gdzie dać still

Witam

Jak poprawnie powiedzieć: - to ciągle nie to czego szukam. Nie wiem gdzie umieścić 'still'

1. It is still not what I've been looking for.
czy może
2. It is not still what I have been looking for

#1

dzięki fui eu, ale jesteś pewien? I osobiście obstawiałbym: It isn't still what I have been looking for.

Może jest tak, że jak piszemy osobnie 'is' i 'not' to sytuacja się zmienia, np.:
1. It isn't still what ...
oraz
2. It is still not what ...

?

Ja tylko wiem z praktyki nie znam reguly. Poczekaj chwile i kto sie tu dopisze :)

/I/ Still haven't found what I'm looking for. (jak w piosence) :)

>>I osobiście obstawiałbym: It isn't still what I have been looking for.

calf to nie casino :)

Tak jak powiedzial fui , 'still' tutaj przed przeczeniem nie po ' *It isn't still .... - wrong.

'still' jest asertywne , ma pozytywna orientacje, nie moze byc po przeczeniu (za wyjatkiem pytan i kiedy jest po za zasiegiem negacji w zdaniu)

@fui

>>Ja tylko wiem z praktyki nie znam reguly

Yet another convincing evidence to suggest that some part of our syntax faculty is innate and some is acquired. :) ..but leaving aside the formlal rules, I would've done it the same way in the first place just 'by ear. :)

A co mozna powiedziec na temat:
You’re not still working are you?

You’re still not working, are you ?
You’re not working any longer, are you ?
You’re no longer working, are you ?
Is his car still not working ?

I think most native speakers would put a question mark against “ you are not still working’
and they would be unsure about its acceptability. Though negative in meaning it’s still declarative.

The meaning of “ *you’re not still working “ would be hardly recoverable as “ is it true that you’re still not working ? “ The former is ambiguous and inequivalent to the latter reading.

I got "You’re not still working are you?" from a reliable source. Wiem ze nie wyglada na poprawny i sam bym tak nie napisal ale ...
bbc.co.uk/worldservice/learningenglish/language/askaboutenglish/2009/06/090929_aae_still.shtml

to znaczy co innego: czyżbyś nadal pracował?

@fui

‘Still’ as an assertive time adverb cannot be readily crammed within the scope of clause negation . When you have a negative clause, it’ usually negative throughout or till a final adjunct and the end of the negation scope is usually marked by intonation. The basic rule is that nonassertive elements normally follow the negative item with ‘the other way round’ being true for assertive ones. These may not however be always hard and fast rules , especially in familiar context or when the latter
( assertive ) fall outside the negation scope.

But don’t you still feel that this sentence smells a bit ‘fishy’ ?

I ‘m not saying we should ignore the native competence but I don’t like this sentence anyway, no matter where it comes from or whatever it might be interpreted like.
It’s only one man’s opinion.