adj. and s., nullus, nemo (☞ nullus, substantively and adjectively, of persons or things; nemo usually substantively, rarely as an adjective, only of persons. ☞ When a genitive is required, use nullius for neminis, which does not occur in the best prose, and the ablative nemine occurs only in early and post-classical Latin; e.g., Tac., Ann., 16, 27; Hist., 2, 47: for this we find nullo, Vid: Zumpt, § 676; Wytenb., § 226, A. 1; Stürenb. ad Cic., Arch., 6, p. 96; ad Off., Comment, ii.; Kühner ad Cic., Tusc., . 5, 22, 63): nemo homo (only in Cic.): non ullus, non quisquam (none whatever, the former substantively, the latter adjectively): no Roman, nemo Romanus (Cic.); no writer, nemo scriptor or nullus scriptor (Cic. ☞ Stürenburg ad Cic., Off., refers nemo to quality, and nullus to quantity; so that nemo scriptor = nemo scriptor qualiscunque est; nullus scriptor = nullus scriptor, quotquot sunt). When nullus and nemo are used as partitives, i. e., when “no “is opposed to the other parts or to the whole, they frequently take a genitive; e.g., no mortal, nemo mortalium: no animal is wiser, nulla belluarum prudentior est; but for the genitive, we may sometimes use a circumlocution with de, ex; e.g., none of ours fell, nemo de nostris cecidit. Nihil is often apparently used for nullus and nemo (with a genitive when for nullus); but there is this difference, that nihil gives emphasis to the negative sense; e.g., none is more unfortunate than I, none more fortunate than Catulus, nihil me infortunatius, nihil fortunatius est Catulo: to demand no reward (at all), nihil praemii expetere: to have no doubt (at all), nihil dubitationis habere. We frequently use “no” when a particular, not a general, idea is to be negatived. In this case, which occurs especially when “no” belongs to a word signifying property, or to the determination of the predicate of a substantive, instead of nullus the Latin uses the simple negative non; e.g., I know that I bring no very pleasant intelligence, scio non jucundissimum nuntium me vobis allaturum: no snow falls on the open sea, nives in alto non cadunt: they had no honey, mel non habebant. In like manner “no” is expressed in Latin by non when the English object with its verb is denoted in Latin by one verbal expression; e.g., to have no fear, non timere: to have no hesitation, non dubitare: to entertain no hatred toward anyone, non odisse aliquem, etc. And no, also no, et nullus, nec ullus (adjectively); nec quisquam (substantively): no single one, nemo quisquam: nemo unus: no single person, homo nemo; nemo unus: in no place, nusquam nullo loco (☞ nullibi is not Ciceronian, but is used only by Vitr.; nuspiam is not Latin): at no time, numquam; nullo tempore: and at no time, nec umquam: in no respect, nihil (Vid: Zumpt, § 677): by no means, nullo modo, nulla ratione (in no manner); neutiquam, nequaquam, haudquaquam, haud (with adjectives); minime (not at all); minime, minime gentium, minime vero, minime quidem (not at all, on no account; in contradictions and answers): nihil minus (nothing less; as a negative reply). [☞ Nullatenus is very late.]