Um... Guys? Can we get back to non-sequitor stuff that only gets posted so that someone is winning the game to be the last poster? (Unless this is a tactic to keep being the last... in which case bravo!)
I'm going to try this one more time then I'm out, so I suppose by the rules of this forum, you'll "win," and will merrily go about your way trying to convince people of a falsehood out of your sense of...something, I don't even know what. In the English language, two negatives--"negative mishandling," to use Fowler's typically hilarious and sometimes dodgy usage--do not, in any way, resolve to or imply a positive. I am a writer by trade, and even an educator during those college terms I'm feeling poor enough to teach English at the local university as an adjunct. I'm quite well-regarded in both fields, if I do say so myself. But let's set aside any suggestion of an argument from expertise and turn our attention to the four style guides used by professionals in the United States, the latest editions of all of which I conveniently, and unsurprisingly, have here at hand. The Chicago Manual of Style, 17th Edition. This is the most widely used guide in American publishing, and is usually just referred to as "Chicago." It's the standard used by editors of fiction and non-fiction, especially copy editors. The American Press Stylebook, 55th Edition. This is what journalists use and is commonly referred to simply as "AP." The Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, 7th Edition. Used mainly in academic settings outside university English departments (many History departments use it as well), particularly in the sciences, psychology being the most obvious. Usually referred to as "the APA." The Modern Language Association Handbook, 9th Edition. As someone who has spent so much time in English classes, both as an instructor and as a student, it should come as no surprise that this is my favorite. We call it "MLA 9." Collectively, to an educated, working writer and editor in the United States of America, these four books are "the rules." None of those books make the, frankly, preposterous claim that double negation implies a positive. I think your claim (in addition to being unsupported by any widely used and well-respected authority), is simply bizarre. Do you honestly believe that if someone says, "I ain't got no apples," that what that means, that the intelligibility of that utterance, is that that person has apples. Or, more to the point, do you honestly believe that they are trying to tell you that they have apples? Do you believe so to the extent that you would reply, "Ah! I see you are claiming to have some apples!" Because that's what you're strongly implying. I don't know how to convince you of this. You've chosen to die on this hill. And you don't look good doing it. Sincerely, Christopher Rowe, BA, MFA, writer of five novels, two short story collections, dozens of short stories, columns, and essays (and even one poem!), all of which were published by highly reputable and well regarded professional companies and many of which have been reprinted and translated around the world and someone who, to the minds of many at least, ain't no idiot.
OK, i'm not a native english speaker, so i would like to know your opinion on this, because you clearly know better than me. Are you sure that double negatives don't ever mean a positive? Because in italian language yes, they do. I'm gonna translate: "you cannot not know it". In italian it's a perfectly valid phrase (from a grammatical pov) and it means that you surely know a certain thing, even if you negate. Is a incorrect form in english? On a similar note, we can also pick the famous Socrates' paradox "I know that i know nothing". It's one of the cornerstone of the classic philosophy. How is it a "technical mistake"? (EDIT: ok, paradoxes shouldn't be used as reference, and this is not even a double negation. Let's focus only on the "you cannot not know it" )
Signore, saying that you know that you know nothing is a single negative. You know that that you have no information. Single. No? Like, he doesn't say "I don't know that I know nothing" meaning he knows something?
well, the paradox is that in the moment you know something, you cannot know nothing. The phrase is describing a impossible situation. But yeah. Paradoxes shouldn't be used as reference.
Please don't ruin this for me. As I often find myself at the heart of such "heated" debates, it is nice to have a rest for once. Another champion has taken up the cause, and I salute him!
Your English is very good. If you didn't point out that it was your second language, no one would ever know.
That's a good point. It's a paradox rather than a double negative. I'm with @NIGHTBRINGER, your English is great. Case in point is I can never tell which short story is yours in the competition by the spelling or grammar. And that's a pretty good test, since I'm watching out for the stories from the Capo!
I am claiming that in this case this person is attempting to communicate "not A" in an incorrect way because he is using a sentence which purely grammatically speaking communicates "not not A" which is grammatically speaking in English equivalent to "A". As unlike say French, modern English no longer has the negative concord. The only reason he still succeeds at communicating "not A" is because I am aware there are English dialects which do still have the negative concord. Unfortunately, dialects aren't necessarily grammatically correct according to the parent language, even if they usually can largely be understood by someone who expects the "proper" grammar and vocabulary of the parent language. Also, in this particular case it helps that the dialects that still use it get enough exposure that most English speaking people will have encountered it through movies/books/etc. So especially if you're American, you will see this grammatical construct used quite often. If you're not American, you'l probably mostly see it in movies where it's often used to accentuate how uneducated or rural a character is (e.g. the texan farmhand, or the poor kid from the bad part of town) So tl;dr: the person in your examples is talking in a dialect, which according to the grammar of the parent language is incorrect. If you know the dialect you'l understand him. If you don't know the dialect but only the "proper" parent language you'll probably be confused to some extend. As for respectable authorities; again see the various scientific publications explaining/investigating the decline of the use of the negative concord in modern standard English, while it survives in specific dialects.
The Knights of the Eight is a fellowship joined simply by embracing the gentleman's game of Warhammer Fantasy 8th Edition. Open to anyone
Query: is there an inner circle in the Knights of Eight? Perhaps a distinction drawn between pure-bloods (those that only play 8th Edition WFB) and half-bloods (those that play 8th edition WFB in addition to one or more other tabletop wargames... including possibly AoS)?! Or are all members of equal rank?
Well played, sir. But I'm positive that @NIGHTBRINGER has a little round place in his heart... the base where the glorious miniature of the C'Tan Nightbringer belongs.
I still have my Nightbringer model from way back in my 40k days. Sitting on a custom made round base made of pure brass (my pops made it for me, it's extremely stable and helps prevent the model from tipping over). However, I plan to one day strip the paint off the model, and repurpose him as a K'daai Fireborn unit filler... upon which time, he will be rebased onto a square base!