Yes and no in one word

Yes and no, or word pairs with similar words, are expressions of the affirmative and the negative, respectively, in several languages, including English. Some languages make a distinction between answers to affirmative versus negative questions and may have three-form or four-form systems. English originally used a four-form system up to and including Early Middle English and Modern English has reduced to a two-form system consisting of ‘yes’ and ‘no’. It exists in many facets of communication, such as: eye blink communication, head movements, Morse Code, and sign language. Some languages, such as Latin, do not have yes-no word systems.

Answering yes/no question with single words meaning ‘yes’ or ‘no’ is by no means universal. Probably about half the world’s languages typically employ an echo response: repeating the verb in the question in an affirmative or a negative form. Some of these also have optional words for ‘yes’ and ‘no’, like Hungarian, Russian, and Portuguese. Others simply don’t have designated yes/no words, like Welsh, Irish, Latin, Thai, and Chinese.^[1] Echo responses avoid the issue of what an unadorned yes means in response to a negative question. Yes and no can be used as a response to a variety of situations – but are better suited when asked simple questions. While a yes response to the question, «You don’t like strawberries?» is ambiguous in English, the Welsh response ydw (I am) has no ambiguity.

The words yes and no are not easily classified into any of the eight conventional parts of speech. Sometimes they are classified as interjections, although they do not qualify as such,^{[fact or opinion?]} and they are not adverbs. They are sometimes classified as a part of speech in their own right, sentence words, or pro-sentences, although that category contains more than yes and no, and not all linguists include them in their lists of sentence words. Sentences consisting solely of one of these two words are classified as minor sentences.

Classification of English grammar[edit]

Although sometimes classified as interjections, these words do not express emotion or act as calls for attention; they are not adverbs because they do not qualify any verb, adjective, or adverb. They are sometimes classified as a part of speech in their own right: sentence words or word sentences.^[2][3][4]

This is the position of Otto Jespersen, who states that «‘Yes’ and ‘No’ … are to all intents and purposes sentences just as much as the most delicately balanced sentences ever uttered by Demosthenes or penned by Samuel Johnson.»^[5]

Georg von der Gabelentz, Henry Sweet, and Philipp Wegener have all written on the subject of sentence words. Both Sweet and Wegener include yes and no in this category, with Sweet treating them separately from both imperatives and interjections, although Gabelentz does not.^[6]

Watts^[7] classifies yes and no as grammatical particles, in particular response particles. He also notes their relationship to the interjections oh and ah, which is that the interjections can precede yes and no but not follow them. Oh as an interjection expresses surprise, but in the combined forms oh yes and oh no merely acts as an intensifier; but ah in the combined forms ah yes and ah no retains its stand-alone meaning, of focusing upon the previous speaker’s or writer’s last statement. The forms *yes oh, *yes ah, *no oh, and *no ah are grammatically ill-formed. Aijmer^[8] similarly categorizes the yes and no as response signals or reaction signals.

Ameka classifies these two words in different ways according to the context. When used as back-channel items, he classifies them as interjections; but when they are used as the responses to a yes–no question, he classifies them as formulaic words. The distinction between an interjection and a formula is, in Ameka’s view, that the former does not have an addressee (although it may be directed at a person), whereas the latter does. The yes or no in response to the question is addressed at the interrogator, whereas yes or no used as a back-channel item is a feedback usage, an utterance that is said to oneself. However, Sorjonen criticizes this analysis as lacking empirical work on the other usages of these words, in addition to interjections and feedback uses.^[9]

Bloomfield and Hockett classify the words, when used to answer yes-no questions, as special completive interjections. They classify sentences comprising solely one of these two words as minor sentences.^[3]

Sweet classifies the words in several ways. They are sentence-modifying adverbs, adverbs that act as modifiers to an entire sentence. They are also sentence words, when standing alone. They may, as question responses, also be absolute forms that correspond to what would otherwise be the not in a negated echo response. For example, a «No.» in response to the question «Is he here?» is equivalent to the echo response «He is not here.» Sweet observes that there is no correspondence with a simple yes in the latter situation, although the sentence-word «Certainly.» provides an absolute form of an emphatic echo response «He is certainly here.» Many other adverbs can also be used as sentence words in this way.^[10]

Unlike yes, no can also be an adverb of degree, applying to adjectives solely in the comparative (e.g., no greater, no sooner, but not no soon or no soonest), and an adjective when applied to nouns (e.g., «He is no fool.» and Dyer’s «No clouds, no vapours intervene.»).^[10][11]

Grammarians of other languages have created further, similar, special classifications for these types of words. Tesnière classifies the French oui and non as phrasillons logiques (along with voici). Fonagy observes that such a classification may be partly justified for the former two, but suggests that pragmatic holophrases is more appropriate.^[12]

The Early English four-form system[edit]

While Modern English has a two-form system of yes and no for affirmatives and negatives, earlier forms of English had a four-form system, comprising the words yea, nay, yes, and no. Yes contradicts a negatively formulated question, No affirms it; Yea affirms a positively formulated question, Nay contradicts it.

• Will they not go? — Yes, they will.
• Will they not go? — No, they will not.
• Will they go? — Yea, they will.
• Will they go? — Nay, they will not.

This is illustrated by the following passage from Much Ado about Nothing:^[13]

Claudio: Can the world buie such a iewell? [buy such a jewel]
Benedick: Yea, and a case to put it into, but speake you this with a sad brow?

Benedick’s answer of yea is a correct application of the rule, but as observed by W. A. Wright «Shakespeare does not always observe this rule, and even in the earliest times the usage appears not to have been consistent.» Furness gives as an example the following, where Hermia’s answer should, in following the rule, have been yes:^[13][14]

Demetrius: Do not you thinke, The Duke was heere, and bid vs follow him?
Hermia: Yea, and my Father.

This subtle grammatical feature of Early Modern English is recorded by Sir Thomas More in his critique of William Tyndale’s translation of the New Testament into Early Modern English, which was then quoted as an authority by later scholars:^[13]

I would not here note by the way that Tyndale here translateth no for nay, for it is but a trifle and mistaking of the Englishe worde : saving that ye shoulde see that he whych in two so plain Englishe wordes, and so common as in naye and no can not tell when he should take the one and when the tother, is not for translating into Englishe a man very mete. For the use of these two wordes in aunswering a question is this. No aunswereth the question framed by the affirmative. As for ensample if a manne should aske Tindall himselfe: ys an heretike meete to translate Holy Scripture into Englishe ? Lo to thys question if he will aunswere trew Englishe, he must aunswere nay and not no. But and if the question be asked hym thus lo: is not an heretike mete to translate Holy Scripture into Englishe ? To this question if he will aunswere trewe Englishe, he must aunswere no and not nay. And a lyke difference is there betwene these two adverbs ye and yes. For if the question bee framed unto Tindall by the affirmative in thys fashion. If an heretique falsely translate the New Testament into Englishe, to make his false heresyes seem the word of Godde, be his bokes worthy to be burned ? To this questyon asked in thys wyse, yf he will aunswere true Englishe, he must aunswere ye and not yes. But now if the question be asked him thus lo; by the negative. If an heretike falsely translate the Newe Testament into Englishe to make his false heresyee seme the word of God, be not hys bokes well worthy to be burned ? To thys question in thys fashion framed if he will aunswere trewe Englishe he may not aunswere ye but he must answere yes, and say yes marry be they, bothe the translation and the translatour, and al that wyll hold wyth them.

— Thomas More, The Confutation of Tyndale’s Answer, pp. 430^[15][16]

In fact, More’s exemplification of the rule actually contradicts his statement of what the rule is. This went unnoticed by scholars such as Horne Tooke, Robert Gordon Latham, and Trench, and was first pointed out by George Perkins Marsh in his Century Dictionary, where he corrects More’s incorrect statement of the first rule, «No aunswereth the question framed by the affirmative.», to read nay. That even More got the rule wrong, even while himself dressing down Tyndale for getting it wrong, is seen by Furness as evidence that the four word system was «too subtle a distinction for practice».

Marsh found no evidence of a four-form system in Mœso-Gothic, although he reported finding «traces» in Old English. He observed that in the Anglo-Saxon Gospels,

• positively phrased questions are answered positively with gea (John 21:15,16, King James Version: «Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee» etc.)
• and negatively with ne (Luke 12:51, KJ: «Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division»; 13:4,5, KJ: «Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them, think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem? I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.»), nese (John 21:5 «Then Jesus saith unto them, Children, have ye any meat? They answered him, No.»; Matthew 13:28,29, KJ: «The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we go and gather them up? But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them.»), and nic meaning «not I» (John 18:17, KJ: «Then saith the damsel that kept the door unto Peter, Art not thou also one of this man’s disciples? He saith, I am not.»);
• while negatively phrased questions are answered positively with gyse (Matthew 17:25, KJ: «they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes.»)
• and negatively for example with nâ, meaning «no one» (John 8:10,11, «he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? She said, No man, Lord.»).^[14]

Marsh calls this four-form system of Early Modern English a «needless subtlety». Tooke called it a «ridiculous distinction», with Marsh concluding that Tooke believed Thomas More to have simply made this rule up and observing that Tooke is not alone in his disbelief of More. Marsh, however, points out (having himself analyzed the works of John Wycliffe, Geoffrey Chaucer, John Gower, John Skelton, and Robert of Gloucester, and Piers Plowman and Le Morte d’Arthur) that the distinction both existed and was generally and fairly uniformly observed in Early Modern English from the time of Chaucer to the time of Tyndale. But after the time of Tyndale, the four-form system was rapidly replaced by the modern two-form system.^[14]

Three-form systems[edit]

Several languages have a three-form system, with two affirmative words and one negative. In a three-form system, the affirmative response to a positively phrased question is the unmarked affirmative, the affirmative response to a negatively phrased question is the marked affirmative, and the negative response to both forms of question is the (single) negative. For example, in Norwegian the affirmative answer to «Snakker du norsk?» («Do you speak Norwegian?») is «Ja», and the affirmative answer to «Snakker du ikke norsk?» («Do you not speak Norwegian?») is «Jo», while the negative answer to both questions is «Nei».^{[14][17][18][19][20]}

Danish, Swedish, Norwegian, Icelandic, Faroese, Hungarian, German, Dutch, French and Malayalam all have three-form systems. Swedish and Danish have ja, jo, and nej. Norwegian has ja, jo/jau, and nei. Icelandic has já, jú, and nei. Faroese has ja, jú, and nei. Hungarian has igen, de, and nem. German has ja, doch, and nein. Dutch has ja, jawel, and nee. French has oui, si, and non. Malayalam has അതേ, ഉവ്വ് and ഇല്ല. Though, technically Malayalam is a multi-form system of Yes and No as can be seen from below, the former are the formal words for Yes and No.

Swedish, and to some extent Danish and Norwegian, also have additional forms javisst and jovisst, analogous to ja and jo, to indicate a strong affirmative response. Swedish (and Danish and Norwegian slang) also have the forms joho and nehej, which both indicate stronger response than jo or nej. Jo can also be used as an emphatic contradiction of a negative statement.^[18][21] And Malayalam has the additional forms അതേല്ലോ, ഉവ്വല്ലോ and ഇല്ലല്ലോ which act like question words, question tags or to strengthen the affirmative or negative response, indicating stronger meaning than അതേ, ഉവ്വ് and ഇല്ല. The words അല്ലേ, ആണല്ലോ, അല്ലല്ലോ, വേണല്ലോ, വേണ്ടല്ലോ, ഉണ്ടല്ലോ and ഇല്ലേ work in the same ways. These words also sound more polite as they don’t sound like curt when saying «No!» or «Yes!». ഉണ്ട means «it is there» and the word behaves as an affirmative response like അതേ. The usage of ഏയ് to simply mean «No» or «No way!», is informal and may be casual or sarcastic, while അല്ല is the more formal way of saying «false», «incorrect» or that «it is not» and is a negative response for questions. The word അല്ലല്ല has a stronger meaning than അല്ല. ശരി is used to mean «OK» or «correct», with the opposite ശരിയല്ല meaning «not OK» or «not correct». It is used to answer affirmatively to questions to confirm any action by the asker, but to answer negatively one says വേണ്ടാ. വേണം and വേണ്ട both mean to «want» and to «not want».

Other languages with four-form systems[edit]

Like Early Modern English, the Romanian language has a four-form system. The affirmative and negative responses to positively phrased questions are da and nu, respectively. But in responses to negatively phrased questions they are prefixed with ba (i.e. ba da and ba nu). nu is also used as a negation adverb, infixed between subject and verb. Thus, for example, the affirmative response to the negatively phrased question «N-ai plătit?» («Didn’t you pay?») is «Ba da.» («Yes.»—i.e. «I did pay.»), and the negative response to a positively phrased question beginning «Se poate să …?» («Is it possible to …?») is «Nu, nu se poate.» («No, it is not possible.»—note the use of nu for both no and negation of the verb.)^[22][23][24]

Related words in other languages and translation problems[edit]

Bloomfield and Hockett observe that not all languages have special completive interjections.

Finnish[edit]

Finnish does not generally answer yes-no questions with either adverbs or interjections but answers them with a repetition of the verb in the question,^[25] negating it if the answer is the negative. (This is an echo response.) The answer to «Tuletteko kaupungista?» («Are you coming from town?») is the verb form itself, «Tulemme.» («We are coming.») However, in spoken Finnish, a simple «Yes» answer is somewhat more common, «Joo.»

Negative questions are answered similarly. Negative answers are just the negated verb form. The answer to «Tunnetteko herra Lehdon?» («Do you know Mr Lehto?») is «En tunne.» («I don’t know.») or simply «En.» («I don’t.»).^{[3][26][27][28]} However, Finnish also has particle words for «yes»: «Kyllä» (formal) and «joo» (colloquial). A yes-no question can be answered «yes» with either «kyllä» or «joo«, which are not conjugated according to the person and plurality of the verb. «Ei«, however, is always conjugated and means «no».

Estonian[edit]

Estonian has a structure similar to Finnish, with both repetitions and interjections. Jah means «yes». Unlike Finnish, the negation particle is always ei, regardless of person and plurality. Ei ole («am/are/is not») can be replaced by pole (a contraction of the ancient expression ep ole, meaning the same).

The word küll, cognate to Finnish kyllä, can be used to reply positively to a negative question: «Kas sa ei räägi soome keelt?» «Räägin küll!» («You don’t speak Finnish?» «Yes, I do!») It can also be used to approve a positive statement: «Sa tulidki kaasa!» «Tulin küll.» («You (unexpectedly) came along!» «Yes I did.»)

Latvian[edit]

Up until the 16th century Latvian did not have a word for «yes» and the common way of responding affirmatively to a question was by repeating the question’s verb, just as in Finnish. The modern day jā was borrowed from Middle High German ja and first appeared in 16th-century religious texts, especially catechisms, in answers to questions about faith. At that time such works were usually translated from German by non-Latvians that had learned Latvian as a foreign language. By the 17th century, jā was being used by some Latvian speakers that lived near the cities, and more frequently when speaking to non-Latvians, but they would revert to agreeing by repeating the question verb when talking among themselves. By the 18th century the use of jā was still of low frequency, and in Northern Vidzeme the word was almost non-existent until the 18th and early 19th century. Only in the mid-19th century did jā really become usual everywhere.^[29]

Welsh[edit]

It is often assumed that Welsh has no words at all for yes and no. It has ie and nage, and do and naddo. However, these are used only in specialized circumstances and are some of the many ways in Welsh of saying yes or no. Ie and nage are used to respond to sentences of simple identification, while do and naddo are used to respond to questions specifically in the past tense. As in Finnish, the main way to state yes or no, in answer to yes-no questions, is to echo the verb of the question. The answers to «Ydy Ffred yn dod?» («Is Ffred coming?») are either «Ydy» («He is (coming).») or «Nac ydy» («He is not (coming)»). In general, the negative answer is the positive answer combined with nag. For more information on yes and no answers to yes-no questions in Welsh, see Jones, listed in further reading.^[28][30][31]

Goidelic languages[edit]

The Goidelic languages (Irish, Scottish Gaelic and Manx) do not have words for yes or no at all. Instead, an echo response of the main verb used to ask the question is used. Sometimes, one of the words meaning «to be» (Irish tá or is, see Irish syntax § The forms meaning «to be»; Scottish Gaelic tha or is see Scottish Gaelic grammar § verbs; Manx ta or is) is used. For example, the Irish question «An bhfuil sé ag teacht?» («Is he coming?») may be answered «Tá« («Is») or «Níl« («Is not»). More frequently, another verb will be used. For example, to respond to «Ar chuala sé?» («Did he hear?»), «Chuala» («Heard») or «Níor chuala» («Did not hear») are used. Irish people frequently give echo answers in English as well, e.g. «Did you hear?» Answer «I heard/I did».

Latin[edit]

Latin has no single words for yes and no. Their functions as word sentence responses to yes-no questions are taken up by sentence adverbs, single adverbs that are sentence modifiers and also used as word sentences. There are several such adverbs classed as truth-value adverbs—including certe, fortasse, nimirum, plane, vero, etiam, sane, videlicet, and minime (negative). They express the speaker’s/writer’s feelings about the truth value of a proposition. They, in conjunction with the negator non, are used as responses to yes-no questions.^{[3][32][33][34][35]} For example:

«Quid enim diceres? Damnatum? Certe non.» («For what could you say? That I had been condemned? Assuredly not.»)

Latin also employs echo responses.^[34][36]

Galician and Portuguese[edit]

These languages have words for yes and no, namely si and non in Galician and sim and não in Portuguese. However, answering a question with them is less idiomatic than answering with the verb in the proper conjugation.

Spanish[edit]

In Spanish, the words sí ‘yes’ and no ‘no’ are unambiguously classified as adverbs: serving as answers to questions and also modifying verbs. The affirmative sí can replace the verb after a negation (Yo no tengo coche, pero él sí = I don’t own a car, but he does) or intensify it (I don’t believe he owns a car. / He does own one! = No creo que él tenga coche. / ¡Sí lo tiene!). The word no is the standard adverb placed next to a verb to negate it (Yo no tengo coche = I don’t own a car). Double negation is normal and valid in Spanish, and it is interpreted as reinforcing the negation (No tengo ningún coche = I own no car).

Chinese[edit]

Speakers of Chinese use echo responses.^[37] In all Sinitic/Chinese languages, yes-no questions are often posed in A-not-A form, and the replies to such questions are echo answers that echo either A or not A.^[38][39] In Standard Mandarin Chinese, the closest equivalents to yes and no are to state «是» (shì; lit. ‘»is»‘) and «不是» (búshì; lit. ‘»not is»‘).^[40][41] The phrase 不要 (búyào; ‘(I) do not want’) may also be used for the interjection «no», and 嗯 (ǹg) may be used for «yes». Similarly, in Cantonese, the preceding are 係 hai6 (lit: «is») and 唔係 (lit: «not is») m4 hai6, respectively. One can also answer 冇錯 mou5 co3 (lit. ‘»not wrong»‘) for the affirmative, although there is no corresponding negative to this.

Japanese[edit]

Japanese lacks words for yes and no. The words «はい» (hai) and «いいえ» (iie) are mistaken by English speakers for equivalents to yes and no, but they actually signify agreement or disagreement with the proposition put by the question: «That’s right.» or «That’s not right.»^[37][42] For example: if asked, Are you not going? (行かないのですか?, ikanai no desu ka?), answering with the affirmative «はい» would mean «Right, I am not going»; whereas in English, answering «yes» would be to contradict the negative question. Echo responses are not uncommon in Japanese.

Complications[edit]

These differences between languages make translation difficult. No two languages are isomorphic at the most elementary level of words for yes and no. Translation from two-form to three-form systems are equivalent to what English-speaking school children learning French or German encounter. The mapping becomes complex when converting two-form to three-form systems. There are many idioms, such as reduplication (in French, German, and Italian) of affirmatives for emphasis (the German ja ja ja).

The mappings are one-to-many in both directions. The German ja has no fewer than 13 English equivalents that vary according to context and usage (yes, yeah, and no when used as an answer; well, all right, so, and now, when used for segmentation; oh, ah, uh, and eh when used an interjection; and do you, will you, and their various inflections when used as a marker for tag questions) for example. Moreover, both ja and doch are frequently used as additional particles for conveying nuanced meaning where, in English, no such particle exists. Straightforward, non-idiomatic, translations from German to English and then back to German can often result in the loss of all of the modal particles such as ja and doch from a text.^{[43][44][45][46]}

Translation from languages that have word systems to those that do not, such as Latin, is similarly problematic. As Calvert says, «Saying yes or no takes a little thought in Latin».^[35]

Colloquial forms[edit]

Non-verbal[edit]

Linguist James R. Hurford notes that in many English dialects «there are colloquial equivalents of Yes and No made with nasal sounds interrupted by a voiceless, breathy h-like interval (for Yes) or by a glottal stop (for No)» and that these interjections are transcribed into writing as uh-huh or mm-hmm.^[47] These forms are particularly useful for speakers who are at a given time unable to articulate the actual words yes and no.^[47] The use of short vocalizations like uh-huh, mm-hmm, and yeah are examples of non-verbal communication, and in particular the practice of backchanneling.^[48][49]

Art historian Robert Farris Thompson has posited that mm-hmm may be a loanword from a West African language that entered the English vernacular from the speech of enslaved Africans; linguist Lev Michael, however, says that this proposed origin is implausible, and linguist Roslyn Burns states that the origin of the term is difficult to confirm.^[50]

Aye and variants[edit]

The word aye () as a synonym for yes in response to a question dates to the 1570s. According to the Online Etymology Dictionary, it is of unknown origin. It may derive from the word I (in the context of «I assent»); as an alteration of the Middle English yai («yes»); or the adverb aye (meaning always «always, ever»), which comes from the Old Norse ei.^[51] Using aye to mean yes is archaic, having disappeared from most of the English-speaking world, but is notably still used by people from Scotland, Ulster, and the north of England.^[52]

In December 1993, a witness in a Scottish court who had answered «aye» to confirm he was the person summoned was told by a sheriff judge that he must answer either yes or no. When his name was read again and he was asked to confirm it, he answered «aye» again, and was imprisoned for 90 minutes for contempt of court. On his release he said, «I genuinely thought I was answering him.»^[53]

Aye is also a common word in parliamentary procedure, where the phrase the ayes have it means that a motion has passed.^[54] In the House of Commons of the British Parliament, MPs vote orally by saying «aye» or «no» to indicate they approve or disapprove of the measure or piece of legislation. (In the House of Lords, by contrast, members say «content» or «not content» when voting).^[55]

The term has also historically been used in nautical usage, often phrased as «aye, aye, sir» duplicating the word «aye».^[56] Fowler’s Dictionary of Modern English Usage (1926) explained that the nautical phrase was at that time usually written ay, ay, sir.^[54]

The informal, affirmative phrase why-aye (also rendered whey-aye or way-eye) is used in the dialect of northeast England,^[57][58] most notably by Geordies.^[58]

Other[edit]

Other variants of «yes» include acha in informal Indian English and historically righto or righty-ho in upper-class British English, although these fell out of use during the early 20th century.^[52]

See also[edit]

• Affirmation and negation
• Thumb signal
• Translation
• Untranslatability

References[edit]

Further reading[edit]

• Bob Morris Jones (1999). The Welsh Answering System. Walter de Gruyter. ISBN 978-3-11-016450-3.—Jones’ analysis of how to answer questions with «yes» or «no» in the Welsh language, broken down into a typology of echo and non-echo responsives, polarity and truth-value responses, and numbers of forms
• George L. Huttar (1994). «Words for ‘yes’, ‘no’, ‘maybe’«. Ndyuka: A Descriptive Grammar. Routledge. p. 42. ISBN 978-0-415-05992-3.
• Holmberg, Anders (2016). The syntax of yes and no. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780198701859.
• Kulick, Don (April 2003). «No». Language & Communication. Elsevier. 23 (2): 139–151. doi:10.1016/S0271-5309(02)00043-5. Pdf. Archived 2015-02-27 at the Wayback Machine

Mandarin has an unambiguous simplex 不 bù which means ‘no’ on its own, but no equivalent simplex that means ‘yes’.

不 does double duty as the negating particle for non-past verbs, so it’s not only used as a standalone ‘no’, but it is used thus. With past verbs (i.e., with the perfective-like particle 了 le), the negator is instead 没(有) méi(yǒu), which is also used to reply in the negative; as a reply, the second syllable/character is never omitted.

When commenting or answering questions in the affirmative, it is most common to use 对 duì ‘correct’, or in some cases to repeat the verb, especially if the verb is a ‘core’ verb like 是 shì ‘be [copular]’, 在 zài ‘be [located]’, 有 yǒu ‘have’, modal verbs, etc. Repeating the verb, negated, can of course also be used for negative replies.

There is an affirmative grunt, often written 嗯 ǹ(g), èn(g) (but commonly pronounced [ɔ˦˨ ~ ɔ˧]), which is similar to ‘uh-huh’ in English, but that’s not really a lexeme as such, and like its English equivalent, it is used more on its own to encourage the speaker to continue than to give an actual affirmative reply.

In 1996, a famous Chinese manifesto was published entitled China Can Say No or The China That Can Say No. Its Chinese title is 中国可以说不 Zhōngguó kěyǐ shuō bù, showing that 不 works as an abstract nominal form of expressing a negative reaction, like English ‘no’.

The manifesto was in turn based on a Japanese essay from 1989 entitled The Japan That Can Say No with similar goals and contents. The Japanese title of this essay, 「NO」と言える日本 ‘NO’ to ieru Nihon, is interesting because it shows that the Japanese word for no, いいえ īe, does not work in the same way, using instead the English word. (This is also because the essay is critic of and wants Japan to distance itself from the US, but いいえ would not have worked as well in the context.)

If the titles had been reversed, Mandarin also would not really have had a straightforward way to express things. Beyond using the affirmative grunt or a semantically different verb like 同意 tóngyì ‘agree’, there isn’t really an obvious way to say, “China can say yes”.

English, like most other languages, is full of slang, expressions, and informal vocabulary. Perhaps the most common situation in which we see such words or phrases used is in expressing an affirmative or negative response. An affirmative or negative response is just a grammatically technical way to describe a yes or no answer. Just to review, we use yes to affirm a previous idea or express a positive reaction. This would be an affirmative case. We use no to negate a previous idea or express a negative reaction. This would be a negative case.

Let’s start with some yes situations: touching on context, meaning, and tone. There are a lot of words in English that are basically variations of the word yes itself. For example, you might hear “yeah”, “yep”, “yup”, “yah” or “yas”. Really anything that sounds a lot like yes, said in a positive manner is likely just a different way of saying yes in English. Some other common phrases that are simple are “for sure”, “sounds good”, or “sounds like a plan”. These are self-explanatory in that you are expressing positive approval. Now we’ll look at some of the more unusual examples.

 

Phrases which mean «Yes»

All of the following words or phrases can be used to say yes: “you got it”, “bet”, “you know it”, “good deal”, and “without a doubt”. “You got it” and “you know it” are basically affirming that the other person has the correct idea. The above phrases are more casual phrases used to imply something like — “yes, you have gotten it correct” or “yes, you know it to be true”. “Bet” is a shorter version of the command “you bet”. Bet means to wager or gamble, so basically what you’re saying is because this is true or I can confirm this idea (with a yes) then you could bet on it and win money. In “good deal”, deal refers to the proposal – let’s say “should we get dinner this evening?” – so saying that it is a good deal expresses a positive reaction. Finally, “without a doubt” means that there is no possibility that the contrary might be true. These are some of the most common yes phrases that you likely will not find in your textbook.

Phrases which mean «No»

Now we can move on to no situations looking at context, meaning, and tone. Once again, many of the words are just variations of the original word no itself. For example, take the following list: “nah”, “nope”, or “nay”. Much like yes phrases, any short word that starts with n and is said in a negative tone is likely a synonym for no. Some other common phrases include: “no can do”, “that will not work”, “not a chance”, or “no way”. All these in one way or another refer to the proposal or idea and indicate a negative response.

Here are a few more words or phrases used to say no: “doubtful”, “no shot”, “dog won’t hunt”, or “when pigs fly”. Doubtful means full of doubt (so unlikely to be true or a good idea) and no shot means there is not a chance that the given question is true or that the proposed option is a good idea. “Dog won’t hunt” is a lot like the previously mentioned “no can do”, in this case we are saying that something is simply not possible. “When pigs fly” implies that the answer will be yes when pigs fly which is impossible, so thus the answer will never be yes. The phrases discussed here are fairly common but likely have not yet found their way into many English learning textbooks.

Expressing uncertainty

While we are touching on ways to affirm or negate in conversation it’s a good idea to touch on ways to express uncertainty as well. The most common word for this in English is “maybe” which is derived from “it may be so”. Like yes and no there exists a near infinity of ways to express the uncertainty that comes with a maybe. Beginning once again with the more commonly used expressions we have: “perhaps”, “possibly”, “not sure”, or “there is a chance that”. Each of these examples expresses some level of uncertainty about the situation. Some more informal options include: “who knows”, “no clue”, “idk (I don’t know)”, “God knows”, or “it’s whatever”. Here the first three once again express uncertainty based on a lack of knowledge by the parties involved. The final expression “it’s whatever” applies more to issues of preference. For example — “should we go to the movies tonight?” answered by “it’s whatever” means that you do not care all that much whether or not you attend the movies.

Just as much as the words themselves, tone can be a key indicator of meaning. Usually the way a person speaks well clue you in as to whether or not their response is positive or negative. These are just some of the many ways to say maybe, yes, and no in English. It is important to understand and learn to use phrases like the ones covered here that you probably will not learn from a textbook. Best of luck!

Hero image by Megan Hodges on Unsplash

Very fun fact about the Turkish ‘no’, hayır, it actually means good or well in Arabic, from which it was borrowed as early as the 10th century. The word’s usage as ‘no’ only came about in the 17th century however, as part of a trend to avoid directly expressing negative words. It was meant to express a sentiment of a rejection that solely expressed a wish that things turned out well for the rejected person anyway.

It carries both meanings in Turkish today, though «no» is obviously more common than the other one which is along the lines of «something fortunate». It is most famously a very common turn of phrase, which many would claim espouse a very Turkish sentiment overall: «her işte bir hayır vardır», used to reassure someone that there will be a fortunate outcome somewhere along the line to whatever may seem like an absolute negative turn of events currently. Similar to kismet.

And «evet» is a word where no one really knows how it came along (for Turkish speakers, Nisanyan says it might be éw-et, a very old Turkic way of saying ‘ivedi et, çabuk yap’, i.e. to do immediately). The older way of saying yes and no were ‘ha’ and ‘yok’, which are either used today dialectically, or as vulgar ways of saying the same thing. Like, my mom would get really mad at me if I ever answered ‘ha’ to something she asks — it’s very impolite.

“Yes” and “no” are not as simple as they might at first appear. Here are a few of the ways in which they can vary greatly across languages.

You’d think that there would be no simpler words in any language than “yes” and “no.” I mean, those are basically the first words we learn as kids. They can convey a nearly infinite amount of information, and are applicable in an incredible range of scenarios. So they should be universal, right? Well…yes and no.

Perhaps it’s the very fact that “yes” and “no” are so easily plugged into any language situation that they are deceptively complex. Or perhaps it’s just that since English is the current world’s lingua franca, it leaves most of us westerners unable to imagine a world without those words. Either way, “yes” and “no” are not only complex, they’re not even universal.

In English, as depicted in the comic above, “yes” and “no” are used whether the question asked is negative or positive. In German, for example, there isn’t just ja and nein, there’s also doch, which is “yes” in response to a negative question. “You didn’t take the trash out?” Doch – yes, I did. Similarly, French doesn’t have just oui and non, but also si, which serves the same purpose as doch. Apparently English used to have yea and nay for positively-framed questions, while yes and no were meant for negative ones, but they got buried under history.

Other languages have more complex relationships with “yes” and “no.” In Gailic, there are no words for “yes” and “no.” If you want to answer a question positively or negatively, you have to refer to the verb in the question itself. This unique property has found its way into the Irish English-speaking accent, as well: “Have you been to the pub?” “I haven’t.” “Did you see Seamus?” “I did.” In Thai, there isn’t really a word for “no.” But there is a word for “yes”: ใช่, or chai. The only way to say “no” is ไม่ใช่, or mai-chai. Basically: “not-yes” (it’s an oversimplification, but that’s the idea). In Greek, the word ναι (“ne”) means “yes,” where in Croatian and Serbian, the same word means “no.” And in Polish, confusingly, “no” means “yes.” That is, the word no is slang for a casual “yes,” like “yeah.” I can only imagine the linguistic and cultural misadventures that’s led to.

How about in the language you’re learning? Any yes-and-no oddities worth mentioning?

Yes и No — парные слова английского языка с особым статусом, выражающие согласие и отрицание в высказывании («Да» и «Нет»).

Их употребление имеет ряд отличий от употребления слов, означающих согласие и отрицание в других языках, как в письменном, так и в разговорном виде.
Среди лингвистов не существует единого мнения по поводу того к какой части речи следует относить «Yes» и «No», так как грамматические нормы употребления этих слов не имеют аналогов в английском языке.
До достижения консенсуса, «Yes», «No» и их производные («yeah», «yay», «yea», «nay», «nope» и другие) выделяют в отдельную часть речи.

Трудности классификации[править]

Чем «Yes» и «No» не являются[править]

Вопреки тому, что слова «Yes» и «No» являются парными, в предложении они употребляются по-разному и по-разному влияют на другие члены предложения.

Так, «Yes» может быть классифицировано как местоимение, «заменяющее» повтор всего предыдущего предложения. Так, диалог

 — The weather`s so nice! (Погода замечательная!)

 — Yes! (Да!)

равнозначен диалогу

 — The weather`s so nice! (Погода замечательная!)

 — The weather`s so nice! (Погода замечательная!)

где смысл сказанного обеими собеседниками идентичен.

В то же время употребление «No» не «заменяет» предыдущее предложение и не может служить местоимением.
Так, диалог

 — The weather`s so nice! (Погода замечательная!)

 — No! (Нет!)

равнозначен диалогу

 — The weather`s so nice! (Погода замечательная!)

 — The weather isn’t nice! (Погода не замечательная!)

Смысл сказанного обеими собеседниками не идентичен.

В этом случае «No» может быть классифицировано как частица, но частицей отрицания в английском языке является «Not»; употребление «Not» и «No» существенно грамматически разнится и не может быть приравнено. Так, оба предложения ниже означают одно и то же, но построены в соответствии с совершенно разными принципами:

I do not see a doll. (Я не вижу куклы.) — Частица «Not» относится к глаголу и ставится после него.

I see no doll. (Я не вижу куклы.) — Слово «No» относится к существительному и ставится перед ним, исключая артикль.

Не является пара «Yes» и «No» и междометиями — они не выражают эмоции и не используются для привлечения внимания собеседника.

Пара «Yes» и «No» не является наречиями, потому что не характеризуют глагол, прилагательное или другое наречие.

«Yes» и «No» имеют аналоги в знаковых системах (кивок головой, подмигивание, азбука морзе).

Теории, чем «Yes» и «No» являются[править]

Некоторые лингвисты характеризуют часть речи «Yes» и «No» как «слова-предложения» или «предложения-слова» (англ. sentence words, word sentences).^[1][2][3]
Среди них — Отто Есперсен, который писал, что «’Yes’ и ‘No’ […] по всем намерениям и целям являются предложениями как самые тщательно сбалансированные предложения когда-либо написанные Демосфеном или Сэмюэлем Джонсоном».^[4]

Георг фон дер Габеленц и Генри Суит также относили их к «словам-предложениям», но Габеленц также включал в эту часть речи слова в повелительном наклонении и междометия,^[5] а Суит включал их также в наречия (англ. sentence-modifying adverbs), потому что они могут поменять смысл предложения и многие наречия могут заменить ответы «Yes» и «No», например, наречие «Certainly» .^[6]

Ричард Уоттс обозначил часть речи «Yes» и «No» как «партикли для ответа» (англ. response particles). От также подметил уникальное отношение «Yes» и «No» к междометиям, в частности к близким по значению «oh» и «ah» — междометия всегда употребляются перед «Yes» и «No»; при этом, междометие «Oh», обычно выражающее удивление, в комбинациях «oh yes» или «oh no» удивления не выражает, а междометие «Ah» в комбинациях «ah yes» или «ah no» сохраняет своё утвердительное значение.^[7]

Карин Аиймер определила часть речи «Yes» и «No» как «сигналы ответа» (англ. response signals, reaction signals).^[8]

Феликс Амека (нидерл. Felix Kofi Ameka) предлагает разделить «Yes» и «No» на две части речи в зависимости от контекста употребления.
Одна группа — междометия, используемые в диалогах для показа собеседнику своей заинтересованности (англ. back-channel response). Слушающий может быть не согласен с тем, что говорит его партнёр по диалогу, но произнести «Yes» в ответ. В этом случае «Yes» не означает согласия. Слушающий может употребить «No», выражая возмущение событием, рассказанным ему. В этом случае «No» не означает отрицания.
Вторая группа — шаблонные слова (англ. formulaic words), ответы на «да-нет вопрос».^[9]

Леонард Блумфилд и Чарльз Хоккет обозначили ответы на «да-нет вопрос» как «специальные заканчивающие междометия» (англ. special completive interjections).^[2]

Слово «No», в отличие от «Yes», может быть прилагательным (означающим «никакой» — «He is no fool») и наречием меры и степени (в сочетаниях типа «no greater», «no sooner»).^[6][10]

Ещё совсем недавно в Новоанглийский период становления Английского языка всё ещё существовали четыре слова для ответа на альтернативные вопросы: «yea» (от древнеанглийского «gea») и «nay» (от древнеанглийского «ne») отвечали на вопросы без отрицательной конструкции, а
«yes» (от древнеанглийского «gyse») и «no» (от древнеанглийского «nâ», «no one») — с отрицательной конструкцией:^[11][12][13]

Will they not go? — Yes, they will.

Will they not go? — No, they will not.

Will they go? — Yea, they will.

Will they go? — Nay, they will not.

Уже во времена Уильяма Шекспира «Yes» и «No» начали заменять «Yea» и «Nay», и авторы часто неверно употребляли слова.^[14]

Производные формы[править]

Ономатопические «uh-huh» и «mm-hmm» являются самыми часто употребимыми формами «Yes» и «No» («Yes» при ударении на втором слоге, «No» при ударении на первом слоге).^[15]

Исторические формы «Yea» и «Nay» практически полностью вышли из употребления, но используются при голосовании в парламенте Канады.

Диалектное «Aye» (//), употребляется в Ирландии, Шотландии и на севере Британских островов^[16] также используется в парламентской процедуре при голосовании в Палате общин.^[17]

Отличия от других языков[править]

Хотя в мире и существуют языки с аналогичным паре «Yes» и «No» употреблением слов для выражением согласия и отрицания, многие языки используют тройку или четвёрку слов для ответа на альтернативные вопросы, а некоторые аналогов «Yes» и «No» не имеют и используют только полные смысловые предложения в качестве ответа.

Аналоги «Yes» и «No» в разных языках могут быть классифицированы как какая-либо классическая часть речи: междометия, наречия, союзы.

Финский язык и уэльский язык используют глагол в качестве ответа, хотя и имеют слова, близкие по значению к «Yes» и «No» («Kyllä» и «joo», «ie» и «nage»).^{[18][19][2][20][21][22][22][23][24]} То же самое относится к Гойдельским, галисийскому, и португальскому языкам.

В китайском вопрос включает в себя оба варианта ответа и отвечающий повторяет один вариант, не употребляя слов, аналогичных «Yes» и «No».^[25][26] В Севернокитайском наиболее близкой аналогией являются «是» (правильно) и «不是» (неправильно).^[27][28] В Кантонском употребляются «係» и «唔係», «冇錯», «不要».
В японском слов, аналогичных «Yes» и «No», нет. Употребляются «はい» (правильно) и «いいえ» (неправильно), означающие степень согласия.^[29][30]

Латинский язык слов, аналогичных «Yes» и «No», не имеет. Для утвердительного ответа используются наречия (certe, fortasse, nimirum, plane, vero, etiam, sane, minime, videlicet), для отрицательного — после наречия добавляется отрицательная частица «non», произошедшая от фразы «noenum» (ни один):^{[2][31][32][33][34]}

 — Quid enim diceres? Damnatum? (На основании чего ты говоришь? Что я был осуждён?)

 — Certe non. (Конечно нет). (Цицерон, Dom. 51)^[32]

Латинский также использует глагол в качестве ответа.^[33][35]

Латышский язык не имеет оригинального латышского слова для «Yes»; с приходом христианства в XVI веке образованна часть населения начала употреблять немецкое «Ja» в религиозных текстах и лишь к XIX веку оно вошло в латышский язык.^[36]

Родственные английскому немецкий,^{[37][38][39][40][41]} северные (датский, нидерландский, фарерский, исландский, норвежский и шведский), французский и венгерский языки имеют три ответа на альтернативные вопросы. Такая система экономит речевые средства, позволяя избежать неоднозначности при толковании ответа на вопрос с отрицательной конструкцией.

Язык	Утвердительный ответ на вопрос без отрицательной конструкции	Утвердительный ответ на вопрос с отрицательной конструкцией	Отрицательной ответ
Венгерский	igen	de	nem
Исландский	já	jú	nei
Немецкий	ja	doch	nein
Нидерландский	ja	jawel	nee
Норвежский	ja	jo / jau	nei
Фарерский	ja	jú	nei
Французский	oui	si	non
Шведский и датский	ja	jo	nej

Шведский пример положительного ответа на вопрос с отрицательной конструкцией:

 — Vet du inte det? (Ты не знаешь этого?)

 — Jo. (Знаю).

Норвежский пример положительного ответа на вопрос с отрицательной конструкцией:

 — Snakker du ikke norsk? (Ты не говоришь по-норвежски?)

 — Jo. (Говорю).^{[13][42][43][44]}

Шведский, норвежский и датский также имеют производные наречия «javisst» и «jovisst», аналогичные по употреблению «ja» и «jo», означающие «сильное да», «да-да», «конечно же». Шведский и датский также имеют производные наречия «joho» и «nehej», аналогичные по употреблению «jo» и «nej».^[43] «Jo» также может служить междометием как реакция на негативное утверждение, с которым реагирующий не согласен.^[45] Английский язык не имеет форм «Yes» и «No», более сильных по значению.

Немецкое «nein» является сокращением от древневерхненемецкого «ni ein» (ни один). Французское «oui» (от старофранцузского «oïl») является сокращением от «hoc ille» (это есть) на народной латыни.^[46]

Современный румынский язык — единственный, использующий четвёрку слов для ответа на альтернативные вопросы, при этом система является намного сложнее:^[47][48][49]

• Для утвердительного ответа на вопрос без отрицательной конструкции используется «da».
• Для отрицательного ответа на вопрос без отрицательной конструкции используется «nu».

 — Se poate să …? (А можно…?)

 — Nu, nu se poate. (Нет, нельзя).

• Для утвердительного ответа на вопрос с отрицательной конструкцией используется «ba da».

 — N-ai plătit? (Ты не заплатил?)

 — Ba da. (Заплатил).

• Для отрицательного ответа на вопрос с отрицательной конструкцией используется «ba nu «.

А «nu» также используется как отрицательное наречие между подлежащим и глаголом.

В испанском «sí» и «no» являются наречиями и относятся к сказуемому.

Источники[править]

Литература[править]

• Words for ‘yes’, ‘no’, ‘maybe’ // Ndyuka: A Descriptive Grammar. — Routledge, 1994. — ISBN 978-0-415-05992-3.
• Kulick, Don^[en] No (неопр.) // Language & Communication. — Elsevier, 2003. — Т. 23. — № 2. — С. 139—151. — DOI:10.1016/S0271-5309(02)00043-5 Pdf.

Английский язык [+]
Действительный залог (active voice)	Present simple • Past simple • Future simple • Future in the past Present continuous • Past continuous • Future continuous • Future in the continuous Present perfect • Past perfect • Future perfect • Future in the perfect Present Perfect Continuous Tense • Past Perfect Continuous Tense • Future Perfect Continuous Tense • Future in the Perfect Continuous Tense
Страдательный залог (passive voice)	Present simple • Past simple • Future simple • Future in the past Present continuous • Past continuous Present perfect • Past perfect • Future perfect • Future in the perfect
Формы глагола (английский язык)	Infinitive • Past tense • Participle I • Participle II • Неправильные глаголы (English irregular verbs) • Изъявительное наклонение • Повелительное наклонение • Сослагательное наклонение
Вспомогательный глагол (Auxiliary verbs)	be (am • is • are • was • were • been) • do (do • does • did • done) • have (have • has • hимя) • Модальные глаголы (may • might • will • would • can • could • shall • should)
Построение предложений	Conditional sentence (if clause) • Cleft sentence • Indirect speech (Reported speech) • Complex Subject • Complex Object • There is (there are)
Разное	Степени сравнения • Фонетические феномены • E-Prime • Yes и No

Перевод «Да» и «Нет» на английский язык

Если вы умеете говорить по-английски yes и no, то это совсем не говорит о знании иностранного языка. Даже наоборот: некоторые только эти два слова и знают. А вот если вы эти слова умеете заменить чем-то более оригинальным, то это уже говорит о вашем продвинутом уровне. Поэтому мы решили вам помочь повысить его всего за несколько минут. Предлагаем вам 14 способов сказать «Да» и «Нет» на английском языке.

Итак, как избежать холодного yes и no? Базовые способы таковы.

Говорим «да»

Информация лучше всего запоминается на примерах с переводом, поэтому предлагаем несколько конкретных выражений.

• ‘Did you enjoy the film?’ ‘Yeah, it was really good.’
• ‘Are you coming to my party?’ ‘Definitely. I wouldn’t miss it for anything.’
• ‘So you haven’t seen your father since this morning?’ ‘That’s right.’
• ‘Will you take a message if anyone calls while I’m out?’ ‘Of course/Sure.’
• ‘Are you looking forward to your trip to Scotland?’ ‘You bet!’
• ‘Will you be working late again tonight?’ ‘I guess so.’
• ‘Is it true that John and Sarah have split up?’ ‘I’m afraid so.’

Говорим «нет»

‘Are you coming tonight?’ ‘I’m afraid not, I have to work.’

‘Is there something special you’d like to do for your birthday?’ ‘Not really, I’d be happy to stay at home.’

‘Has Mr Smith checked out of his hotel yet?’ ‘Not as far as I know, no.’

‘Can I stay up to watch the film?’ ‘Certainly not, it’s time you went to bed!’

‘You didn’t tell Paul what I said, did you?’ ‘Of course not, you’re my friend!’

‘Would you like some cake?’ ‘No thanks/I couldn’t, I’ve just had a big lunch.’

‘Are you going to apologize to them?’ ‘No way! It’s all their fault!’

‘Are you coming up the mountain with us, then?’ ‘You must be joking! I’m not going out in this weather.’

Добавлено: 07.11.14

yes and no

Partially so, but also partially not. Said of a situation more complex than a simple yes-or-no response. A: «So, would this tax maneuver be illegal?» B: «Well, yes and no. The actual transactions you want to do are perfectly legal, but not when both companies have the same beneficial owner.» A: «Was the film any good?» B: Eh, yes and no. It was entertaining, but the plot and characters were totally absurd.»

Farlex Dictionary of Idioms. © 2022 Farlex, Inc, all rights reserved.

yes and no

In some ways and not others, as in Did you enjoy yourself?-Yes and no, I liked the music itself but hated the conductor. This idiom, always a reply to a question, was first recorded in 1873.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of Idioms by Christine Ammer. Copyright © 2003, 1997 by The Christine Ammer 1992 Trust. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. All rights reserved.

yes and no

partly and partly not.

1981 Brian Murphy The Enigma Variations ‘Do you believe that if you continue seeing me you’ll be damned?’ ‘Yes and no.’

Farlex Partner Idioms Dictionary © Farlex 2017

ˌyes and ˈno

said when you cannot answer either ‘yes’ or ‘no’ because the situation is not simple: ‘Have you got a car?’ ‘Well, yes and no. We have, but it’s not working at the moment.’

Farlex Partner Idioms Dictionary © Farlex 2017

yes and no

That is partly true. This equivocal reply to a question dates from the mid-nineteenth century. C. M. Young used it in Pillars of the House: “‘Do you come from his father?’—‘Well, yes and no. His father is still in Oregon.’” A teasing version, originating in the twentieth-century schoolyard, is yes, no, maybe so, meaning, of course, wouldn’t you like to know (the answer)!

The Dictionary of Clichés by Christine Ammer Copyright © 2013 by Christine Ammer

See also:

• not far out
• not far off
• not far off/out/wrong
• not far wrong
• meet in the middle
• glancing blow
• have a case of (something)
• oilhead
• out of the corner of eye
• out of the corner of one’s eye