he has no arms or legs/ he has no arms and legs.

Discussion in 'English Only' started by drinkwater, May 31, 2013.

  1. drinkwater Senior Member

    Hi. Are there any differences between these two sentences:

    He has no arms or legs.

    He has no arms and legs.

    Thanks for the help.
  2. Beryl from Northallerton Senior Member

    British English
    I think that the first is (technically) correct, but I suspect that many would use the second without missing a beat.
  3. GMF1991 Senior Member

    Cork, Ireland
    English (UK, Suffolk)
    I think that the second has a possible interpretation that "he" has legs, but no arms. Whereas the first indicates that "he" has no arms and no legs.


Share This Page