (Will you go home? No, I will not.)
> As you can see, in Japanese the negative is in the verb, so they don't need a separate word like "not" in English or "ikke" in Danish.


 
I think, one could generalized it like this:

no = iie (いいえ)
not = masen　(ません)


----------



## Namakemono

Yeah, but then again, masen is only present formal. In informal verbs you would say nai/nakatta. I think we should consider it part of the verb rather than a word on itself.


----------



## ronanpoirier

In Hungarian, I think there is just one word for both "no" and "not": nem.

But I see a lot the word "ne" but it is used with Imperative Tense always when I see it.


----------



## apmoy70

In Greek we use different words:

No: *«Όχι»* [ˈɔ.çi]. It derives from the crasis of the 1st p. personal pronoun *«ἐγώ» ĕgṓ* + *«οὐχί» oukʰí* (Classical particle used to show disagreement or negation *«οὐ» ou* which antevocalically becomes *«οὐκ» ouk*, (Homeric) *«οὐκί» oukí*, (Attic) *«οὐχί» oukʰí* --> _not_) > (colloq.) *«ἐγὤχι» ĕgṓkʰĭ* > Byz.Gr aphetism *«ὤχι» ṓkhi* & (later) *«ὄχι» ókhi* > MoGr *«όχι»* [ˈɔ.çi].

Not: (1) Proclitic negation particle *«δε(ν)»* [ðe(n)] < Byz.Gr. *«δέν» dén*, aphetism of Classical adv. *«οὐδέν» oudén* --> _in no way, not at all_ < adverbialised neuter nom. *«οὐδέν»* of the pronoun *«οὐδείς» oudeí̯s* --> _no one, nobody, none, nothing_.
(2) Proclitic negation particle *«μή(ν)»* [mi(n)] < Classical negation particle *«μή» mḗ* --> _not_.

(1) is used in clauses with indicative mood, (2) is used primarily in subjunctive contexts. Both particles are syntactically part of the proclitic group in front of the verb, and can be separated from the verb only by intervening clitic pronouns.


----------



## dihydrogen monoxide

apmoy70 said:


> In Greek we use different words:
> 
> No: *«Όχι»* [ˈɔ.çi]. It derives from the crasis of the 1st p. personal pronoun *«ἐγώ» ĕgṓ* + *«οὐχί» oukʰí* (Classical particle used to show disagreement or negation *«οὐ» ou* which antevocalically becomes *«οὐκ» ouk*, (Homeric) *«οὐκί» oukí*, (Attic) *«οὐχί» oukʰí* --> _not_) > (colloq.) *«ἐγὤχι» ĕgṓkʰĭ* > Byz.Gr aphetism *«ὤχι» ṓkhi* & (later) *«ὄχι» ókhi* > MoGr *«όχι»* [ˈɔ.çi].
> 
> Not: (1) Proclitic negation particle *«δε(ν)»* [ðe(n)] < Byz.Gr. *«δέν» dén*, aphetism of Classical adv. *«οὐδέν» oudén* --> _in no way, not at all_ < adverbialised neuter nom. *«οὐδέν»* of the pronoun *«οὐδείς» oudeí̯s* --> _no one, nobody, none, nothing_.
> (2) Proclitic negation particle *«μή(ν)»* [mi(n)] < Classical negation particle *«μή» mḗ* --> _not_.
> 
> (1) is used in clauses with indicative mood, (2) is used primarily in subjunctive contexts. Both particles are syntactically part of the proclitic group in front of the verb, and can be separated from the verb only by intervening clitic pronouns.
> [/QUOTE
> 
> How would that be expressed in Ancient Greek?


----------



## Awwal12

Etcetera said:


> Hi Whodunit!
> 
> In Russian, we too have two words - не and нет. The example sentence can be translated like that:
> - Ты хочешь домой?
> - *Нет*. Я *не *хочу идти домой.
> So, in this sentence, нет means the same as the English 'no', and не - the same as 'not'.


It should be noted that while "нет" means "no" and is the only option in constructions describing an absence ("нет" + NG(gen.)), "не" also can be used for a negative answer in informal speech (cf. English "nah").


----------



## apmoy70

dihydrogen monoxide said:


> How would that be expressed in Ancient Greek?


Well, in Classical Greek, negation was expressed with the negation particle *«οὐ» ou* which becomes the antevocalic *«οὐκ» ouk* before a vowel with spiritus lenis, and the antevocalic *«οὐχ» oukʰ* before a vowel with spiritus asper. It is generally regarded that it's coming from the Proto-Hellenic phrase *ne oi̯u kʷid --> _not at all, not ever, not on your life_.


			
				David Willis Christopher Lucas Anne Breitbarth-The History of negation in the languages of Europe and the Mediterranean said:
			
		

> _*ne_ the historically real negator + _*oi̯u_ (PIE *h₂oi̯u-/*h₂ei̯u- _lifetime, long time_), used adverbially and added to strengthen the negative + _*kʷid_ an indefinite or generalizing particle. Ultimately, the negative _*ne_ lost its salience and was dropped, _*oi̯u kʷid_ became _*oi̯ukid_ (by the boukólos rule), whence by regular sound changes _oukí_ and the shorter forms _ouk_ and _ou_


Τhe negation particle *«μή» mḗ* (< PIE *meh₁ _no, not_ an Armeno-Greco-Albano-Indo-Iranian grammatical isogloss that originally meant _not_ and later obtained the function of the prohibitive particle) was used in Classical Greek as negation particle in clauses expressing:

will or thought
with an imperative or subjunctive in negative commands
with an optative or past indicative, expressing a negative wish
in a question expecting a negative answer
in dependent clauses
with participle representing conditional clause
in warnings or statements of fear
introducing indirect statement after verb of fearing or apprehension


----------



## oveka

In Ukrainian:
- Ти хочеш додому?
- *Ні*. Я *не *хочу йти дому.
So, in this sentence, *ні* means the same as the English '_no_', and *не* - the same as '_not_'.


----------



## nimak

In *Macedonian* *не* (ne) [nɛ] = *no*, *not

No*, I do *not* want to go home. = *Не*, *не* сакам да одам дома. (*Ne*, *ne* sakam da odam doma.)


----------



## Olaszinhok

*Italian:*
We've got two different words:
No = *no *(nɔ) and not = *non* (non)   No, I do not know - *No*, *non (lo) so*


----------



## Sardokan1.0

Like other Romance languages and Italian, also Sardinian uses two different words, but they are inverted if compared with Italian.

No = *Non*
Not = *No*
No, I don't know = *Non, no 'nd isco* (compared with Italian the literal translation is "no, non ne so" = no, I don't know of it)


----------



## Penyafort

betulina said:


> Catalan works like Spanish in this case: we only have *no*.
> 
> _Do you want to go home? - *No*. I do*n't* want to go home._
> Vols anar a casa? - *No*. *No *vull anar a casa.



I'll only add a difference. Catalan, unlike Spanish, may also use *pas *in order to reinforce the negation. It is not compulsory as in French though, and Catalan can use pas after no in short replies.

_Vols anar a casa? - No pas. No vull anar pas a casa._
Do you want to go home? - Not at all. I don't want to go home at all.

In Northern Catalan, this _pas _has effectively replaced _no, _therefore with no reinforcing meaning, but simple negation.

_Vull anar *pas *a casa._ - I don't want to go home.


----------

