Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!news.mathworks.com!news.kei.com!bloom-beacon.mit.edu!news.starnet.net!wupost!waikato!comp.vuw.ac.nz!actrix.gen.nz!kriha
From: kriha_p@actrix.gen.nz (Paul J. Kriha)
Subject: Re: Comparison of languages for CS1 and CS2
Message-ID: <40nkja$og_004@actrix.gen.nz>
Sender: news@actrix.gen.nz (News Administrator)
Organization: Kriha Consultants Pty Ltd
Date: Mon, 14 Aug 1995 13:54:50 GMT
References: <KANZE.95Aug9114322@slsvhdt.lts.sel.alcatel.de> <DD38LB.4CA@tigadmin.ml.com> <40eai1$lms@pipe4.nyc.pipeline.com><DD54E4.M0n@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> <40h99d$9ou@pipe3.nyc.pipeline.com>
X-Newsreader: News Xpress Version 1.0 Beta #3
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: kriha.actrix.gen.nz
Lines: 63

In article <40h99d$9ou@pipe3.nyc.pipeline.com>,
   mlomark@nyc.pipeline.com (Mark Odegard) wrote:
>In sci.lang colin@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Colin Matheson) said: 
> 
>[snip snip snip] 
> 
>>>>'He never doesn't eat nothing'.  
>  
>>>Which means, to me, that he always does eat something.  
>>>  
>>> [ ] 
>>> 
>>>Indeed, two negatives usually equal a positive. It's not   
>>>something learned in school. It's just intrinsic to my  
>>>native-speaker-ness.  
>> 
>>I'm sorry, but I think you're kidding yourself.  There are cases in 
>>English, with unusual stress and intonation, in which two negatives 
>>are intended to be positive - 
>> 
>>I *never* ate *nothing* 
> 
>Agreed, but only after a doubletake. The original example, 
>however, "He never doesn't eat nothing" is a triple  
>negation. "He never does not eat" = he does eat (logically), 
>but can be construed as "he never eats". But add that  
>third negative. Oh dear. The only logical analysis is that 
>he *does* eat something (always). But then, because it's so 
>odd, you just have to understand this is a ghastly piece of 
>English and just assume it's all negative. "He never eats 
>anything at all".  
> 
>>Whereas with neutral stress and intonation, "I never ate nothing" 
>>clearly means that nothing was eaten.  Analysing the sentences means 
>>imposing extra-linguistic processing, based (as I said before) on a 
>>mistaken application of logic to natural language.  English looks as 
>>if it always had, and probably always will make use of, mulitiple 
>>negation as a means of emphasis. 
>> 
>>There's a song (from "Hair"?) that goes "Ain't got no ... (and so 
>>on)", and I'd be very surprised if anyone interprets that naturally as 
>>a positive. 
> 
>So would I. "I ain't got no" while considered substandard, 
>is nonetheless idiomatic.  
> 

Hasn't this horse been flocked to death on this group
several times already?   :-)

The IE languages with the notable exception of English
use multiple negations to stress the negative.

No double takes or deep thinking is required. As soon
as the sentence contains a negative it's negative.
More negations just make the negative stronger.

The English "Boolean logic" is relatively recent invention
(cca 200 yrs) and the colloquial use is still fighting 
that silly rule.

Paul JK

