"Aucun train ne roule plus sur ces voies ferrées."
Translation:Not a single train goes on these railroad tracks anymore.
15 CommentsThis discussion is locked.
When spelled as two words, any more refers to quantities. ... When spelled as one word, anymore is an adverb that refers to time. It means “at present,” “still,” or “any longer.” Cheers :)!
In English all you need to say is: "Trains don't run on this track anymore" - all those other words just make it sound awkward. We would never use "Not a single.." in this context. It's OK if you want to back translate into the given French but otherwise it's inelegant.
I have a question about pronunciation. Grammatically, the sentence has two parts: Aucun train ne roule plus and sur ces voies ferrees, and I would expect a small pause between the two parts. But at full speed, both the male and female voices jam plus and sur together. Aucun train ne roule + plus sur ces voies ferrees. Can somebody explain why that is?
"No single train goes" means that the only trains that go over are double or triple (whatever that means). To say that the number of trains going over these tracks is zero, you can say:
Not a single train goes.
Not one train goes.
No trains go.
Note that the last one is plural. Zero is grammatically plural, so it's "zero trains go", not "zero train goes". The phrase "no train goes" isn't wrong, but it's a little different. "No train goes" looks at things from the perspective of a hypothetical train and asks whether it would go, rather than looking at things from the perspective of the tracks and asking about usage.
With a few exceptions (like the words "nobody" and "no one" and "nothing", which are singular), most "no" statements about things not happening use plural nouns. Talking about a restaurant, both "no students eat there" or "no student eats there" are grammatically correct, but the first is much more common than the second.