Is inversing the phrase “I have not played the piano” into “Not have I played the piano” grammatically correct?

So, first of all, one does not "inverse" a phrase, it should be "Is **inverting** the phrase..." Secondly, whether or not it's grammatically correct, it sounds incredibly awkward and I can't imaging a native speaker talking or writing like that. It sounds like something you would see in archaic writing or poetry.

Speak like Yoda, you are

“I have not played it” inverts to “I have played it not” for a declarative statement (archaic) and “have I not played it?” for the interrogative.

Nope. You could say "Have I not played the piano?" Which means "Is it true that I have not played the piano before?"

No it isn’t, and I’m sure someone more well-versed in the subject will be here shortly to explain why

It is not. Sometimes in poetry you can do "the piano, i have not played", but that still sounds really weird in normal conversation. I've never heard someone put the "not have" first tho.


You could invert it to "Never have I played the piano," but that's not a phrasing that someone would commonly use in speech.

“Not have I played the piano” is incorrect. (But you can say "Never have I played the piano" or "At no time have I played the piano" or "In no way have I played the piano", and so on.)

absolutely not

Subject verb object. Your second sentence starts with a verb, not have, followed by the subject I, followed by action verb then object. Your first sentence is correct.

You aren't quite right but what you are trying to do is an advanced structure called **dramatic inversion**, **negative inversion** (or maybe something else too!) Some correct examples are: * Only in Louisiana can you find a drive-thru liquor store in a megachurch. * Rarely before have my students arrived so unprepared to the first class. * Under no circumstances may sentries leave the watchtower without informing the unit commander.

There's an interesting online slang syntax "Not me doing something" ("Not me having played the piano!") which sort of expresses disbelief in the prospect. But what you've written isn't grammatical (should be "I have not played the piano").

The long answer is, not in Modern English. over the centuries, English has done away with a lot of the grammar that allowed for a more versatile word order even in the absence of much punctuation (such as noun cases), thus putting words in strange orders would make it less understandable. Of course when this was done the words themselves were different. If you were to literally translate Old English word for word into Modern English you'd get some strange word orders. Where you might use something with a non-standard word order is if you were writing a novel and trying to convey how a character spoke a different language or in an ancient way of speaking. You'd have to be careful that the context was enough for the reader to understand it. But using Modern English words with rules from an earlier form of English is not grammatically correct.

Nobody would ever Say, “Not have I played the piano.” I have never even seen it written. Maybe your instructor meant, “Never have I played the piano.” Even that is poetic and old-fashioned and not used in common speech.

It would be "Played the piano, I have not."

"I have not" inverts to "Haven't I" ("Have not I" sounds unnatural) to change it into a question. If you're talking about changing the order but not the meaning, "Never have I" as the other commenter said, is correct.

No, that is not correct. You can’t do that in English.

<American English> No. Your English teacher is wrong. You can poetically invert the statement into "Never have I played the piano.", however.

It has all the right parts but they're not in the right order (as everybody has pointed out). Unlike, say,  Latin where you can pretty much put the properly declined word anywhere in the sentence without changing the meaning, English follows a pattern and part of its meaning is derived from this pattern and the logic that it follows.

No. The only way that would be correct would be in a clarifying statement, like >Person 1: I'm asking "Have you played the guitar?" Person 2: Not "Have I played the piano?"

No

“Inverting”, and no, not with “not”. Using inversion is a kind of *emphasis*, so you would use *never* to highlight that you have not played the piano before, even once: * **Never** have I (ever) played the piano before. This phrasing is relatively uncommon in everyday speech, but it can be seen in higher registers of writing, as well as the teenage “truth or dare”-style game “Never Have I Ever”.

No. That is not correct at all.

“Played the piano, I have not.” Would be correct. It’d make you sound like yoda. You could also do “The piano, I have not played”, but it sounds less natural.

Not at all

"Not have I played the piano" does not convey the same meaning as "I have not played the piano". If you said "Not have I...", no one would know exactly what you meant. At best it is too ambiguous for anyone to know what you mean, at worst it is non-sense. There are ways that you could change the word order and still preserve the meaning. I not have played the piano. (Very strange but intelligible) Played the piano I have not. (Sounds like Yoda from star wars) These constructions are strange and probably not grammatically correct but if you use them people would still understand what you were saying.