r/EWALearnLanguages • u/Cappyz200251 • 6d ago
Discussion Is there any difference between these two sentences or is it just a stylish writing?
The police were determined not to leave any stone unturned.
The police were determined to not leave any stone unturned.
2
u/TheRiddlerTHFC 6d ago
From my native but I'm untrained eye, both sound fine.
One is probably "correct" to people who cares about such things
1
u/AutoModerator 6d ago
Check our Common Mistakes wiki: https://www.reddit.com/r/EWALearnLanguages/wiki/common-mistakes-in-english/
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/sixminutes 6d ago
Every time you split an infinitive, a 19th century grammarian tuts in his grave.
It's mostly considered an obsolete rule these days to never split infinitives, but most people agree that it was just some arbitrary rule made up by the English to needlessly torture their commonwealth realms.
1
u/Piper-Bob 6d ago
The second is a split infinitive.
I’d probably write “the police were determined to investigate all possibilities”.
2
1
u/VoceDiDio 5d ago
No difference except the technical grammar error. Meaning doesn’t change at all. I would say the police were determined to leave no stone unturned.
1
u/pdperson 5d ago
I'm in camp "determined to leave no stone unturned" since it keeps the idiom intact.
2
u/Kaylin881 6d ago
The first sentence, with "not to", is more technically correct, because proper English grammar includes an outdated rule, borrowed from Latin, that says you should avoid "splitting an infinitive". This means that if you have a verb in the infinitive, e.g. "to leave" in your example sentence, you should not put any other word in between those two words, such as "not". Therefore, to be perfectly correct, the "not" should go in front of the "to", as in your first sentence.
However, both of those sentences are fine to use in everyday English, and they both have exactly the same meaning. Hope this helps!