Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > alt.usage.english > #1144929

Re: Double negation

Show all headers | View raw

On 30/05/2026 10:57 p.m., Stefan Ram wrote:
>    The meaning of "double negation" as in "We don't need no education"
>    often is negation. But recently I read an example where it seems to
>    be actually meant to be double negation in the logical sense:
> 
>    Seemingly from a transcript:
> 
> |. . . The more important thing is what it doesn't say.
> |It doesn't say you're not allowed to automate the kill chain.
> |So you're allowed to do that? You are not not allowed to do that.
> 
>    .

The two "not"s in your second example are in different clauses, so it is 
not an case of the "double negation" famously disapproved of by school 
grammar.

Back to alt.usage.english | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Double negation ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) - 2026-05-30 10:57 +0000
  Re: Double negation "HenHanna" <HenHanna@Posting.from.CsiPh> - 2026-05-30 19:27 +0000
    Re: Double negation The True Melissa <thetruemelissa@gmail.com> - 2026-05-30 16:41 -0400
      Re: Double negation Peter Moylan <peter@pmoylan.org> - 2026-05-31 11:49 +1000
        Re: Double negation Steve Hayes <hayesstw@telkomsa.net> - 2026-05-31 05:21 +0200
      Re: Double negation Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2026-05-31 11:31 +0300
    Re: Double negation  -- (Conrad's  Triple negative) "HenHanna" <HenHanna@Posting.from.CsiPh> - 2026-05-31 00:13 +0000
  Re: Double negation Ross Clark <benlizro@ihug.co.nz> - 2026-05-31 09:00 +1200

csiph-web