How to improve this sentence?
Believing X involves believing Y, but believing Y does not involve
believing X.
How is the best way to make an ellipsis omitting the second part of the sentence:
- Believing X involves believing Y, but not vice versa.
- Believing X involves believing Y, but not the other way around.
- ?
What would be the most idiomatic suggestion?
ellipsis
asked 3 hours ago
Sasan
575934
add a comment |
Believing X involves believing Y, but believing Y does not involve
believing X.
How is the best way to make an ellipsis omitting the second part of the sentence:
- Believing X involves believing Y, but not vice versa.
- Believing X involves believing Y, but not the other way around.
- ?
What would be the most idiomatic suggestion?
ellipsis
asked 3 hours ago
Sasan
575934
1
Another option: "Believing X involves believing Y, but the same doesn’t apply in reverse."
– ralph.m
2 hours ago
1
Both are equally fine, natural, and idiomatic; there is no one ‘best’ way of wording this.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
10 mins ago
add a comment |
Believing X involves believing Y, but believing Y does not involve
believing X.
How is the best way to make an ellipsis omitting the second part of the sentence:
- Believing X involves believing Y, but not vice versa.
- Believing X involves believing Y, but not the other way around.
- ?
What would be the most idiomatic suggestion?
ellipsis
asked 3 hours ago
Sasan
575934
Believing X involves believing Y, but believing Y does not involve
believing X.
How is the best way to make an ellipsis omitting the second part of the sentence:
- Believing X involves believing Y, but not vice versa.
- Believing X involves believing Y, but not the other way around.
- ?
What would be the most idiomatic suggestion?
ellipsis
ellipsis
asked 3 hours ago
Sasan
575934
asked 3 hours ago
Sasan
575934
asked 3 hours ago
Sasan
575934
asked 3 hours ago
Sasan
575934
asked 3 hours ago
Sasan
575934
575934
1
Another option: "Believing X involves believing Y, but the same doesn’t apply in reverse."
– ralph.m
2 hours ago
1
Both are equally fine, natural, and idiomatic; there is no one ‘best’ way of wording this.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
10 mins ago
add a comment |
1
Another option: "Believing X involves believing Y, but the same doesn’t apply in reverse."
– ralph.m
2 hours ago
1
Both are equally fine, natural, and idiomatic; there is no one ‘best’ way of wording this.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
10 mins ago
1
1
Another option: "Believing X involves believing Y, but the same doesn’t apply in reverse."
– ralph.m
2 hours ago
Another option: "Believing X involves believing Y, but the same doesn’t apply in reverse."
– ralph.m
2 hours ago
1
1
Both are equally fine, natural, and idiomatic; there is no one ‘best’ way of wording this.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
10 mins ago
Both are equally fine, natural, and idiomatic; there is no one ‘best’ way of wording this.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
10 mins ago
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
Neither solutions are incorrect, but for there to be one best answer, I would say "vice versa" wins just because of the fact that it is the shortest. The phrase "vice versa" is perfect for this situation.
According to Collin's Dictionary,
Vice versa is used to indicate that the reverse of what you have said
is true. For example 'women may bring their husbands with them, and
vice versa' means that men may also bring their wives with them.
Teachers qualified to teach in England are not accepted in Scotland,
and vice versa.
The example mentioned above is very close to the statement mentioned in the question.
Playing Devil's advocate, as a semi-native speaker, I would say that vice versa is best used for factual statements, such as the one in the example above. Depending on what "X" and "Y" is, 2. may be a better option.
Believing in natural selection involves believing in evolution, but not the other way around.
Believing in Jesus Christ involves believing in spirituality, but not vice versa.
This is, of course, just my opinion.
answered 2 hours ago
Aryaman
393
I don’t see any difference in factuality in the two examples you give. If anything, I’d say the Jesus one is less factual, since it’s entirely possible to believe in Jesus without believing in spirituality (I believe he was a historical figure, but I have zero belief in spirituality), whereas believing in natural selection does entail believing in at least some kind of evolution, even if it’s perhaps not precisely the Darwinian type.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
11 mins ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f478577%2fhow-to-improve-this-sentence%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
Neither solutions are incorrect, but for there to be one best answer, I would say "vice versa" wins just because of the fact that it is the shortest. The phrase "vice versa" is perfect for this situation.
According to Collin's Dictionary,
Vice versa is used to indicate that the reverse of what you have said
is true. For example 'women may bring their husbands with them, and
vice versa' means that men may also bring their wives with them.
Teachers qualified to teach in England are not accepted in Scotland,
and vice versa.
The example mentioned above is very close to the statement mentioned in the question.
Playing Devil's advocate, as a semi-native speaker, I would say that vice versa is best used for factual statements, such as the one in the example above. Depending on what "X" and "Y" is, 2. may be a better option.
Believing in natural selection involves believing in evolution, but not the other way around.
Believing in Jesus Christ involves believing in spirituality, but not vice versa.
This is, of course, just my opinion.
answered 2 hours ago
Aryaman
393
I don’t see any difference in factuality in the two examples you give. If anything, I’d say the Jesus one is less factual, since it’s entirely possible to believe in Jesus without believing in spirituality (I believe he was a historical figure, but I have zero belief in spirituality), whereas believing in natural selection does entail believing in at least some kind of evolution, even if it’s perhaps not precisely the Darwinian type.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
11 mins ago
add a comment |
Neither solutions are incorrect, but for there to be one best answer, I would say "vice versa" wins just because of the fact that it is the shortest. The phrase "vice versa" is perfect for this situation.
According to Collin's Dictionary,
Vice versa is used to indicate that the reverse of what you have said
is true. For example 'women may bring their husbands with them, and
vice versa' means that men may also bring their wives with them.
Teachers qualified to teach in England are not accepted in Scotland,
and vice versa.
The example mentioned above is very close to the statement mentioned in the question.
Playing Devil's advocate, as a semi-native speaker, I would say that vice versa is best used for factual statements, such as the one in the example above. Depending on what "X" and "Y" is, 2. may be a better option.
Believing in natural selection involves believing in evolution, but not the other way around.
Believing in Jesus Christ involves believing in spirituality, but not vice versa.
This is, of course, just my opinion.
answered 2 hours ago
Aryaman
393
I don’t see any difference in factuality in the two examples you give. If anything, I’d say the Jesus one is less factual, since it’s entirely possible to believe in Jesus without believing in spirituality (I believe he was a historical figure, but I have zero belief in spirituality), whereas believing in natural selection does entail believing in at least some kind of evolution, even if it’s perhaps not precisely the Darwinian type.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
11 mins ago
add a comment |
Neither solutions are incorrect, but for there to be one best answer, I would say "vice versa" wins just because of the fact that it is the shortest. The phrase "vice versa" is perfect for this situation.
According to Collin's Dictionary,
Vice versa is used to indicate that the reverse of what you have said
is true. For example 'women may bring their husbands with them, and
vice versa' means that men may also bring their wives with them.
Teachers qualified to teach in England are not accepted in Scotland,
and vice versa.
The example mentioned above is very close to the statement mentioned in the question.
Playing Devil's advocate, as a semi-native speaker, I would say that vice versa is best used for factual statements, such as the one in the example above. Depending on what "X" and "Y" is, 2. may be a better option.
Believing in natural selection involves believing in evolution, but not the other way around.
Believing in Jesus Christ involves believing in spirituality, but not vice versa.
This is, of course, just my opinion.
answered 2 hours ago
Aryaman
393
Neither solutions are incorrect, but for there to be one best answer, I would say "vice versa" wins just because of the fact that it is the shortest. The phrase "vice versa" is perfect for this situation.
According to Collin's Dictionary,
Vice versa is used to indicate that the reverse of what you have said
is true. For example 'women may bring their husbands with them, and
vice versa' means that men may also bring their wives with them.
Teachers qualified to teach in England are not accepted in Scotland,
and vice versa.
The example mentioned above is very close to the statement mentioned in the question.
Playing Devil's advocate, as a semi-native speaker, I would say that vice versa is best used for factual statements, such as the one in the example above. Depending on what "X" and "Y" is, 2. may be a better option.
Believing in natural selection involves believing in evolution, but not the other way around.
Believing in Jesus Christ involves believing in spirituality, but not vice versa.
This is, of course, just my opinion.
answered 2 hours ago
Aryaman
393
answered 2 hours ago
Aryaman
393
answered 2 hours ago
Aryaman
393
answered 2 hours ago
Aryaman
393
393
I don’t see any difference in factuality in the two examples you give. If anything, I’d say the Jesus one is less factual, since it’s entirely possible to believe in Jesus without believing in spirituality (I believe he was a historical figure, but I have zero belief in spirituality), whereas believing in natural selection does entail believing in at least some kind of evolution, even if it’s perhaps not precisely the Darwinian type.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
11 mins ago
add a comment |
I don’t see any difference in factuality in the two examples you give. If anything, I’d say the Jesus one is less factual, since it’s entirely possible to believe in Jesus without believing in spirituality (I believe he was a historical figure, but I have zero belief in spirituality), whereas believing in natural selection does entail believing in at least some kind of evolution, even if it’s perhaps not precisely the Darwinian type.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
11 mins ago
I don’t see any difference in factuality in the two examples you give. If anything, I’d say the Jesus one is less factual, since it’s entirely possible to believe in Jesus without believing in spirituality (I believe he was a historical figure, but I have zero belief in spirituality), whereas believing in natural selection does entail believing in at least some kind of evolution, even if it’s perhaps not precisely the Darwinian type.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
11 mins ago
I don’t see any difference in factuality in the two examples you give. If anything, I’d say the Jesus one is less factual, since it’s entirely possible to believe in Jesus without believing in spirituality (I believe he was a historical figure, but I have zero belief in spirituality), whereas believing in natural selection does entail believing in at least some kind of evolution, even if it’s perhaps not precisely the Darwinian type.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
11 mins ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f478577%2fhow-to-improve-this-sentence%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
1
Another option: "Believing X involves believing Y, but the same doesn’t apply in reverse."
– ralph.m
2 hours ago
1
Both are equally fine, natural, and idiomatic; there is no one ‘best’ way of wording this.
– Janus Bahs Jacquet
10 mins ago