Iskander Posted 17 years ago
Grammar
Double negation
Hello everyone,
I'm well aware double negation is considered ungrammatical, but it has been a few times that I've come across a peculiar kind of construction where a rhetoric question or a questionable statement is followed by a denial, which is initiated with a negative condition and contains a negated verb as well. For instance, "not right now it doesn't [do something aforementioned]", or "not until then they wouldn't", or anything of that shape. Could anybody please tell me if this kind of sentences highlighted make sense to a native speaker, and if they do, exactly how grammatical they are in a formal context. Any input will be hugely appreciated.
Thank you very much in advance!
I'm well aware double negation is considered ungrammatical, but it has been a few times that I've come across a peculiar kind of construction where a rhetoric question or a questionable statement is followed by a denial, which is initiated with a negative condition and contains a negated verb as well. For instance, "not right now it doesn't [do something aforementioned]", or "not until then they wouldn't", or anything of that shape. Could anybody please tell me if this kind of sentences highlighted make sense to a native speaker, and if they do, exactly how grammatical they are in a formal context. Any input will be hugely appreciated.
Thank you very much in advance!
Top answer
Hi Iskander, and welcome to English Forums. There is nothing ungrammatical about a double negative, per se. A double negative is not grammatical when two negatives are used in a row to mean something negative.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
0
Hi Iskander, and welcome to English Forums.
There is nothing ungrammatical about a double negative, per se.
A double negative is not grammatical when two negatives are used in a row to mean something negative.
I didn't do nothing, logically, means "I did something" but the intended meaning is "I did nothing" or "I didn't do anything." That sort of double negative is not
There is nothing ungrammatical about a double negative, per se.
A double negative is not grammatical when two negatives are used in a row to mean something negative.
I didn't do nothing, logically, means "I did something" but the intended meaning is "I did nothing" or "I didn't do anything." That sort of double negative is not
00
Thank you Grammar Geek.
Thus, since the negatives in my examples aren't going in a row, they are both used for the sake of ease of comprehension, one referring to the auxiliary verb and the other referring to the adverb, am I getting it right? I just had to wonder, because putting the adverbial clause to the end of either sentence makes for a usual sentence with a sole negation in it, so
Thus, since the negatives in my examples aren't going in a row, they are both used for the sake of ease of comprehension, one referring to the auxiliary verb and the other referring to the adverb, am I getting it right? I just had to wonder, because putting the adverbial clause to the end of either sentence makes for a usual sentence with a sole negation in it, so
0