Question #1: What is the difference in meaning between "[to be] not invited" and similar negated forms? Is "to be not invited" an idiomatic form that has a meaning distinct from other ways of phrasing the lack of an invitation? Here are some examples from the Google search "to be not invited":
- Syrian president to be not invited to Euro-Mediterranean summit
- Is nornal to be not invited to a wedding espcially his sons wedding?
- They sit back and allow them to be “not invited”. (in comments; search for "not invited)
- The only black senator named Tim Scott is a Republican and claimed to be not invited to the MLK event
It seems this has a different meaning than other forms. For example, what is the difference in meaning between "Is John not going to be invited?" and "Is John going to be not invited?"
Question #2: Can this be generalized to other similar/parallel forms of negation "not to be verb" and "to be not verb" and other forms (see below)?
(These questions are inspired by the question, Is "To be not invited is sad" grammatical?)
In both Question 1 and Question 2, one may consider the following forms:
- Not to be verb.
- To not be verb.
- To be not verb.
- Any other form expressing a similar meaning.
Also, for this entire question/answer thread, one may attempt to creatively create contexts/scenarios in which there is a difference in meaning in order to explain how they could signify a difference.