English double negatives

[StayTuned]

I ain't got no money

I don’t mean to put no pressure on you


etc


How does this make sense? I AIN'T got NO money. So you DO have money. DON'T mean to put NO pressure on you. So you ARE trying to put pressure on someone.

Why does it mean the opposite of what it should actually mean?

[Deleted]

That is just really shitty English spoken by people that were poorly educated.

"I could care less" is a classic example.

[Badpaladin]

That is just really shitty English spoken by people that were poorly educated.

Doesn't mean they're poorly educated. It's a cultural quirk. There's people in academic settings who still use the term "irregardless" when they mean "regardless" (yes, I know the dictionary recognizes both to mean the same thing).

[StayTuned]

That is just really shitty English spoken by people that were poorly educated.

"I could care less" is a classic example.

So it is, in fact, wrong to say it like this?

What about American?

[Deleted]

Doesn't mean they're poorly educated. It's a cultural quirk. There's people in academic settings who still use the term "irregardless" when they mean "regardless" (yes, I know the dictionary recognizes both to mean the same thing).

It is an educational problem, they should have been taught the correct way.

[Themius]

Doesn't mean they're poorly educated. It's a cultural quirk. There's people in academic settings who still use the term "irregardless" when they mean "regardless" (yes, I know the dictionary recognizes both to mean the same thing).

I don't get the hubbub about irregardless and regardless when we have words like void and devoid devoid means the same as void though the de before that should end or take away the void.

[Xylr]

omg. stop these threads..

your language is bad because it doesn't sound like english. sounds like you making sounds.

now, stop.

[StayTuned]

omg. stop these threads..

your language is bad because it doesn't sound like english. sounds like you making sounds.

now, stop.

Wtf did I just read? What's that supposed to mean?

[Deleted]

So it is, in fact, wrong to say it like this?

What about American?

It is very wrong, people say "could care less" to actually mean "I don't give a shit", in actual fact they are saying they do care some. "Couldn't care less" is the correct phrase to use.

[Rukentuts]

Wtf did I just read? What's that supposed to mean?

I think it was a bash on the German language.

[Deleted]

I don't get the hubbub about irregardless and regardless when we have words like void and devoid devoid means the same as void though the de before that should end or take away the void.

Inflammable means the same as flammable is another good example.

[Badpaladin]

It is an educational problem, they should have been taught the correct way.

Would that make me uneducated then? I've been an English tutor in the past, but I use slag like what the OP mentioned all the time.

I don't get the hubbub about irregardless and regardless when we have words like void and devoid devoid means the same as void though the de before that should end or take away the void.

English is a funny language. It gets really interesting when you're playing around with language recognition and finding ways to move past the obscene amount of ambiguities in our spoken language.

[StayTuned]

It is very wrong, people say "could care less" to actually mean "I don't give a shit", in actual fact they are saying they do care some. "Couldn't care less" is the correct phrase to use.

Yeah. I know It's just something that caught my attention because so many people seem to use it. Especially in songs, and it just didn't make no sense to me (joking.... :P).

[Deleted]

One that I find particularly frustrating:

"I ain't done nothing!"

When they mean: "I haven't done anything!"

What they actually say: "I have done something!"

[Themius]

It is very wrong, people say "could care less" to actually mean "I don't give a shit", in actual fact they are saying they do care some. "Couldn't care less" is the correct phrase to use.

It seems part cultural. There are plenty of people who uses all these phrases without the double negatives, but double negatives at times to emphasis.

[Lord Pebbleton]

It's slang.

[Nasukkin]

Double negatives don't make sense in the English language and are usually grammatically incorrect for the context in which they appear. As others have mentioned, it is usually an indicator of being uneducated in the arts of English grammar.

Keep in mind, however, that double-negation is actually correct grammar in other languages, such as Spanish (No tengo no problemas. is literally "I don't have no problems" and actually means "I don't have any problems" when translated to English). Perhaps there is some spill-over/gray area between why people use double-negatives, especially if they are multi-lingual?

[StayTuned]

Would that make me uneducated then? I've been an English tutor in the past, but I use slag like what the OP mentioned all the time.



English is a funny language. It gets really interesting when you're playing around with language recognition and finding ways to move past the obscene amount of ambiguities in our spoken language.

Yes, but it literally makes no sense to say it this way. Double negatives always cancel each other out, making it a positive statement. If you have money, you can't have no money.

It's like math....

What does the dictionary says about that?

[Deleted]

Would that make me uneducated then? I've been an English tutor in the past, but I use slag like what the OP mentioned all the time.



English is a funny language. It gets really interesting when you're playing around with language recognition and finding ways to move past the obscene amount of ambiguities in our spoken language.

It makes you a poor tutor if that is what you are teaching your students, there is nothing wrong with slang as long as it makes sense, the example we are talking about does not.

[Eviscero]

...I AIN'T got NO money. So you do not have money...

I think you mean: So you DO have money. That would be the logical meaning. 'I don't have no money' means 'I have some money' (provided that you believe statements are either true or false, but never both nor neither).

But the statement "I AIN'T got NO money" would be stated with the intention of conveying that the person doesn't have any money and in fact does have no money. I think this is the reason why it is frowned upon and considered improper because the implied meaning is the opposite of the literal meaning. I agree with an earlier post that it is cultural and well-understood by most native English speakers, even if it is formally incorrect.