Mixing
Can I write “You must not sit when your superior is not”?
I’m trying to shorten some of the sentences in my work and this sentence came across:
“You must not sit when your superior is standing.”
Is it grammatically correct to substitute with:
“You must not sit when your superior is not” ([Not sitting])?
In both cases the second clauses are in continuous form, so I maintained that. Couldn’t find any examples online, but I’m sure I’ve seen it used somewhere.
word-choice syntactic-analysis
asked Jan 2 at 21:08
Simon SSimon S
524
migrated from writing.stackexchange.com Jan 2 at 22:35
This question came from our site for the craft of professional writing, including fiction, non-fiction, technical, scholarly, and commercial writing.
|
show 2 more comments
I’m trying to shorten some of the sentences in my work and this sentence came across:
“You must not sit when your superior is standing.”
Is it grammatically correct to substitute with:
“You must not sit when your superior is not” ([Not sitting])?
In both cases the second clauses are in continuous form, so I maintained that. Couldn’t find any examples online, but I’m sure I’ve seen it used somewhere.
word-choice syntactic-analysis
asked Jan 2 at 21:08
Simon SSimon S
524
migrated from writing.stackexchange.com Jan 2 at 22:35
This question came from our site for the craft of professional writing, including fiction, non-fiction, technical, scholarly, and commercial writing.
Is 5 characters worth it?
– bruglesco
Jan 2 at 21:21
@bruglesco Lol. Good point. Let me rephrase, “I’m trying out new forms in my writing.”
– Simon S
Jan 2 at 21:35
I personally wouldn't. Not sure if it is grammatically correct or not but it saves no significant space and is harder to understand. The first sentence also sounds less harsh. partly because it is phrased without the negation.
– bruglesco
Jan 2 at 21:41
2
If your goal is more elegant writing, it's never a good idea to make the audience do extra work. In this case the extra work is changing the verb form of an elided word. So, regardless of whether the grammar is correct, I would advise against it, even though it is easy to understand and unambiguous. Elegant writing is almost always about reducing the audience's work, not increasing it.
– Chris Sunami
Jan 2 at 21:47
You must not sit if your "superior" is not really superior after all??
– Hot Licks
Jan 2 at 22:48
|
show 2 more comments
I’m trying to shorten some of the sentences in my work and this sentence came across:
“You must not sit when your superior is standing.”
Is it grammatically correct to substitute with:
“You must not sit when your superior is not” ([Not sitting])?
In both cases the second clauses are in continuous form, so I maintained that. Couldn’t find any examples online, but I’m sure I’ve seen it used somewhere.
word-choice syntactic-analysis
asked Jan 2 at 21:08
Simon SSimon S
524
I’m trying to shorten some of the sentences in my work and this sentence came across:
“You must not sit when your superior is standing.”
Is it grammatically correct to substitute with:
“You must not sit when your superior is not” ([Not sitting])?
In both cases the second clauses are in continuous form, so I maintained that. Couldn’t find any examples online, but I’m sure I’ve seen it used somewhere.
word-choice syntactic-analysis
word-choice syntactic-analysis
asked Jan 2 at 21:08
Simon SSimon S
524
asked Jan 2 at 21:08
Simon SSimon S
524
asked Jan 2 at 21:08
Simon SSimon S
524
asked Jan 2 at 21:08
Simon SSimon S
524
asked Jan 2 at 21:08
Simon SSimon S
524
524
migrated from writing.stackexchange.com Jan 2 at 22:35
This question came from our site for the craft of professional writing, including fiction, non-fiction, technical, scholarly, and commercial writing.
migrated from writing.stackexchange.com Jan 2 at 22:35
This question came from our site for the craft of professional writing, including fiction, non-fiction, technical, scholarly, and commercial writing.
Is 5 characters worth it?
– bruglesco
Jan 2 at 21:21
@bruglesco Lol. Good point. Let me rephrase, “I’m trying out new forms in my writing.”
– Simon S
Jan 2 at 21:35
I personally wouldn't. Not sure if it is grammatically correct or not but it saves no significant space and is harder to understand. The first sentence also sounds less harsh. partly because it is phrased without the negation.
– bruglesco
Jan 2 at 21:41
2
If your goal is more elegant writing, it's never a good idea to make the audience do extra work. In this case the extra work is changing the verb form of an elided word. So, regardless of whether the grammar is correct, I would advise against it, even though it is easy to understand and unambiguous. Elegant writing is almost always about reducing the audience's work, not increasing it.
– Chris Sunami
Jan 2 at 21:47
You must not sit if your "superior" is not really superior after all??
– Hot Licks
Jan 2 at 22:48
|
show 2 more comments
Is 5 characters worth it?
– bruglesco
Jan 2 at 21:21
@bruglesco Lol. Good point. Let me rephrase, “I’m trying out new forms in my writing.”
– Simon S
Jan 2 at 21:35
I personally wouldn't. Not sure if it is grammatically correct or not but it saves no significant space and is harder to understand. The first sentence also sounds less harsh. partly because it is phrased without the negation.
– bruglesco
Jan 2 at 21:41
2
If your goal is more elegant writing, it's never a good idea to make the audience do extra work. In this case the extra work is changing the verb form of an elided word. So, regardless of whether the grammar is correct, I would advise against it, even though it is easy to understand and unambiguous. Elegant writing is almost always about reducing the audience's work, not increasing it.
– Chris Sunami
Jan 2 at 21:47
You must not sit if your "superior" is not really superior after all??
– Hot Licks
Jan 2 at 22:48
Is 5 characters worth it?
– bruglesco
Jan 2 at 21:21
Is 5 characters worth it?
– bruglesco
Jan 2 at 21:21
@bruglesco Lol. Good point. Let me rephrase, “I’m trying out new forms in my writing.”
– Simon S
Jan 2 at 21:35
@bruglesco Lol. Good point. Let me rephrase, “I’m trying out new forms in my writing.”
– Simon S
Jan 2 at 21:35
I personally wouldn't. Not sure if it is grammatically correct or not but it saves no significant space and is harder to understand. The first sentence also sounds less harsh. partly because it is phrased without the negation.
– bruglesco
Jan 2 at 21:41
I personally wouldn't. Not sure if it is grammatically correct or not but it saves no significant space and is harder to understand. The first sentence also sounds less harsh. partly because it is phrased without the negation.
– bruglesco
Jan 2 at 21:41
2
2
If your goal is more elegant writing, it's never a good idea to make the audience do extra work. In this case the extra work is changing the verb form of an elided word. So, regardless of whether the grammar is correct, I would advise against it, even though it is easy to understand and unambiguous. Elegant writing is almost always about reducing the audience's work, not increasing it.
– Chris Sunami
Jan 2 at 21:47
If your goal is more elegant writing, it's never a good idea to make the audience do extra work. In this case the extra work is changing the verb form of an elided word. So, regardless of whether the grammar is correct, I would advise against it, even though it is easy to understand and unambiguous. Elegant writing is almost always about reducing the audience's work, not increasing it.
– Chris Sunami
Jan 2 at 21:47
You must not sit if your "superior" is not really superior after all??
– Hot Licks
Jan 2 at 22:48
You must not sit if your "superior" is not really superior after all??
– Hot Licks
Jan 2 at 22:48
|
show 2 more comments
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
As J.G. says, no you cannot drop the current participle. For a direct comparison to be implied, you need to use the same verb (either "to sit" or "to be sitting") for both subjects, e.g.:
“You must not sit when your superior does not”
or
“You must not be seated when your superior is not”
Personally, though comes across as quite formal, I would phrase it as:
“You must not sit while your superior stands”
answered Jan 2 at 23:54
David John SmithDavid John Smith
1542
If you transpose the example @JG used with your first alternative, how can you say "You must not enter when your superior does not" when your superior has already entered some time prior?
– Chris Rogers
Jan 3 at 0:12
“You must not sit while your superior stands” seems the best answer here, though @jg broigjt up a good point about a character’s speech idiosyncrasy, hence the upvote. The main takeaway I got from the discussion—don’t mix simple and continuous tenses in this example. Thank you all!
– Simon S
Jan 4 at 19:03
add a comment |
The grammar answer is: no, you may not, just as you can't say, "You must not enter when you superior is not" (to mean they haven't entered yet). You can't pair "is not" with an imperative verb as if it's its own past participle.
The authorial answer is: if it's the words of a character for whom such an idiosyncratic speech style would be typical, or even character-defining, it might make sense. Just bear in mind any such effort has to inculcate an attitude in readers you're happy with them having. In this case, that attitude would be, "this person's hard to parse". Only beta readers can tell you whether this makes the character less sympathetic, but maybe it's a character for whom that's not a problem.
Note: the second paragraph was for the benefit of writers, as at the time of posting this question appeared on writing.se.
answered Jan 2 at 21:49
J.G.J.G.
2895
add a comment |
To add to the answer from @JG, if you are looking for alternative forms within your writing, instead you could use
You must not be sitting when your superior is not
answered Jan 3 at 0:00
Chris RogersChris Rogers
735210
add a comment |
You could also consider framing it in the affirmative or positive voice with "You should stand when your superior does so", or "As your superior sits or stands, you should do likewise."
It speaks to the tone you are trying to convey...
answered Jan 3 at 18:53
RodolfoRodolfo
211
add a comment |
I would simply say: "You shouldn't sit while your superior is standing." I think it's the least awkward and best sounding way to say what you mean.
answered Jan 3 at 18:21
M.HatM.Hat
111
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f479584%2fcan-i-write-you-must-not-sit-when-your-superior-is-not%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
5 Answers
5
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
As J.G. says, no you cannot drop the current participle. For a direct comparison to be implied, you need to use the same verb (either "to sit" or "to be sitting") for both subjects, e.g.:
“You must not sit when your superior does not”
or
“You must not be seated when your superior is not”
Personally, though comes across as quite formal, I would phrase it as:
“You must not sit while your superior stands”
answered Jan 2 at 23:54
David John SmithDavid John Smith
1542
If you transpose the example @JG used with your first alternative, how can you say "You must not enter when your superior does not" when your superior has already entered some time prior?
– Chris Rogers
Jan 3 at 0:12
“You must not sit while your superior stands” seems the best answer here, though @jg broigjt up a good point about a character’s speech idiosyncrasy, hence the upvote. The main takeaway I got from the discussion—don’t mix simple and continuous tenses in this example. Thank you all!
– Simon S
Jan 4 at 19:03
add a comment |
As J.G. says, no you cannot drop the current participle. For a direct comparison to be implied, you need to use the same verb (either "to sit" or "to be sitting") for both subjects, e.g.:
“You must not sit when your superior does not”
or
“You must not be seated when your superior is not”
Personally, though comes across as quite formal, I would phrase it as:
“You must not sit while your superior stands”
answered Jan 2 at 23:54
David John SmithDavid John Smith
1542
If you transpose the example @JG used with your first alternative, how can you say "You must not enter when your superior does not" when your superior has already entered some time prior?
– Chris Rogers
Jan 3 at 0:12
“You must not sit while your superior stands” seems the best answer here, though @jg broigjt up a good point about a character’s speech idiosyncrasy, hence the upvote. The main takeaway I got from the discussion—don’t mix simple and continuous tenses in this example. Thank you all!
– Simon S
Jan 4 at 19:03
add a comment |
As J.G. says, no you cannot drop the current participle. For a direct comparison to be implied, you need to use the same verb (either "to sit" or "to be sitting") for both subjects, e.g.:
“You must not sit when your superior does not”
or
“You must not be seated when your superior is not”
Personally, though comes across as quite formal, I would phrase it as:
“You must not sit while your superior stands”
answered Jan 2 at 23:54
David John SmithDavid John Smith
1542
As J.G. says, no you cannot drop the current participle. For a direct comparison to be implied, you need to use the same verb (either "to sit" or "to be sitting") for both subjects, e.g.:
“You must not sit when your superior does not”
or
“You must not be seated when your superior is not”
Personally, though comes across as quite formal, I would phrase it as:
“You must not sit while your superior stands”
answered Jan 2 at 23:54
David John SmithDavid John Smith
1542
answered Jan 2 at 23:54
David John SmithDavid John Smith
1542
answered Jan 2 at 23:54
David John SmithDavid John Smith
1542
answered Jan 2 at 23:54
David John SmithDavid John Smith
1542
1542
If you transpose the example @JG used with your first alternative, how can you say "You must not enter when your superior does not" when your superior has already entered some time prior?
– Chris Rogers
Jan 3 at 0:12
“You must not sit while your superior stands” seems the best answer here, though @jg broigjt up a good point about a character’s speech idiosyncrasy, hence the upvote. The main takeaway I got from the discussion—don’t mix simple and continuous tenses in this example. Thank you all!
– Simon S
Jan 4 at 19:03
add a comment |
If you transpose the example @JG used with your first alternative, how can you say "You must not enter when your superior does not" when your superior has already entered some time prior?
– Chris Rogers
Jan 3 at 0:12
“You must not sit while your superior stands” seems the best answer here, though @jg broigjt up a good point about a character’s speech idiosyncrasy, hence the upvote. The main takeaway I got from the discussion—don’t mix simple and continuous tenses in this example. Thank you all!
– Simon S
Jan 4 at 19:03
If you transpose the example @JG used with your first alternative, how can you say "You must not enter when your superior does not" when your superior has already entered some time prior?
– Chris Rogers
Jan 3 at 0:12
If you transpose the example @JG used with your first alternative, how can you say "You must not enter when your superior does not" when your superior has already entered some time prior?
– Chris Rogers
Jan 3 at 0:12
“You must not sit while your superior stands” seems the best answer here, though @jg broigjt up a good point about a character’s speech idiosyncrasy, hence the upvote. The main takeaway I got from the discussion—don’t mix simple and continuous tenses in this example. Thank you all!
– Simon S
Jan 4 at 19:03
“You must not sit while your superior stands” seems the best answer here, though @jg broigjt up a good point about a character’s speech idiosyncrasy, hence the upvote. The main takeaway I got from the discussion—don’t mix simple and continuous tenses in this example. Thank you all!
– Simon S
Jan 4 at 19:03
add a comment |
The grammar answer is: no, you may not, just as you can't say, "You must not enter when you superior is not" (to mean they haven't entered yet). You can't pair "is not" with an imperative verb as if it's its own past participle.
The authorial answer is: if it's the words of a character for whom such an idiosyncratic speech style would be typical, or even character-defining, it might make sense. Just bear in mind any such effort has to inculcate an attitude in readers you're happy with them having. In this case, that attitude would be, "this person's hard to parse". Only beta readers can tell you whether this makes the character less sympathetic, but maybe it's a character for whom that's not a problem.
Note: the second paragraph was for the benefit of writers, as at the time of posting this question appeared on writing.se.
answered Jan 2 at 21:49
J.G.J.G.
2895
add a comment |
The grammar answer is: no, you may not, just as you can't say, "You must not enter when you superior is not" (to mean they haven't entered yet). You can't pair "is not" with an imperative verb as if it's its own past participle.
The authorial answer is: if it's the words of a character for whom such an idiosyncratic speech style would be typical, or even character-defining, it might make sense. Just bear in mind any such effort has to inculcate an attitude in readers you're happy with them having. In this case, that attitude would be, "this person's hard to parse". Only beta readers can tell you whether this makes the character less sympathetic, but maybe it's a character for whom that's not a problem.
Note: the second paragraph was for the benefit of writers, as at the time of posting this question appeared on writing.se.
answered Jan 2 at 21:49
J.G.J.G.
2895
add a comment |
The grammar answer is: no, you may not, just as you can't say, "You must not enter when you superior is not" (to mean they haven't entered yet). You can't pair "is not" with an imperative verb as if it's its own past participle.
The authorial answer is: if it's the words of a character for whom such an idiosyncratic speech style would be typical, or even character-defining, it might make sense. Just bear in mind any such effort has to inculcate an attitude in readers you're happy with them having. In this case, that attitude would be, "this person's hard to parse". Only beta readers can tell you whether this makes the character less sympathetic, but maybe it's a character for whom that's not a problem.
Note: the second paragraph was for the benefit of writers, as at the time of posting this question appeared on writing.se.
answered Jan 2 at 21:49
J.G.J.G.
2895
The grammar answer is: no, you may not, just as you can't say, "You must not enter when you superior is not" (to mean they haven't entered yet). You can't pair "is not" with an imperative verb as if it's its own past participle.
The authorial answer is: if it's the words of a character for whom such an idiosyncratic speech style would be typical, or even character-defining, it might make sense. Just bear in mind any such effort has to inculcate an attitude in readers you're happy with them having. In this case, that attitude would be, "this person's hard to parse". Only beta readers can tell you whether this makes the character less sympathetic, but maybe it's a character for whom that's not a problem.
Note: the second paragraph was for the benefit of writers, as at the time of posting this question appeared on writing.se.
answered Jan 2 at 21:49
J.G.J.G.
2895
edited Jan 2 at 22:42
answered Jan 2 at 21:49
J.G.J.G.
2895
answered Jan 2 at 21:49
J.G.J.G.
2895
answered Jan 2 at 21:49
J.G.J.G.
2895
2895
add a comment |
add a comment |
To add to the answer from @JG, if you are looking for alternative forms within your writing, instead you could use
You must not be sitting when your superior is not
answered Jan 3 at 0:00
Chris RogersChris Rogers
735210
add a comment |
To add to the answer from @JG, if you are looking for alternative forms within your writing, instead you could use
You must not be sitting when your superior is not
answered Jan 3 at 0:00
Chris RogersChris Rogers
735210
add a comment |
To add to the answer from @JG, if you are looking for alternative forms within your writing, instead you could use
You must not be sitting when your superior is not
answered Jan 3 at 0:00
Chris RogersChris Rogers
735210
To add to the answer from @JG, if you are looking for alternative forms within your writing, instead you could use
You must not be sitting when your superior is not
answered Jan 3 at 0:00
Chris RogersChris Rogers
735210
answered Jan 3 at 0:00
Chris RogersChris Rogers
735210
answered Jan 3 at 0:00
Chris RogersChris Rogers
735210
answered Jan 3 at 0:00
Chris RogersChris Rogers
735210
735210
add a comment |
add a comment |
You could also consider framing it in the affirmative or positive voice with "You should stand when your superior does so", or "As your superior sits or stands, you should do likewise."
It speaks to the tone you are trying to convey...
answered Jan 3 at 18:53
RodolfoRodolfo
211
add a comment |
You could also consider framing it in the affirmative or positive voice with "You should stand when your superior does so", or "As your superior sits or stands, you should do likewise."
It speaks to the tone you are trying to convey...
answered Jan 3 at 18:53
RodolfoRodolfo
211
add a comment |
You could also consider framing it in the affirmative or positive voice with "You should stand when your superior does so", or "As your superior sits or stands, you should do likewise."
It speaks to the tone you are trying to convey...
answered Jan 3 at 18:53
RodolfoRodolfo
211
You could also consider framing it in the affirmative or positive voice with "You should stand when your superior does so", or "As your superior sits or stands, you should do likewise."
It speaks to the tone you are trying to convey...
answered Jan 3 at 18:53
RodolfoRodolfo
211
answered Jan 3 at 18:53
RodolfoRodolfo
211
answered Jan 3 at 18:53
RodolfoRodolfo
211
answered Jan 3 at 18:53
RodolfoRodolfo
211
211
add a comment |
add a comment |
I would simply say: "You shouldn't sit while your superior is standing." I think it's the least awkward and best sounding way to say what you mean.
answered Jan 3 at 18:21
M.HatM.Hat
111
add a comment |
I would simply say: "You shouldn't sit while your superior is standing." I think it's the least awkward and best sounding way to say what you mean.
answered Jan 3 at 18:21
M.HatM.Hat
111
add a comment |
I would simply say: "You shouldn't sit while your superior is standing." I think it's the least awkward and best sounding way to say what you mean.
answered Jan 3 at 18:21
M.HatM.Hat
111
I would simply say: "You shouldn't sit while your superior is standing." I think it's the least awkward and best sounding way to say what you mean.
answered Jan 3 at 18:21
M.HatM.Hat
111
answered Jan 3 at 18:21
M.HatM.Hat
111
answered Jan 3 at 18:21
M.HatM.Hat
111
answered Jan 3 at 18:21
M.HatM.Hat
111
111
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f479584%2fcan-i-write-you-must-not-sit-when-your-superior-is-not%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Is 5 characters worth it?
– bruglesco
Jan 2 at 21:21
@bruglesco Lol. Good point. Let me rephrase, “I’m trying out new forms in my writing.”
– Simon S
Jan 2 at 21:35
I personally wouldn't. Not sure if it is grammatically correct or not but it saves no significant space and is harder to understand. The first sentence also sounds less harsh. partly because it is phrased without the negation.
– bruglesco
Jan 2 at 21:41
2
If your goal is more elegant writing, it's never a good idea to make the audience do extra work. In this case the extra work is changing the verb form of an elided word. So, regardless of whether the grammar is correct, I would advise against it, even though it is easy to understand and unambiguous. Elegant writing is almost always about reducing the audience's work, not increasing it.
– Chris Sunami
Jan 2 at 21:47
You must not sit if your "superior" is not really superior after all??
– Hot Licks
Jan 2 at 22:48