JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.

'wel', opposite of 'not'

optimistique

Senior Member
This is something that has been intriguing me for a longtime. How do you express the opposite of the negation 'not' in your language? A particle to emphasize the 'positiveness' of a statement as opposed to the negative one preceding it.
Dutch has a word for it: wel.

To make things clearer, I'll give a context in a few languages, so that you understand me correctly:

Dutch: Dus je hebt hem niet gezien? Ik heb hem wel gezien!*
English: So you have not seen him? I DID see him!*
French: Donc tu ne l'as pas vu? Moi, je l'ai vu!*

*Same person speaking in these sentences!

You see that the Dutch word 'wel' does not return as a word in the translations. How does your language cope with this phenomen?
In German, there's a veriety of translating it:

wohl
eben
doch
and many more

Context:
Hast du ihn nicht gesehen? - Doch, ich habe ihn wohl gesehen!
Did you not see him? - Yes, I did see him!

Das meine ich ja eben. (opposite: eben nicht)
That is exactly what I mean.

Das wollte ich dir doch sagen. (something like a positive filler)
That is what I wanted to tell you.

Visit our German forum, if you want to know more. :)
I can think of two ways to do it in Portuguese:

Então não o viste? - Ah, vi-o, sim! (Yes, I did!)
Então não o viste? - Vi-o, pois! (I sure did!)

None of the two words, however, is specific to this type of sentence. Sim just means "yes", and pois is used for confirmation in various contexts.

It's also possible to use repetition for the same effect:

Então não o viste? - Vi, vi! (I did, I did!)
Hi, optimistique :)

If I understand you right (something we say to answer affirmatively a negative question), in Catalan I can think of two ways now.
Using the same example you gave (So you did not see him? -I did see him!)

-Aleshores no l'has vist? -Sí, sí que l'he vist!
-Aleshores no l'has vist? -Sí, i tant que l'he vist! --> this one is more emphathic and we also say "i tant" alone.
I like this thread :)

in spoken Gujarati (you wouldn't see this written i don't think), you'd put a "né" at the end (pronounced like the first "ne" in "never"). So, for example:

Te ene naa joyo hato, hayni? - Joyo to né!
(You didn't see him, did you? - I did!")

It's similar to the french "si" and german "doch"

The thing is, you'd have to hear me saying it for it to make better sense, because it'd only make sense if said in a certain way.
I think (at least some of) those that answered misunderstood Optimistique's question. If I understood his question correctly, he is not looking for a particle used as a positive response to a negative question - but rather a particle that emphasizes the "positiveness" of a statement as compared to a preceding negative one.

In his sentence, "Dus je hebt hem niet gezien? Oh, maar ik heb hem wel gezien!" the same person is speaking. "Wel" emphasizes that the speaker did see him, as opposed to the person spoken to, who did not.

English accomplishes this through intonation only.

"So you didn't see him? Me, I did (see him)!"

I believe the German equivalent is "schon."

"Hast du ihn also nicht gesehen? Ich habe ihn aber schon gesehen!"

And in Spanish one uses "sí que."

"¿Así que no lo has visto? ¡Yo sí que lo he visto!"

I'm not sure about French. All I can think of is the following, which lacks a particle.

"Alors tu ne l'as pas vu? Moi je l'ai vu."

I'm not sure (Palestinian colloquial) Arabic has an equivalent. I think we could say آه (aa - meaning "yes") but it doesn't sound that good.

يعني إنت ما شُفتوش؟ أنا آه شُفتو!
(Ya'ni inte ma shuftoosh? Ana aa shufto!)

Optimistique, if you are indeed referring to a response, please let me know and feel free to ignore this post. ;)
يعني إنت ما شُفتوش؟ أنا آه شُفتو!
(Ya'ni inte ma shuftoosh? Ana aa shufto!)

ElRoy, I'm puzzled by the way you write shuft u in Arabic.
Shouldn't it be shin - wau - faa' - taa' - haa' ? Isn't the /u/ the third pers. sg. masc. in the accusative case (or its equivalent)?

[Sorry it seems to be impossible to paste anything from MS-Word in this forum.]
Qcumber said:
يعني إنت ما شُفتوش؟ أنا آه شُفتو!
(Ya'ni inte ma shuftoosh? Ana aa shufto!)

ElRoy, I'm puzzled by the way you write shuft u in Arabic.
Shouldn't it be shin - wau - faa' - taa' - haa' ? Isn't the /u/ the third pers. sg. masc. in the accusative case (or its equivalent)?

[Sorry it seems to be impossible to paste anything from MS-Word in this forum.]

You will notice in my transliteration that it's pronounced "shufto" in Palestinian Arabic. Because there is no standardized spelling for colloquial Arabic, we have more flexibility when we write in it. I could have mimicked the standard equivalent by writing شفته, but in this particular case I was more interested in making my spelling as phonetic as possible (of course, the sound "o" does not exist in standard Arabic, as you surely know, but it is usually rendered by و in writing).

In conclusion, both شفته and شفتو are acceptable if you're writing in colloquial Palestinian Arabic, but only شفته (pronounced "shutuhu") is acceptable in standard Arabic (actually, we would most likely use a different verb - رأيته -but that's beside the point).

I hope I answered your question. :)
elroy said:
I think (at least some of) those that answered misunderstood Optimistique's question. If I understood her question correctly, she is not looking for a particle used as a positive response to a negative question - but rather a particle that emphasizes the "positiveness" of a statement as compared to a preceding negative one.

In her sentence, "Dus je hebt hem niet gezien? Oh, maar ik heb hem wel gezien!" the same person is speaking. "Wel" emphasizes that the speaker did see him, as opposed to the person spoken to, who did not.

Oh, right. I'm afraid I don't speak Dutch and I didn't notice that the same person was speaking... nor I didn't in the French and English examples :o

If that is the case, then in Catalan we would only use the "sí que" form, as elroy said for Spanish.

-Aleshores no l'has vist? Jo sí que l'he vist! (we would say the personal pronoun in such a case)

The form "i tant" would be only an emphatic answer.
Thanks a lot, Elroy. Yes, it's clear now: you have given something of a phonetic transcription of colloquial Arabic. Now, is it used by Arabs themselves? I asked a couple of North-Africans, and they said they didn't. Only haa' was acceptable in that case. It would be interresting to make a corpus of letters, and see how ordinary people write this pronoun.
Hi everybody, thank you very much for your responses and I'm glad you like this thread:) (Btw, Elroy, I am a boy;))

Well, Elroy, you DID understood my question correctly in what I was looking for. Actually I only noticed now, that my example question is ambiguous. I meant for the sentences to be said by two different persons, but maybe your interpretation is even better, because it leaves out the possibility of the positive answer on a negative question.

So as Elroy said, I'm interested in a particle (or if your language does not use one, any other word or means your language uses) to emphasize the positiveness of a statement as opposed to a negative preceding one.

Sorry for the confusion!:o


So if you feel you should answer again, because your response would be different in this new light, then please feel free to do so! Also, responses about other languages are always more than welcome! :)
optimistique said:
So if you feel you should answer again, because your response would be different in this new light, then please feel free to do so! Also, responses about other languages are always more than welcome! :)

Okay, I seem to have been mislead by the Dutch "wel", which sounded so much like "wohl" in German, ... :)

So, Elroy was right about "schon", but I would leave out "aber" in his example:

"Hast du ihn also nicht gesehen? Ich habe ihn schon gesehen!"

Another possibility is "nämlich", which means something like "for" (but it's still very different):
"Hast du ihn also nicht gesehen? Ich habe ihn nämlich gesehen!"
optimistique said:
Now I'm confused about the German:

are 'schon' and 'wohl' more or less synonyms in this particular case?

They are not synonyms, as I cannot think of any example where they can be used interchangeably. Here are two examples:

"Ich kenne ich schon, aber ..." (I do know him, but ...)
"Ich kenne ihn sehr wohl." (I know him indeed.)

The first sentence is concessive, the second one is an affirmation of something that has been said before. In context:

A: Sag mal, kennst du eigentlich den neuen Lehrer dort?
(Tell me, do you know the new teacher over there?)
B: Ich kenne ihn schon, aber Unterricht hatte ich bei dem noch nie.
(Yes, I do know him, but I've never had lessons with him.)

A: Du willst mir doch nicht im Ernst sagen, dass du den neuen Lehrer kennst? Der kommt aus Ägypten!
(Don't tell me you know the new teacher! He comes from Egypt!)
B: Doch, ich kenne ihn sehr wohl. Er war früher mal an unserer Schule.
(Yes, I do know him, believe it or not. He was at our school some time ago.)

It's hard to explain German grammar in English. :)
optimistique said:
So as Elroy said, I'm interested in a particle (or if your language does not use one, any other word or means your language uses) to emphasize the positiveness of a statement as opposed to a negative preceding one.
Ah, well, in that case:

Portuguese: Então não o viste? - Ah, eu cá vi! (So, didn't you see him? I did.)

Literal translation for Eu cá vi: "I here saw [him]."
optimistique said:
(Btw, Elroy, I am a boy;))
Oops! Sorry about that! :o I have edited my post to change my pronouns.

Ik dacht eerst dat je geen jongen bent, maar nu weet ik dat je wel een jongen bent! ;)
Well, in Serbian it depends on a context, but in this sentence it goes smt like this:
- Znači nisi ga video (videla if female)? - So you have not seen him?
- Jesam! - I did! (In Cyrillic: Значи ниси га видео/ла? - Јесам!)

I am - "Jesam" or "Ja sam"; I am not - "Nisam" or "Ja nisam"
Yes - "da"; No - "ne";
Negation is also achieved by adding "NE" in front of verbs, such as: "jedem - ne jedem" (I eat - I don't eat), "radim - ne radim" (I work - I don't work)

Hope this helps!
Pozdrav!
Greek:

We don't use a particle or a specific word, but the set-phrase «κι όμως» [ˈco̞.mo̞s̠] as an affirmative answer to a negative question.

«Κι» [ci] is the colloquial & poetic spelling of the phonetically reduced conjunction «και» [ce̞] --> and, when the next word begins with a vowel.

«Όμως» [ˈo̞.mo̞s̠] is a contrastive conjunction in MoGr < Ancient Greek adverb «ὅμως» /ˈho.mɔːs/ --> nevertheless, yet < Ancient Greek adverb «ὁμῶς» /hoˈmɔ̂ːs/ --> equally, at the same time (< PIE *somh1ós) with stress shift.
Salve to everyone. :)

In Italian we can say it in a few ways, but the most common is by adding "eccome", which is a univerbated form of "e come", meaning "and how!" or "you bet!"

(Did you not see him? - Yes, I did see him!)
Non l'hai visto? - (Sì,) l'ho visto eccome!

but you can also answer:

(Sì,) eccome se l'ho visto!
(Sì,) certo che l'ho visto!
Altroché se l'ho visto!

Or simply put "sì" (yes) at the end:

L'ho visto sì! (informal)

Also, like in Spanish or Catalan, a simple:

Sì, che l'ho visto!

can work, and is indeed a very common way to express this.;)

(Please, feel free to correct my English: I'm not a native speaker, and am mostly self-taught. :))
Last edited:
Top Bottom

AltStyle によって変換されたページ (->オリジナル) /