I'd like to see if I understand a couple grammar points correctly. I'd like to
rewrite this sentence:

>  1. 食べも飲みもしない

As either one of these:

>  2a. 食べなくも 飲まなくもある  
>   2b. 食べなくもあり飲まなくもある

I think both 2a and 2b are grammatical with the same meaning as 1. But I'm not
sure I've done this correctly, and I'm particularly unsure about whether the
あり is necessary in the first half.

* * *

The following is my reasoning. (I've tried to express it as clearly as I can,
but it's probably too long and confusing--my apologies!)

I'm working off Hiroshi Aoyagi's idea that `-i` is a suppletive form of `-ku
ar-(r)u`, so the end of the sentence looks like this:

```

    　　*飲みも　　 しなくある　　 　→　飲みも　　 しない
       *nom(i)-mo si-na-ku ar-u　→　nom(i)-mo si-nai
    
```

Here, the stem `si` appears because the suffix `-(a)na-ku` needs to have
something to attach to, and it can't attach directly to the verb stem `nom-`
because `-mo` is in the way.

I'm moving `-(a)na-ku` before `-mo` and attaching it directly to both verb
stems, so `si` is no longer necessary and it disappears. But the tense
morpheme `-(r)u` still needs to appear at the end of the sentence, so I have
to insert the dummy verb `ar-` for it to attach to:

```

    　　飲まなくも　　　　ある
    　　nom-(a)na-ku-mo ar-u
    
```

Since `-mo` appears between `-ku` and `ar-(r)u`, it can't take the usual form
of `-i`.

Since the tense morpheme `-(r)u` only has to appear once at the end of the
sentence, I don't think I need to add the dummy verb `ar-` to the first half.
But if I do, I think it ends up in "infinitive" form (あり):

```

    　　食べなくも　　　   　　 飲まなくも　　　　ある
    　　tabe-na-ku-mo        nom-(a)na-ku-mo ar-u
    
    　　食べなくも　　　あり　　 飲まなくも　　　　ある
    　　tabe-na-ku-mo ar-(i) nom-(a)na-ku-mo ar-u
    
```

So based on this, I suspect that both 2a and 2b are equivalent to 1. Am I
correct or mistaken?
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-11-01T22:58:26.843
13308
2013-11-21T04:43:14.010
2013-11-02T02:25:30.620
question
grammar linguistics
Can 「食べも飲みもしない」 be rewritten as 「食べなくも飲まなくもある」?
These revisions sound -very- strange to my ears. I would never use ある with
verbs in this way, even if the verb form in question is technically conjugated
as an adjective, but even if you rewrite them with する, they sound odd. I think
this comes down to the base form you're riffing off of. 食べもしない is a quite
normal way of saying 'I won't even eat it' or 'I won't eat it either', but it
is in no way possible to rephrase it as 食べなくもする. 食べなくもする, to my ears, sounds
possible but unusual -- if I were to hear it on its own, I would think it
meant '(Besides doing other things,) I am also not eating', but it would be
much more natural-sounding to say (何々をするけど、) 食べはしない. 食べなくもある simply doesn't
make any sense -- it's as if there's some state of not eating that's existing
independent of any participants.

Since it's not possible to use forms like 食べなくもある, it's not possible to extend
them into constructions like you've created.

Your analysis of adjectives is largely correct, but I think things end up
somewhat different with adjective-like verb forms like ない -- while you can do
things like しなくなる, you can't really use ある beyond forms that are historically
derived from it (e.g. なかった). I think this is a semantic thing, since the same
forms sound pretty okay with たい (e.g. 食べたくはある) -- this is probably because たい,
like straight-up adjectives, creates a state (of wanting to do something),
while ない is more of an action (well, lack thereof, but still an action for
semantics purposes). So you can use ある with stative things, but you have to
use する with active things, but even then, 食べなくはする sounds odd.
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-11-02T02:41:12.873
13311
2013-11-02T02:41:12.873
3639
13308
answer
This structure is correct it is just very casual Japanese sorry if my
explanation is too simple I don't have a very large English vocabulary but
here is an example from a song lyric.

許せなくもあり そうされたくもあり

here is the link to the official lyrics

<http://j-lyric.net/artist/a000680/l00ab4a.html>
CC BY-SA 3.0
2013-11-21T04:43:14.010
13466
2013-11-21T04:43:14.010
4209
13308
answer