tlhIngan-Hol Archive: Mon Nov 30 12:48:52 2009
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Double negatives
- From: Christopher Doty <[email protected]>
- Subject: Re: Double negatives
- Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:47:34 -0800
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=UKpZMfy40XGI9t5/z+29Xc7b5rEOiem6BZak/r0Z28I=; b=FjQRQR6O81bsDCOzy61cKjxWI07VgPsClj5Zf23Ed1nNSh9h3UWAN6N4ASxTVDZQlB CUmKjXsj+fWPMNjPy7tb6+uFEBEX89K35+aMLPDD5q03Z/+3REP/0Q9nIZ3L+BE7VwqS 8RFQZRcQk8eMw1lOjPAvjRSiA3l7Ou32mYiU0=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=OJ8NOHBu0Qb/wquGiJaIAYEmeNL71Cq6+t2LZBaHJ46/Mw7pTytbjaueSkn7IO6TOU Ps34ATKgwcrMQEsF1qa4qz/eB1krXFBFK5NgTEm1Po+RvLO1SLKnCQJ9Kax+jvFBUQoV 52GMewDbkkACYgGkC//kWQmi/+kQTbJeNjVgs=
- In-reply-to: <[email protected]>
- References: <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]> <[email protected]>
Certainly in some places, but any can also have a non-negative
meaning: "Any kind of pie is fine."
(Also, how did we get on pie? I want some now...)
Chris
On Mon, Nov 30, 2009 at 12:43, Tracy Canfield <[email protected]> wrote:
> 2009/11/30 ghunchu'wI' 'utlh <[email protected]>:
>> Did I err in using the name "Standard English" to refer to the strict
>> grammatical rules taught in school? Or did my English teachers err in
>> telling me that double negatives essentially cancel?
>
> Your English teachers erred, and they erred in two different ways.
>
> One is the "double negatives cancel", which others have gotten into,
> so I won't rehash.
>
> The other is the idea that the negative only occurs once in an English
> sentence. Something more subtle seems to be going on here. Compare
>
> SE: I don't want any pie.
> Other Englishes: I don't want no pie.
>
> An English teacher might say that the first sentence contains one
> negative element, and the second contains two. But consider this
> disallowed SE sentence:
>
> SE: *I want any pie.
> SE: I want some pie.
>
> (the * is a standard linguistic shorthand for a sentence that native
> speakers would consider impermissible)
>
> The rule doesn't seem to be "Some varieties use double negatives, and
> some don't." The rule is more along the lines of "SE uses 'some' with
> non-negative constructions of this sort, and 'any' with negative
> constructions; some other spoken varieties use 'some' with
> non-negative constructions and 'no' with negative constructions." I
> don't have _The Language Instinct_ nearby, but Pinker argues (citing
> someone else, I think) that when you compare the distribution of "any"
> and "no" in these sorts of construction, they have the same rules. In
> other words, if "no" is a negative above, "any" is too.