Would there be any difference? For instance,

  1. I don't want to talk about non-important issues. (unimportant)

  2. He is a very non-active/non-sexual person. (inactive) (asexual)

  3. This is a non-logical assumption. (illogical)

  • 3
    In short, no. People would understand what you meant, but it's neither idiomatically nor grammatically correct to substitute "non-" for other, established negative prefixes. – Jason Patterson Sep 12 '15 at 1:34
  • You mean "he is non-present today"? – Maulik V Sep 12 '15 at 7:16
  • @MaulikV - Actually, "he is not present today" would be more likely. – WhatRoughBeast Oct 25 '18 at 0:25

The prefix non- is used with words that either don't have a form with "another" negative prefix or an antonym, like

non-denominational church

or with words for which the standard form (or the antonym) has a slightly different meaning from what can be achieved by using 'non-'

A non-negative value - (="positive or zero" instead of "positive")

The rest should be used with the "regular" negative prefix.

Your Answer

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

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.