Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!ames!mailrus!uflorida!haven!uvaarpa!mcnc!ecsvax!rsp@pbhyf.PacBell.COM
From: rsp@pbhyf.PacBell.COM (Steve Price)
Newsgroups: comp.society.women
Subject: Re: Logic and Language
Message-ID: <5715@ecsvax.uncecs.edu>
Date: 31 Oct 88 21:19:05 GMT
References: <5688@ecsvax.uncecs.edu>
Sender: skyler@ecsvax.uncecs.edu
Organization: Pacific * Bell, San Ramon, CA
Lines: 29
Approved: skyler@ecsvax.uncecs.edu (Moderator -- Trish Roberts)
Comments-to: comp-women-request@cs.purdue.edu
Submissions-to: comp-women@cs.purdue.edu


In article <5688@ecsvax.uncecs.edu> skyler@ecsvax.uncecs.edu writes:
>In other words, language is not inherently logical, but the
>Western attitude toward language has been that it would be nice if
>it were.
>
Trish's comment reminds me of some linquistic history I had in graduate
school, where I was amused to learn how (male, English) self-appointed linquists
and grammarians of the "Enlightment" were embarrassed at the lack of 
mathematical rigour in English.  So they "laid down the law" with such
little gems as "Two negatives make a positive".  Therefore, as you've
all been taught, "I ain't got no money" means "I have money".

The fact that Chaucer, Shakespeare, Marlowe, et al employed double 
negatives was no proper justification to these guardians of logic in
language.  If 1,000 years of usage and the finest writers of English established
double negatives, why usage and writers were all wrong.

The fact is that in English double, triple, and higher orders of negatives
are used for emphasis.  It has always been so and continues to be so.
English is not Algebra -- for which both mathematicans and linquists can be
grateful.

By the way, since "ain't" ain't a word, "I ain't got no money" parses to
"I got no money" and the double negative disappears.  You can have your logic
and eat it too!

Steve Price
pacbell!pbody!rsp
(415_823-1951