# "No" is not a sentence **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 25, 2005, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-is-not-a-sentence/296247 "2005-03-25T20:28:46Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2005, 12:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-is-not-a-sentence/296247/41 "2005-03-26T00:17:23Z")
Ugh. Let’s say for grammatical purposes we don’t consider one-word utterances sentences. Fine. Most authorities will call such constructions “fragmented sentences,” and I can live with that. They’re still a valid type of sentence. They are to be avoided in most formal writing, but our day-to-day speech is full of such context-dependant responses. What’s wrong with that? Hell, if it makes you happy, you can call these utterances “fragments,” and not “sentences,” if you want. Doesn’t mean they’re not allowed by the rules of the English language, because they certainly are. Who here said we have to speak in completely sentences at the SDMB in the first place? You? Cecil? Anyone? And how would _you_ punctuate that last sentence in your little grammatical fantasy world? With a slew of hyphens? Semi-colons? And don’t answer anything about recasting the sentence, because it’s a perfectly good sentence that does not gain any clarity from such a treatment. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2005, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-is-not-a-sentence/296247/42 "2005-03-26T00:27:40Z")
> [@Hyperelastic](#): > > Of course, there is no law against writing “No.” or any other fragmentary construction, as many have delighted in doing in this thread. Hemingway is full of such tidbits and he got a Nobel Prize. All I have said is that it isn’t a sentence. Go ahead, say “nucular,” spell your name “Sean” and pronounce it “Seen.” In real life, it’s impolite to correct people, so we’ll never even raise an eyebrow. So the purpose of your OP was to let everyone know how much smarter you are than most people. Which you blew by claiming that all sentences have objects. But, really, “I am smarter than most other people” is a pretty dumb thing to start a thread about, anyway. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2005, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-is-not-a-sentence/296247/43 "2005-03-26T00:57:38Z")
> [@Hyperelastic](#): > > You seem to be objecting to linguistic standards on free speech grounds. You _can_ say anything you want, but you _cannot_ reasonably claim that therefore there is no such thing as standard English. > > The cite from Cecil states that “No,” lacking a subject and a verb, is _not_ a sentence, contrary to what **Left Hand of Dorkness** intended. It has nothing to do with linguistic permissivism, my trout, it has to do with the fact you only got partway through the grammar book. Mine (_Little, Brown_) says, “A few word groups lacking the usual subject-predicate combination are not sentence fragments… They include exclamations (_Oh, no!_)…” Enjoy. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2005, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-is-not-a-sentence/296247/44 "2005-03-26T01:04:48Z")
> [@Hyperelastic](#): > > When you have to turn it into a question of “attitude,” it’s pretty clear you’ve lost the argument. You seem to be objecting to linguistic standards on free speech grounds. You _can_ say anything you want, but you _cannot_ reasonably claim that therefore there is no such thing as standard English. I don’t object to standards on the grounds of “free speech,” I object to standards on the grounds that they are for the small-minded and easily confused. ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2005, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-is-not-a-sentence/296247/45 "2005-03-26T01:25:18Z")
> [@Hyperelastic](#): > > When you have to turn it into a question of “attitude,” it’s pretty clear you’ve lost the argument. You seem to be objecting to linguistic standards on free speech grounds. You _can_ say anything you want, but you _cannot_ reasonably claim that therefore there is no such thing as standard English. Of course they can’t. You, on the other hand, can’t reasonably claim that Standard English is something that follows the rules taught by fourth grade teachers. There’s an actual science to studying language, known as linguistics. Applying what you learned in grade school to serious discussions of English is the equivalent of singing “Head, shoulders, knees and toes” to study anatomy. The mistaken notion that a sentence must have a subject and predicate is, again, dogma taught by elementary school teachers. I’m not sure why they characterize what they teach as a set of rules underlying English, when in actuality most of the principles they espouse are tools for teaching composition. At any rate, there simply is no validity to your claim about sentences, and anyone who’s studied some linguistics will be able to tell you that. Polycarp clearly has an immense amount of knowledge in that area, and while you may not like it, he’s demonstrated it time and again with information on obscure languages, explanations of complex grammatical devices, and so on and so forth. Check some of his posts in GQ; he’s extremely well-informed on the subject. And he’s right, as well. > [@Hyperelastic](#): > > Of course, there is no law against writing “No.” or any other fragmentary construction, as many have delighted in doing in this thread. Hemingway is full of such tidbits and he got a Nobel Prize. All I have said is that it isn’t a sentence. Go ahead, say “nucular,” spell your name “Sean” and pronounce it “Seen.” In real life, it’s impolite to correct people, so we’ll never even raise an eyebrow. So what’s your point then? Hemingway ain’t the only one who’s done that. Is the idea that you, on the basis of what you learned in grade school, are a better writer than Hemingway or Shakespeare? Or is it to draw some meaningless distinction: “‘No’ is not a complete sentence. But it’s perfectly fine not to use complete sentences.” What would be the point in saying that? It’s inaccurate - your claims about what a sentence is are not based upon reality - and it doesn’t contain any useful advice anyway. ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2005, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-is-not-a-sentence/296247/46 "2005-03-26T01:34:16Z")
By the way, if you really think “nucular” is wrong, Hyperelastic, I’d like you to take a look at this thread, where I offered some much needed education to folks making the same claim. Some agreed; the stupider ones just slunk away. If you have another argument, I’d love to hear it. Several folks discuss the issue, and I didn’t start participating heavily until the second page or so. > **[It's nucular, Lisa: NUCULAR](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=301996)** > > Anyone else notice that once Bush secured re-election, his conformance to Standard American English suddenly improved? All of a sudden it seems it’s okay to refer to technology relating to the center of an atom by the term he no doubt grew up with:... ---
**Author:** ![Hyperelastic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Hyperelastic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hyperelastic)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2005, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-is-not-a-sentence/296247/47 "2005-03-26T01:40:42Z")
> [@matt\_mcl](#): > > Mine (_Little, Brown_) says, “A few word groups lacking the usual subject-predicate combination are not sentence fragments… They include exclamations (_Oh, no!_)…” > > Enjoy. Do they include “No.”? Also, does your reference consistently call these examples “word groups” and not “sentences”? > [@pulykamell](#): > > Let’s say for grammatical purposes we don’t consider one-word utterances sentences. Fine. Most authorities will call such constructions “fragmented sentences,” and I can live with that. They’re still a valid type of sentence. They are to be avoided in most formal writing, but our day-to-day speech is full of such context-dependant responses. What’s wrong with that? > > Hell, if it makes you happy, you can call these utterances “fragments,” and not “sentences,” if you want. Doesn’t mean they’re not allowed by the rules of the English language, because they certainly are. > > Who here said we have to speak in completely sentences at the SDMB in the first place? You? Cecil? Anyone? > > And how would you punctuate that last sentence in your little grammatical fantasy world? With a slew of hyphens? Semi-colons? Where did I say that a sentence has to have more than one word? “Go.” “Stay.” Both are perfectly good sentences. I shall continue to confine myself to the following two claims: (a) “No.” is not a sentence, and (2) starting a post with “No.” is obnoxious. > [@RickJay](#): > > So the purpose of your OP was to let everyone know how much smarter you are than most people. Which you blew by claiming that all sentences have objects. I already acknowledged this error. Your insistence on bringing it up again can only be viewed as grandstanding. ---
**Author:** ![Driver8](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b5a626/32.png) [@Driver8](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Driver8)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2005, 1:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-is-not-a-sentence/296247/48 "2005-03-26T01:44:44Z")
You didn’t just say “it is not a sentence”. You chewed people out for using these one word sentences or fragments or whatever the hell people want to call them. Your suggestions of improved writing in the OP do not have the same dramatic impact intended by “No.” by itself. You’re suggesting that people write unclearly, just to prescribe to your dogmatic world view. If there ever was terrible usage of English, this would be it. While I appreciate standardization is pretty useful in clear communication, it’s important to realize the rules and definitions were figured out, and are being figured out, after the fact and applied to language that has pretty much been around for a while. You’re doing yourself a grave disservice in terms of communicating if you assume otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![Driver8](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b5a626/32.png) [@Driver8](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Driver8)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2005, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-is-not-a-sentence/296247/49 "2005-03-26T01:51:58Z")
I forgot to say that I would be more sympathetic to your world view if you had encountered this in a university maths text book (for example), where a more dogmatic approach to grammer would be necessary to express rigidly defined ideas. The above isn’t strictly appropriate given your precise complaint, since “No.” isn’t ambigious at all. But to complain about postings on a newsgroup?! Jesus, you really are just looking for attention. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2005, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-is-not-a-sentence/296247/50 "2005-03-26T01:52:12Z")
> [@Hyperelastic](#): > > Do they include “No.”? They don’t give “no” as an example, but I’m having trouble seeing how it’s syntactically different from “Oh, no!”. > [@](#): > > Also, does your reference consistently call these examples “word groups” and not “sentences”? No. My quotation, for example, is from the section on “Clear Sentences.” ---
**Author:** ![furt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/439d5e/32.png) [@furt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/furt)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2005, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-is-not-a-sentence/296247/51 "2005-03-26T03:30:42Z")
**Hyper** , on what are you basing your assertions? You’re obviously not relying on the way people actually write. You seem to be saying that there is a prescriptive set of grammatical rules that must be followed … where is it? ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2005, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-is-not-a-sentence/296247/52 "2005-03-26T03:35:35Z")
> [@Hyperelastic](#): > > DoI already acknowledged this error. Your insistence on bringing it up again can only be viewed as grandstanding. Since that was the entire purpose of your OP, what’s the problem? ---
**Author:** ![pulykamell](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pulykamell/32/3166_2.png) [@pulykamell](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pulykamell)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2005, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-is-not-a-sentence/296247/53 "2005-03-26T04:13:44Z")
> [@Hyperelastic](#): > > Do they include “No.”? > Where did I say that a sentence has to have more than one word? “Go.” “Stay.” Both are perfectly good sentences. Huh? Where did I say that you said sentences have to be more than one word? ---
**Author:** ![Monstre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@Monstre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monstre)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2005, 7:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-is-not-a-sentence/296247/54 "2005-03-26T07:08:25Z")
> [@Hyperelastic](#): > > Where did I say that a sentence has to have more than one word? “Go.” “Stay.” Both are perfectly good sentences. Well, you didn’t say it in those words, but you did say this, which seems to imply it: > [@Hyperelastic](#): > > Unless you’re writing ad copy for a steam-powered automobile in 1902, you do not put a period after a single word. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2005, 12:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-is-not-a-sentence/296247/55 "2005-03-26T12:11:01Z")
> [@Hyperelastic](#): > > I shall continue to confine myself to the following two claims: (a) “No.” is not a sentence, and (2) \*\*starting a post with “No.” is obnoxious. \*\* (bolding mine) See, I could give a rat’s arse about (1), but point (2) is where **You** come across as the obnoxious one, Mr Grammar Maven. ---
**Author:** ![Ponder\_Stibbons](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ponder_stibbons/32/343_2.png) [@Ponder\_Stibbons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ponder_Stibbons)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2005, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-is-not-a-sentence/296247/56 "2005-03-26T13:20:57Z")
Great Og. **Hyperelastic** , you are hyper-wrong. And obnoxious. As pointed out previously, the grammar rule you are thinking of doesn’t discount “No.” as a sentence, but rather as a _complete_ sentence. In grammar circles it is known as a “sentence fragment”. Which is perfectly acceptable in informal writing of the sort found, for example, on message boards. Shit, with all the 1337-speak found all the hell over the place, this does indeed make the OP the Lamest. Rant. Ever. Sorry, make that “Evar”. ---
**Author:** ![PunditLisa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/4af34b/32.png) [@PunditLisa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PunditLisa)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2005, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-is-not-a-sentence/296247/57 "2005-03-26T14:09:18Z")
When I’m at a barbecue, I eat the fried chicken with my hands. When I’m dining with the Queen of England, I don’t. (It’s a little known fact that the Queen loves fried chicken.) Surely you realize that rules can be, and even should be, relaxed depending on the circumstances. To me, these threads are running dialogues. I add punctuation as I see fit in order to aid the reader in “hearing” what I have to say. I freely use fragments. I sometimes even call my readers names that are not in the dictionary, such as “goat-felching asswipes.” These are things I would never do when writing a thesis paper. Whether it follows the technical rules or not, “You. are. an. ass.” reads differently than “You are an ass.” And I appreciate the distinction. However. There is a difference between deliberately bending rules in order to facilitate understanding and erroneously bending the rules because you never learned them. I’ll admit that my anal retentive self does cringe when I read posts that are so poorly constructed that their lack of grammar actually _inhibits_ understanding. My recommendation to you is that if it helps you to overcome your anal retentive preoccupation with grammar, just pretend is a quote: (Insert poster’s name) says, “(insert post).” ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2005, 2:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-is-not-a-sentence/296247/58 "2005-03-26T14:17:14Z")
> [@Ponder Stibbons](#): > > …the grammar rule you are thinking of doesn’t discount “No.” as a sentence, but rather as a _complete_ sentence. In grammar circles it is known as a “sentence fragment”. Which is perfectly acceptable in informal writing of the sort found, for example, on message boards. Actually, according to my _Little, Brown_, “No.” is _neither_ a complete sentence _nor_ a sentence fragment, but an interjection. There’s no reason it wouldn’t be acceptable in formal writing as well. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2005, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-is-not-a-sentence/296247/59 "2005-03-26T14:19:31Z")
> [@PunditLisa](#): > > My recommendation to you is that if it helps you to overcome your anal retentive preoccupation with grammar… Pardon me, but this fellow does not have an anal-retentive preoccupation with grammar. If he had, he would have learned that a group of words can be _neither_ a complete sentence _nor_ a sentence fragment. His preoccupation is with the sound of his own metaphorical voice. _I_ have an anal-retentive preoccupation with grammar, one that is very profitable to me, and I’ll thank you not to attribute him to my category. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [March 26, 2005, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-is-not-a-sentence/296247/60 "2005-03-26T16:13:13Z")
The point is that he (like many non-philologists) mistakes a bunch of prescriptive rules for a discipline worth studying, and which has many Dopers with degrees in it. He is correct that Formal English has specific rules relating to its proper use. But describing those rules and their application is an element of _descriptive_ grammar and linguistics. Granted that the sentence fragment ordinarily has no place in formal writing, nor for that matter the contraction, it is equally improper to presume that the forms proper to formal writing are in some way “better” or “more proper” than colloquial forms. Each has its proper usage. “It is I” said by an eleven-year-old boy at the entrance to a tree fort is as out of place, as **bad** English, as “Cromwell and his Roundheads wasn’t putting up with Royalist bullshit” in a history-test essay. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-is-not-a-sentence/296247.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-is-not-a-sentence/296247.md?page=4)