Pierre viendra non pas demain , *(mais après demain).
Pierre come-FUT NEG NEG tomorrow but after tomorrow
Pierre is not coming tomorrow, but after tomorrow.’ As they say, “It is therefore not surprising that [the correction] is introduced by mais = SN, if we admit that the utterance p SN q is the object of one unique act of enunciation. If mais = PA is, on the other hand, impossible in these conditions, it is because it would cause a succession of two acts of enunciation (which is blocked by non).” (Anscombre & Ducrot 1977: 40)27