tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Nov 30 10:42:14 2009
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Double negatives
Christopher Doty (email@example.com)
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 06:29, ghunchu'wI' 'utlh <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Klingon does not employ "negative concord" the way some languages do.
Whence does this conclusion come?
> Double negatives in Klingon appear to act the way they do in Standard
> English, with one negating the other and yielding an affirmative
This doesn't happen in Standard English, and it is stupid to say so.
Language is not math, and two negatives do not make a positive, and
saying so borders on various kinds of "-ists."
There is, further, reason to believe that we might see differences in
English in Klingon: in English, "not" negates an entire clause; in
Klingon, <-be'> negates only what immediately precedes it. So, in
Klingon, a clause with a negative <-be'> and, say, a <not>, don't
really have two negatives with the same scope.
I'm not saying this is okay in Klingon, just that it might be. And
that two negatives equal a positive is stupid.