Why is this not possible?

[Ratboy]

Hello,

I had this question come up today and I wasn't sure how to answer it.
(the context is a man with a physical disability giving an awareness speech)

The sentence in question was "Yes, I have no arms or legs."

The question I had is Why is "or" okay, but "and" is not?

I know it has something to do with related noun phrases, and that it fits with the "neither or" pattern.

I would appreciate any help you could give me.

Thanks.

[ssean]

Very briefly, the answer as I understand is, when linking positive noun phrases you use 'and', but when linking negative noun phrases you use 'or'.
For example 'I like chocolate and ice cream' compared to 'I like neither chocolate or ice cream' or
'I have been to Peru and Bolivia'
'I have never been to Chile or Argentina'.

[Ratboy]

Thank you.

I thought it might be something simple like that, but I wasn't sure.

Thanks for your help

[Stephen Jones]

Not quite so simple I'm afraid.

First of all He has no arms and legs. is probably a correct sentence. It does sound a little strange, however.

The reason it sounds strange is that 'no' negates what comes immediately afterwards and thus our initial take is 'no arms' and we then have to do a double take when we realize that 'no' negates the noun phrase 'arms and legs'.

If we say He hasn't any arms and legs then it is a little less strange since the negation goes with the verb.

In both cases the construction with 'or' is more common, and the reason for that is that arms and legs are normally considered separately instead of forming a single unit.

Compare the above examples with He doesn't have pencil and paper

[JuanTwoThree]

Isn't the cause of that double-take the possible ambiguity? "I've got no money and children" could mean that I have children, as in "I've got no money and and seven children". " He has no arms and legs" could imply arms none, legs two (or even more).

[Stephen Jones]

Exactly, Juan.