Double negative

2010-06-25 8:21 am
I wrote the following sentence in one of my answers:






I don't
think "the following time" is a natural expression, if not incorrect.

I received a response on my writing.

意見者: Johnny ( 小學級 5 級 )
發表時間: 2010-06-21 16:50:36
[ 檢舉 ]
What is NOT INCORRECT?


Double negative huh, Garlic woof woof?


I have three questions.

1. Can double negative be avoided in my sentence?

2. Is double negative bad English?

I found a very good answer in Yahoo Knowledge+ on this topic. The writer suggested that "Not only is (double negative) absolutely acceptable, it is also widely used."
http://hk.knowledge.yahoo.com/question/question?qid=7007062601139

3. Is Johnny's bashing valid?

回答 (6)

2010-06-25 7:07 pm
✔ 最佳答案
(1) yes, I think you could have avoided using "double negative", but it wouldn't have made it a better sentence.
eg. You could have said: I don't think "the following time" is a natural expression; it may even be wrong.

(2) Double negative is not necessarily bad English. When used appropriately, it quite often reflects a more skilful writing style.
eg. this double negative is commonly used: "good work will not go unnoticed !"
(3) It seems Johnny has over-reacted. I really don't see anything wrong with saying " if not incorrect".
I think this reaction on the use of "double negative" may have been owing to a mistaken idendity. There is a kind of "double negative" which is truly bad English. For example:
(1) you don't know nothing.
(2) I have never taken no drugs (a famous quote from the infamous Canadian sprinter Ben Johnson)
(3) I don't criticise nobody
(4) Even triple negative: e.g. I don't owe nobody nothing.

2010-06-29 13:17:36 補充:
Mine is likely not the best answer, but for some reason 006 has chosen to copy it word by word (missing a few though).
參考: myself
2010-06-27 4:48 am
I smacked Ken, I smacked Baggio, I smacked David, I smacked 小q槍仔, I smacked experts and doctors who voted for bad answers, I smacked poor answers for what they deserved. Do I ever do so with another ID?

2010-06-26 20:52:03 補充:
http://hk.knowledge.yahoo.com/question/question?qid=7009040900884
答題者002胡言亂語。
答題者003所知有限,睇唔到原句錯在何處。
答題者001比002同001好一點,但理解錯原句重點。

I said an answer was bad when it was bad. Did I do it with another ID?

2010-06-26 20:53:19 補充:
Who owned these IDs?
garlic20102 ( 小學級 5 級 ) 2009-04-10 14:44:33 負面 蒜頭大哥,你仲亂吠﹖唉!!!!!
garlic2010s_papa ( 小學級 5 級 ) 2009-04-10 14:41:13 負面 STOP ATTACKING PEOPLE 蒜頭仔
garlic2010s_mama ( 小學級 5 級 ) 2009-04-10 14:38:50 負面 garlic YOU ALWAYS BULLY PEOPLE LA

2010-06-26 20:54:02 補充:
jklo.isabigjoke ( 小學級 5 級 ) 2009-04-10 14:35:48 負面 garlic2010=layeeng=jklo911= more fake IDs You are a big cyber bully yourself!
killgarlictoday ( 小學級 5 級 ) 2009-04-10 14:30:31 負面 Small garlic, people only bully dogs.Good for you!

2010-06-26 20:54:15 補充:
asdfeereas ( 小學級 5 級 ) 2009-04-10 14:28:07 負面 garlic2010 ( 博士級 5 級) is a cyber bully with so many IDs.

2010-06-26 20:58:06 補充:
Did i post these questions for fun?
http://hk.knowledge.yahoo.com/question/question?qid=7009041300751
雅虎知識 - 嚴肅聲明

http://hk.knowledge.yahoo.com/question/question?qid=7009041700210
投假票事件

2010-06-26 20:58:32 補充:
一條本來很有意思的問題,因為某些人要打壓另一答案,用大量假户投「無滿意解答」,令問題被系統移除,十分可惜。這種卑劣行為,如同撒播假知識,不但對發問者不尊重和不公平,更是對雅虎知識的極大侮辱。容讓這種行為在雅虎知識橫行,只會讓雅虎知識淪為一大笑話。造假票這等無恥行徑應到受譴責。

2010-06-26 21:05:47 補充:
Ask Baggio his motive on inviting her Taiwan friends to vote for this answer:
http://hk.knowledge.yahoo.com/question/question?qid=7009042101369

Read Baggio's confession on vote fixing.
http://hk.knowledge.yahoo.com/question/article?qid=6909051300139

2010-06-26 21:20:07 補充:
Shame on you too, whatiswhat. Follow me if you like but your derogatory remarks are leading you nowhere. Act your age. Be a man.

2010-06-26 21:20:31 補充:
Shame on you Baggio is history and I am moving on. If you want to bring it up again, I can give you a detailed account so you can indulge yourself in it for the rest of your life.
2010-06-26 3:05 am
(1) yes, I think you could have avoided using "double negative", but it wouldn't have made it a better sente

(2) Double negative is not necessarily bad English. When used appropriately, it quite often reflects a more skilful writing sty



(3) It seems Johnny has over-reacted. I really don't see anything wrong with saying " if not incorrect".



I think this reaction on the use of "double negative" may have been owing to a mistaken idendity. There is a kind of "double negative" which is truly bad English. For example:
(1) you don't know nothing.
(2) I have never taken no drugs (a famous quote from the infamous Canadian sprinter Ben Johnson)
(3) I don't criticise nobody
(4) Even triple negative: e.g. I don't owe nobody nothing.
希望帮助你
2010-06-26 1:44 am
if not + 否定形容詞,並非屬於差的英文,就連Hillary Clinton也曾說過:

WASHINGTON — Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton says it is “implausible, if not impossible” that North Korea will return to international talks on ending its nuclear ambitions.



其實這句可以這樣說,拙筆如下:

原句:I don't think "the following time" is a natural expression, if not incorrect

改寫:I think "the following time " is unnatural, not to say incorrect.

或者說:I think "the following time" is unnatural, even if it is correct.

希望幫到你!
2010-06-25 4:30 pm
John is a bit fault-finding, but the sentence can be rephrased in a simpler way:

I think 'the following time' is an unnatural expression, if not incorrect.

'if not incorrect' means 即使唔算錯.

Communication is an art more than rules. The ultimate purpose is to put the message across. Even though both grammar and sentence structure are 100% correct, the sentence can be 'functionally' wrong if it cannot serve the purpose of communication or create ambiguity/misunderstanding. The writer needs to take the recipient's ability into consideration. That makes the difference between simple English and legal document writing.

Technically speaking, the original sentence is not wrong. Double negative is a normal expression in English.

2010-06-26 09:10:06 補充:
看了其他答案, 原來有人誤解了 double negative 的功用, 以為只是另一種表達方式. 其實 if correct 不等如 if not incorrect, 前者是毫無疑問的正確, 後者是雖不錯亦不遠矣.

2010-06-26 09:11:28 補充:
雖不算錯亦不遠矣
2010-06-25 10:00 am
1. I think "the following time" is not a natural expression, if not incorrect.
2. May not be
3. No


收錄日期: 2021-04-11 17:44:14
原文連結 [永久失效]:
https://hk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100625000051KK00059

檢視 Wayback Machine 備份