grammar - "I can not attend to something" meaning "I'm free not to attend to something"?


When I say "I cannot attend to it" it sounds like I'm saying "I'm not able to attend to it", while what I want to express is that I'm capable of doing it, but I just don't need to.


In Slavic languages it's resolved by changing the negation particle position: [negation] [can] [do something] vs. [can] [negation] [do something]. In the first case I negate "can", while in the second I negate the "do" verb.


How to achieve the same in English and not be ambiguous?



Answer



In English this is often achieved by using the opposite verb. In this sentence you could say "I'm free to avoid something" or "I'm free to skip something".


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

verbs - "Baby is creeping" vs. "baby is crawling" in AmE

commas - Does this sentence have too many subjunctives?

grammatical number - Use of lone apostrophe for plural?

etymology - Where does the phrase "doctored" originate?

phrases - Somebody is gonna kiss the donkey

typography - When a dagger is used to indicate a note, must it come after an asterisk?

etymology - Origin of "s--t eating grin"