Not so strange actually. Sure, seen superficially, it seems that double negatives negate each other but that doesn’t fit the empirical data. Many languages do this in their standard variety and English does it in many local, social and historical varieties. I think Shakespeare did it too.
Spanish for example has “sin nada”, literally “without nothing” but meaning “with nothing”/ “without anything”.
So the linguistic consensus is that the negative is expressed more than once. Depending on the language this might be optional or not. Slavic languages have a negative prefix “ne-” on verbs and this is obligatory if a negative word (like never, nobody,…) is used in the sentence.
In English a negative expressed more than once is commonly called a double-negative and also thought to mean the opposite of what the sentence says. It trips me up to read awkward sentences like that, I find it’s sort of like a road bump where you don’t expect one. But I do realize that it often appears normally in other languages that way.
All of us have biases, but it’s wrong to excuse bad grammar as being some kind of “normal.” If people can’t handle constructive criticism, they shouldn’t be submitting stuff to online sites to start with.
Tbh prescriptivism has its place in official over regional communication and language learning. We wouldn’t understand each other if we were writing each in their local dialect and when you start learning a language, you don’t want to first need an overview of the dialect continuum.
That said, in unofficial writing it doesn’t matter as long as you write intelligible and advanced language learners should learn about varieties. I for example was tought British English at the start and in the 4th year, we learned about American English and the differences to British English.
Not so strange actually. Sure, seen superficially, it seems that double negatives negate each other but that doesn’t fit the empirical data. Many languages do this in their standard variety and English does it in many local, social and historical varieties. I think Shakespeare did it too.
Spanish for example has “sin nada”, literally “without nothing” but meaning “with nothing”/ “without anything”.
So the linguistic consensus is that the negative is expressed more than once. Depending on the language this might be optional or not. Slavic languages have a negative prefix “ne-” on verbs and this is obligatory if a negative word (like never, nobody,…) is used in the sentence.
In English a negative expressed more than once is commonly called a double-negative and also thought to mean the opposite of what the sentence says. It trips me up to read awkward sentences like that, I find it’s sort of like a road bump where you don’t expect one. But I do realize that it often appears normally in other languages that way.
If you are ready to reflext on your biases, you should take the 4min and watch this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3jxC3zqkEE
All of us have biases, but it’s wrong to excuse bad grammar as being some kind of “normal.” If people can’t handle constructive criticism, they shouldn’t be submitting stuff to online sites to start with.
Prescriptivism in liguistics is for ignorant people.
Ignorance of linguistics is for worthless scum. And I don’t give a flying FUCK (read that again) about anyone elses’ opinion.
Prescriptivism is ignorance. No linguist would take your side in that argument.
Tbh prescriptivism has its place in official over regional communication and language learning. We wouldn’t understand each other if we were writing each in their local dialect and when you start learning a language, you don’t want to first need an overview of the dialect continuum.
That said, in unofficial writing it doesn’t matter as long as you write intelligible and advanced language learners should learn about varieties. I for example was tought British English at the start and in the 4th year, we learned about American English and the differences to British English.
That’s not about linguistics though.
You don’t know shit about linguistics.
https://www.shakespeareswords.com/Public/LanguageCompanion/ThemesAndTopics.aspx?TopicId=25
Edit: oh I see… You don’t know shit about a lot of things… https://kbin.social/m/technology@lemmy.world/t/754132/-/comment/4516568
Tee hee. I really don’t give a fuck what you think either way.
Stop stealing oxygen, coffin dodger
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://www.piped.video/watch?v=o3jxC3zqkEE
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I’m open-source; check me out at GitHub.