Returning to April 6, 2012, last message April 13, 2012,

 Abla brought up Lewis´ example:

V1+ip V2

Zengo´yu görüp de korkmamak imkansızdı.

> görmek ve korkmamak = görüp korkmamak (V1=gör- V2=kork-ma-)

Zengo´yu görüp korkmamak imkansızdı.

> görmemek ve korkmamak = görmeyip korkmamak (V1=gör-me- V2=kork-ma-)

It seems this issue was never resolved.

Does the ´de´  break the negation, or was Lewis wrong.

"de" after "-ip" either doesn´t make any change in the meaning or gives "then" meaning at most (as I claimed in that thread). I don´t expect it breaks negation. If you provide us with your examples you think they do we can analyze ´em.

Sorry to dig up an old issue, but this is pretty fundamental.

Take a breath, more oxygen tunci, please try again. 

-----------------

Further thoughts after the initial post:

It is difficult to find an affirmative/negative sentence that doesn´t require ´but´ instead of ´and´ as the conjunction. I think ´de´ can only mean ´but´ when it is used as a postposition, not as a conjunction. Although, I suppose it could have a special function here.

The man understood the problem, and he did not leave the meeting. 

The man did not understand the problem, and he did not leave the meeting. 

Except for rare sentences like this, perhaps it is better to avoid using -ip. Even these sentences could be written to improve clarity by, for example:

The man understood the problem, and he was not going to leave the meeting. 

The man did not understand the problem, and he was not going to leave the meeting. 

In these improved sentences, -ip can not be used, since there are different tenses. Right!