Re: "be'be'" - double negation

[SoberAlien@aol.com]

Sean M. Burke wrote:
>At 00:57 2002-04-14 -0400, SoberAlien@aol.com wrote:
>> >Very true -- the layman of the 23rd+ century, where presumably everyone 
who
>> >reads English has studied several non-Indoeuropean languages as a part of
>> >their minimal education -- along with more hearty pursuits like temporal
>> >mechanics, warp field theory, and how to make hors-d'oeuvres for
>> >silicon-based guests;
>>
>>You're describing a Starfleet officer, not a layman, even a 23rd century 
one.
>
>If poverty has been eliminated at least throughout Earth, why would people 
>make do with inferior educations?

This argument has merit (although education is not a priority for everyone 
today, even those who can afford it).  Yet I think it's going way out on a 
limb to use it as evidence to support an idea about double negation.  Do you 
really think Dr. Okrand considered this when he chose how to describe points 
of grammar in TKD?  He was writing a book that he knew would in fact be read 
by laymen of the _20th_ century, and that's just how his explanations sound.

-Sengval