anymore vs no longer

[Jazztronik]

Hello,

I'd like to know if they are similar. For instance:

"I have no longer my old car" is the same as
"I don't have my old car anymore" ?

or

"this article is no longer available" ==> "this article isn't available anymore"?

Are they always similar in any context? or can they be different, even though in a slight way?

 

[Jad]

Hello,

I'd like to know if they are similar. For instance:

"I have no longer my old car" is the same as
"I don't have my old car anymore" ?

I have no longer my old car doesn't make sense we'd say, "I no longer have my old car"

"this article is no longer available" ==> "this article isn't available anymore"?

Are they always similar in any context? or can they be different, even though in a slight way?

"No longer" and "not anymore" mean exactly the same thing, though "not anymore" is (I'd say) more common (in such a way that if I went up to a friend and said "I no longer like having milk in my tea", they'd laugh at me, unless it was said deliberately like that in a jokey way). "No longer" is probably used by the more well-spoken (which is why your second example "this article is no longer available" would be found on a website [for example] more often than "this article isn't available anymore")... maybe others will have a different opinion about that.

 

[Jazztronik]

Thank you very much Jad for your quick reply!

So I understand 'no longer' is used in formal situations and 'not...anymore' is much more used in a colloquial way.

Thanks again and cheers!

 

[Jad]

Perhaps you'd like to see if any other English natives have anything to say about it, incase they disagree with me : )

 

[elroy]

I agree with Jad.

Also, to expand on his comment on your first sentence, "no longer" always precedes the verb.

Another very colloquial (and grammatically incorrect) alternative:

I don't have my car no more.

 

[GenJen54]

Originally posted by Elroy
to expand on his comment on your first sentence, "no longer" always precedes the verb.

Hate to disagree, especially with someone that has more than 3,000 posts.

BUT...

With "no longer" there is a slight difference in sentence construction depending upon the verb used.

Whenever you use the verb to be or certain modal verbs, you must place "no longer" after the verb form.

For example:

I am no longer single.
That book is no longer available.
They are no longer with that organizatiton.

She can no longer hear.
We may no longer be able to live in New Orleans.

The same holds true when you use "to be" as part of a present perfect construction.

I am no longer living in New York City.

However, with any other verb, no longer is placed in front of the verb.

She no longer works in this building.
We no longer go to the movies.
They no longer represent that client.

 

[Jazztronik]

well, why not . If there's some difference in some region or country whre they speak English, it'd be good to know. I'm a very curious person.

 

[Jazztronik]

Thanks a lot mates for the explanations. They are very clear.

Very nice forum this one!

 

[elroy]

Originally posted by Elroy
to expand on his comment on your first sentence, "no longer" always precedes the verb.[/quote

Hate to disagree.

With "no longer" there is a slight difference in sentence construction depending upon the verb used.

Whenever you use the verb to be or certain modal verbs, you must place "no longer" after the verb form.

For example:

I am no longer single.
That book is no longer available.
They are no longer with that organizatiton.

She can no longer hear.
We may no longer be able to live in New Orleans.

The same holds true when you use "to be" as part of a present perfect construction.

I am no longer living in New York City.

However, with any other verb, no longer is placed in front of the verb.

She no longer works in this building.
We no longer go to the movies.
They no longer represent that client.

Oops - thought too fast.

I knew there was going to be an exception!

Indeed, "no longer" goes before the verb when the verb is a simple verb and not "to be" (in which case it goes after). It goes between the two parts of a verb phrase in the case of a compound verb.

Good catch!

 

[elroy]

well, why not . If there's some difference in some region or country whre they speak English, it'd be good to know. I'm a very curious person.

No, my answer was too hasty. I was considering your sentence "I no longer have a car" and failed to consider other possible verb constructions. In any grammatically similar situation (simple verb, excluding "to be"), "no longer" comes before the verb. "To be" tends to defy tendencies and behave in its own way.

 

[Marc S]

"We are no longer in UK" makes sense? or in this case is better "We are not in UK anymore"?
Or I have to add "We are no longer living in UK" or "We are not living in UK anymore"

 

[velisarius]

Please phone us in Athens. We are no longer in the UK.

Give us a call in Athens—we're not in the UK anymore.

Both of these work, but they don't necessarily mean that the speaker used to live in the UK. They simply imply that they were in the UK when they spoke to you before, and now they aren't.

 

[ullas84]

Give us a call in Athens—we're not in the UK anymore.

what about ''anylonger'' and ''anymore''?
are that the same in the meaning?

Give us a call in Athens—we're not in the UK anymore.
Give us a call in Athens—we're not in the UK anylonger.

 

[Luca Tufo]

of course, anymore is the same of no longer.

You have to use "anymore" at the end of the sentence while you can use "no longer" in positive sentences

 

[zaffy]

Do 'anymore' and 'no/any longer' refer to both the very present moment and general present? For example,

A: Have another sandwich.
B: Thanks. I'm not hungry any more/any longer.

I no longer play tennis./ I don't play tennis any more. Well, to be honest, I've never been a fan of that sport.