0

In short
Sugar is the root of every disease
So we should avoid it
A man had cancer at the age of 45
and he just said no to any thing
containing sugar and carbonated
drinks and now is aging 45 and never
became ill in these 20 years and just
got minor flue once.
Moral
We should quit sugar..

*now is aging 75

I don't know which sounds more correct but I think the latter is the one to go with.

migrated from english.stackexchange.com Mar 23 at 13:35

This question came from our site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts.

  • Hi Abdul, and welcome to ELL (however involuntarily). Text in images can't be indexed by search or read by anyone using screen reader software or similar, so we generally ask people to transcribe any text from images that they need in order to ask their question. – SamBC Mar 23 at 13:39
  • 1
    Google Books claims over 600,000 written instances of anything and everything. Similar to collocations like aid and abet and cease and desist, it's effectively repetition for "emphasis" rather than "completeness" (to all intents and purposes, the two terms are equivalent). In short - both your suggestions are perfectly fine, and if you wanted to be more emphatic you could write He said no to anything and everything containing sugar. – FumbleFingers Mar 23 at 13:43
  • Could you please add more detail explaining what you think is the difference, and why you think one is better than the other? Otherwise this question should be closed. – Andrew Mar 23 at 14:26
  • 1
    @FumbleFingers - reminds me of a department I was in which was developing "aims and objectives". I was tempted to support the aims, but oppose the objectives. – fred2 Mar 23 at 15:12
  • 1
    @fred2: I suppose you wouldn't have offered to aid those with aims, but abet those with objectives? :) – FumbleFingers Mar 23 at 15:27
1

..anything containing sugar.
..everything containing sugar.

Both are good grammar.

Both are easily understood.

The second version is a little bit more emphatic.
It is just a matter of taste.

0

The effect of the two is the same, but I would say that the precise meaning is different. They lead to the same thing in the end, though.

he just said no to anything containing sugar

This means that he refused any time he was offered something containing sugar.

he just said no to everything containing sugar

This means that he pro-actively decided that he would have nothing with sugar.

The difference is subtle, this understanding may not be consistent between native speakers, and it doesn't really matter because it amounts to the same thing in the end.

Anything and everything are different words and have different meanings, but not infrequently the overall sense of a sentence is the same with either. Do not make the mistake of thinking they are interchangeable generally, though. After all, you wouldn't want to ask someone:

Can I get you everything?

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy