 |
| Courtesy of offthemark.com |
I ain't go no problem with the use of double negatives. And I wouldn't never say that I love me a good grammar joke. And true, I also could not claim that I do not love messing with people.
Yeah, I bet that was hard to understand. You probably had to go back and think about each sentence and think "negative times negative equals positive." And then maybe you got angry at me because you had to do some math in English. Or maybe you're just angry that it was annoying to read. Good. And if you're going to tell me that it was simple to follow, well...you're a liar! Those types of sentences above are about as honest to me as saying I'm okay with How I Met Your Mother leaving Netflix (which is to say, not honest at all-seriously, my YouTube feed is now littered with recommendations to watch more videos of it, thus creating an inescapable, vicious cycle).
So, this week's topic is clearly about double negatives. If you speak Spanish, quieres usar los negativos... but in English, we hate (or we should hate!) hearing double negatives because they make everything more confusing than it needs to be. Of all my grammar topics that I've tackled, this one is probably the most important to consider for communication purposes.
Our first offender is the Rolling Stones. My mom would be seriously disappointed in me if she knew that I even slightly criticizing this group, so nobody tell her!
The issue with this song (like many others) is right in the title. "I Can't Get No Satisfaction" is a double negative and thus means that he can get satisfaction. It kinda dampens the quality of the song when you realize it no longer makes any sense anymore. It's pretty much impossible to listen to at this point without thinking about it.
And our second example is actually very interesting...
And our second example is actually very interesting...
This song is from the iconic band "Pink Floyd." In the song, we hear the lyrics, "We don't need no education / We don't need no thought control." So clearly, we hear and see the double negatives. But is the use deliberate? They really do mean they don't need education, but the use of the double negative of course implies that they do need it. And because it was a double negative used in conjunction with literally accentuating the uselessness of education, it possibly adopts an ironic undertone since it is clear that they need education or they wouldn't have used a double negative. But if the use of the double negative was deliberate, then it is a sentiment truly against education, conformity, and authority. So, I am genuinely interested in hearing your thoughts about this song. If you haven't heard it, treat yourself to just listening to it and don't even focus on the grammar the first time around (gasp!).
So the reason I say double negatives is the most important topic I will cover is because hearing the negative always causes confusion. There is always a subsequent discussion about what was actually meant and everyone loses time. No one wants to have to go back and read something again and again just to try and figure out what you're trying to say. So basically, know when you're using your double negatives.
My suggestion would is just to try and avoid double negatives whenever possible. There isn't much technical grammar with this topic. Just think about what you are intending to say and then make sure your sentence actually reflects that. If I'm describing an unlucky man I should not say, "he never won nothing," as I really wanted to say "he never won anything."
BUT! There are reasons to use a double negative, but they are very circumstantial and most effective when used sparingly. The first is when trying to create a character. If you are trying to create a character who is uneducated or is but must act in accordance to a specific cultural norm (Calpurnia changing her dialect in To Kill a Mockingbird comes to mind), then double negatives can be a tool that help convey that idea. But since we are all students, we wouldn't go spewing off double negatives that contradict what we want to say all the time. The second reason to use a double negative is when the double negative actually means what you want it to and it adds subtle impact. I cannot stress the second part enough. Just because you can use a double negative to create a grammatically correct sentence does not mean you should. An example of this type of double negative is "she was not unaware of the stares, but she strode on without hesitation." Using "she was aware" would have changed the nuance of the phrasing, and in my opinion, would have altered the characterization of the female and created a more "in your face" situation that lacks subtlety.
Let's do it. Highlight the box to see the answer:
Because of the intense fog, we couldn't see ________. (anything, nothing)
Anything; based on the context, I'm trying to say that our vision is hindered. Anything conveys this as using nothing would create a double negative and imply we could see something.
John, being 500 miles from her, felt like there was ________ he could do to help (nothing, anything).
Nothing; I am trying to imply the uselessness John is feeling, and nothing works here because it does not create a double negative and thus is the appropriate word. "Anything" would have meant that John was able to do a lot to help, but we know it's wrong because of the distance.
He ________ the homeless boys on the street. (couldn't not help, had to help)
Either answer is correct. The first instance appropriate uses a double negative to convey the same idea as the second. However, this is a situation where the double negative could be more powerful since it has greater nuance. It implies there is an irresistible force for our character to be good that he cannot ignore, whereas the second one might not have that same idea.
I'm sure you were already familiar with this topic. But it doesn't hurt to become familiar with it again since it is so important in having effective communication. And, hopefully you can see that there actually could be a reason to use it!
So the reason I say double negatives is the most important topic I will cover is because hearing the negative always causes confusion. There is always a subsequent discussion about what was actually meant and everyone loses time. No one wants to have to go back and read something again and again just to try and figure out what you're trying to say. So basically, know when you're using your double negatives.
My suggestion would is just to try and avoid double negatives whenever possible. There isn't much technical grammar with this topic. Just think about what you are intending to say and then make sure your sentence actually reflects that. If I'm describing an unlucky man I should not say, "he never won nothing," as I really wanted to say "he never won anything."
BUT! There are reasons to use a double negative, but they are very circumstantial and most effective when used sparingly. The first is when trying to create a character. If you are trying to create a character who is uneducated or is but must act in accordance to a specific cultural norm (Calpurnia changing her dialect in To Kill a Mockingbird comes to mind), then double negatives can be a tool that help convey that idea. But since we are all students, we wouldn't go spewing off double negatives that contradict what we want to say all the time. The second reason to use a double negative is when the double negative actually means what you want it to and it adds subtle impact. I cannot stress the second part enough. Just because you can use a double negative to create a grammatically correct sentence does not mean you should. An example of this type of double negative is "she was not unaware of the stares, but she strode on without hesitation." Using "she was aware" would have changed the nuance of the phrasing, and in my opinion, would have altered the characterization of the female and created a more "in your face" situation that lacks subtlety.
Let's do it. Highlight the box to see the answer:
Because of the intense fog, we couldn't see ________. (anything, nothing)
Anything; based on the context, I'm trying to say that our vision is hindered. Anything conveys this as using nothing would create a double negative and imply we could see something.
John, being 500 miles from her, felt like there was ________ he could do to help (nothing, anything).
Nothing; I am trying to imply the uselessness John is feeling, and nothing works here because it does not create a double negative and thus is the appropriate word. "Anything" would have meant that John was able to do a lot to help, but we know it's wrong because of the distance.
He ________ the homeless boys on the street. (couldn't not help, had to help)
Either answer is correct. The first instance appropriate uses a double negative to convey the same idea as the second. However, this is a situation where the double negative could be more powerful since it has greater nuance. It implies there is an irresistible force for our character to be good that he cannot ignore, whereas the second one might not have that same idea.
I'm sure you were already familiar with this topic. But it doesn't hurt to become familiar with it again since it is so important in having effective communication. And, hopefully you can see that there actually could be a reason to use it!
I am never not impressed by your grammatical knowledge and this blog post is no exception. You were very much right to point out that the double negative does have the occasional use, even when one is trying to portray an educated speaker (rather than one who would not know better).
ReplyDeleteI hated reading this. I was personally offended by your typos. I hope your next blog is better.
Delete