2

Possible Duplicate:
“There is no rule” vs. “there isn’t rule”

If I'm not mistaken, both "There isn't a storm." and "There is no storm." have the same meaning.

I understand that the first one is the "contraction" of the second one, but what I can't understand is that if it is the contraction of the second, why the is second "There is no storm" and not "There is not storm"?

Community
  • 1
  • It's a contraction of There is not a storm, which is also correct, if odd. – McGarnagle Nov 07 '12 at 22:19
  • I know that isn't is the contraction of is not. Maybe I should have answered on other way. Both there is no and there is not are right? –  Nov 07 '12 at 22:23
  • The contraction of the second sentence in your question would be There's no storm. Both there isn't a storm and there is not a storm are not incorrect, but sound a bit off. – McGarnagle Nov 07 '12 at 22:34

3 Answers3

1

"Isn't" is a contraction of "is not". (Not "is no".)

The correct long form of "there isn't a storm" is "there is not a storm."

RoccoMaxamas
  • 19
  • 1
1

The possibility of using contractions is irrelevant here. OP's examples could be reversed by contrasting there is not a storm with there's no storm - it's all the same.

In such constructions, "no" stands in for "not any". It's possible that with any given formulation, some people might perceive a distinction in either nuance of meaning or "euphony/acceptability". For example...

There is not a God.

There's not a God.

There is no God.

There's no God.

...but I can't say any of those seem inherently "ungrammatical" to me, or mean anything different.

Community
  • 1
FumbleFingers
  • 140,184
  • 45
  • 294
  • 517
0

Because the contraction expands to

  • there is not a storm

The meaning is the same even if the wording is different.

Rory Alsop
  • 6,672