Yeah, you're kind of a jerk. Correcting grammar in writing is one thing, in speech it's much more obnoxious and jerk-ish to constantly correct people
But they ARE logically different. If I "know nothing" then nothing is what I know. If I "don't know nothing" then nothing is what I don't know...manic_depressive13 said:I correct my mother's grammar and pronunciation because she asks me to. If your mother is happy with the way she speaks and she is capable of conveying her meaning then yes, it is arrogant and innapropriate to keep correcting her.
"I don't know anything" isn't more correct or logical than "I don't know nothing". Someone just decided one day that people shouldn't use double negatives in English. The first thing they hammer home in university linguistics is that you're not better than anyone for obsessively adhering to the rules of standard grammar. You're just limiting yourself and being a classist tool.
As a man who dared to read books, my family scorns me often for actually knowing them long and fancy wordings. I'm often accused of doing it solely to inflate my own sense of self-worth, when in reality I do it so I don't sound like yet another shit-thick Brummie.Froggy Slayer said:My mum always uses incorrect words and grammar when she is talking. I always strive to correct her, but a few days ago, she got really pissed off when I corrected her on a double negative, saying that 'I just do it to feel big' and that 'I'm the one who comes out of the situation looking stupid'. Have I been a jerk all along? Or is she over-reacting?
Not really. Shitloads of expressions in English are idiomatic. When someone says "I don't know nothing" everyone knows exactly what they mean. It is in no way less adequate for conveying meaning than "I don't know anything". In fact in most languages it is correct to say "I don't know nothing". If you tried to say "I don't know anything" in Greek, using the direct tranlation for "anything," that would be wrong. This is an arbitrary convention. Both express the same meaning. This doesn't make English a more logical language than Greek. In fact, I can't think of a less logical language than English.Dimitriov said:But they ARE logically different. If I "know nothing" then nothing is what I know. If I "don't know nothing" then nothing is what I don't know...
Why do I have to point this out? they are complete fucking opposites.
That's great... except that in the English that I and many others grew up speaking it doesn't mean that at all. All that it conveys to me is that the speaker doesn't understand that they just used a negative adverb with a negative noun.manic_depressive13 said:Not really. Shitloads of expressions in English are idiomatic. When someone says "I don't know nothing" everyone knows exactly what they mean. It is in no way less adequate for conveying meaning than "I don't know anything". In fact in most languages it is correct to say "I don't know nothing". If you tried to say "I don't know anything" in Greek, using the direct tranlation for "anything," that would be wrong. This is an arbitrary convention. Both express the same meaning. This doesn't make English a more logical language than Greek. In fact, I can't think of a less logical language than English.Dimitriov said:But they ARE logically different. If I "know nothing" then nothing is what I know. If I "don't know nothing" then nothing is what I don't know...
Why do I have to point this out? they are complete fucking opposites.
Uhuh. Leaving aside the fact that no one actually talks like that, is the concept of context really so difficult to grasp? In this case inflection and the fact that it is a direct response to the question "Do you know nothing?" would lend it a different meaning. I could come up with a thousand examples in which perfectly correct usage of English might lead to ambiguities. This is the nature of language.Dimitriov said:That's great... except that in the English that I and many others grew up speaking it doesn't mean that at all. All that it conveys to me is that the speaker doesn't understand that they just used a negative adverb with a negative noun.
speaker 1: "Do you know nothing?"
speaker 2: "No! I don't know nothing, I just didn't understand the question!"
See? that's a proper and logical usage of the double negative in English... which becomes impossible if the word 'not' just suddenly stops having any meaning sometimes, or if the word 'nothing' actually means 'anything.'
hail grammar nazi! ^^Froggy Slayer said:My mum always uses incorrect words and grammar when she is talking. I always strive to correct her, but a few days ago, she got really pissed off when I corrected her on a double negative, saying that 'I just do it to feel big' and that 'I'm the one who comes out of the situation looking stupid'. Have I been a jerk all along? Or is she over-reacting?
I agree with you if we're talking about one of the standard versions of English, but the OP doesn't specify which version of English his mother is speaking - and there are plenty of English dialects where double negatives are standard.Dimitriov said:That's great... except that in the English that I and many others grew up speaking it doesn't mean that at all. All that it conveys to me is that the speaker doesn't understand that they just used a negative adverb with a negative noun.