Double Negative??? -- Sorry George

[Citruscide]

This is George's post after he closed Fro's thread... which I don't care about but double negatives (as in the last sentence) are my pet peeve.

C

Froider,

Please accept my apologies if we deactivated your Platinum account prematurely. I put you back into effect and I will leave it in effect until we launch the new features for Platinum members! See this thread:
http://boards.elitefitness.com/foru...threadid=116395

Of course the real reason to become Platinum is to keep us online. We are working hard to improve our operations so we are no longer operating at a loss and so we can stay online for the next seven years and beyond. And the support of members like you will make this possible.

I am locking this thread -- we cannot afford not to. I hope you understand.

 

[BaBa-BooeY]

Exactly what i was thinking

 

[Warik]

I am locking this thread -- we cannot afford not to.

Actually, this isn't a case of double negation. Think of the various ways to arrange the sentence:

1) we cannot afford not to
2) we cannot afford to
3) we can afford not to
4) we can afford to

That's it. None of combinations 2-4 mean the same thing as expression 1. Just because a sentence contains the word "not" twice does not make it a double negation. Ask Microsoft Word for confirmation. =)

However, I must express my deepest disapproval with George's use of a preposition to conclude his sentence. The shame.

(haha, I corrected you beech... imitate that! )

-Warik

 

[Lord_Suston]

Warik it is scary that you know the English language that well. Or maybe the point that you called someone on it....lol

 

[Citruscide]

Re: Re: Double Negative??? -- Sorry George

Actually, this isn't a case of double negation. Think of the various ways to arrange the sentence:

1) we cannot afford not to
2) we cannot afford to
3) we can afford not to
4) we can afford to

That's it. None of combinations 2-4 mean the same thing as expression 1. Just because a sentence contains the word "not" twice does not make it a double negation. Ask Microsoft Word for confirmation. =)

However, I must express my deepest disapproval with George's use of a preposition to conclude his sentence. The shame.

(haha, I corrected you beech... imitate that! )

-Warik

Hmm... we can not afford not to... which means we can afford to. It is kind of like saying "What you are failing to forget"... which actually means "What you are remembering"

Sure, 2-4 don't mean the same thing... but you can say "We cannot afford to leave this post up... simple solution to the double negative which would be a positive...

C

 

[TheProject]

Y'know, I think Warik's right.

we cannot afford not to lock this post, is basically what George is saying.

There may be a cleaner way to do it, but I believe it's grammatically correct.

 

[Code]

It's not a double negative.

A double negative is a self-contradictory statement, which this is not. It is clear that the use of "we can not afford not to" does not contradict itself nor the intent of the message.

I love the MLA!!

 

[ladymacbeth]

yeah, project and warik are right. But it is a dangling participle.

I'm project's yes-man btw...hehe...mad props.

K

 

[ladymacbeth]

yeah, project and warik are right. But it is a dangling participle.

I'm project's yes-man btw...hehe...mad props.

K

Disclaimer: I'm pretty sure it's a dangling participle, so if I'm wrong don't be an assmuncher about it.

Please?

 

[Lord_Suston]

damn i could've use all you guys in high school english, just go to the chat board and type down my paper and have people critique it.... lol

 

[Warik]

Re: Re: Re: Double Negative??? -- Sorry George

Hmm... we can not afford not to... which means we can afford to.

Actually not. The two phrases, though similar, mean completely distinct things. Let's use a broken pipe in your toilet that makes the bathroom flood with fecal water after every flush.

Citruscide runs to his mommy immediately.

"Mommy, we need to install a new pipe for the bathroom. We can't afford not to."

Does this mean the same as: "Mommy, we need to install a new pipe for the bathroom. We can afford to."

#2 implies that the pipe must be put in the bathroom because you can afford it. #1 implies that it must be put in because you can't afford NOT to put it in. #1 gives a reason that suggests urgency or a lack of alternatives, #2 just says "we can, so let's."

The concern here is finding logically equivalent sentences. If "we can afford to" is logically equivalent to, and as important as, "we can't afford not to," then telling you that you have to sell me your car for cheap because you can afford to (that is, you can afford to sell me your car for cheap because you have enough money to get a new one) is as valid a reason to sell me your car for cheap as "you have to sell me your car for cheap because you can't keep up with the payments. You CAN'T afford NOT to sell your car."

It is kind of like saying "What you are failing to forget"... which actually means "What you are remembering"

These two, on the other hand, are logically equivalent.

Remembering something means retaining it in your mind.
Forgetting something means once retaining something in your mind, and then no longer retaining it.

Failure to forget something means the opposite of forgetting it, which is just remembering it. Remembering it is the positive form, while "failing to forgetting" it is the negative form. That's double negation - having two ways of expressing something and choosing the one with two negatives.

Now the most important question:

What's more pathetic? The fact that I accurately conjured all of this up as I went without any reference material, or the fact that I took the time to do so at 12:40 AM knowing that I have to wake up tomorrow (today!) at 8:00 AM for a midterm for which I have not studied.

muhaha.

-Warik

 

[Warik]

A double negative is a self-contradictory statement

Well... I'm not sure that's entirely accurate. Is that what your MLA reference said? I had a copy of this shit called "Writer's Inc" from 10th grade English that I haven't used in years. Maybe it says something. Self-contradictory doesn't really sit well with me, because if both forms of the sentence mean the same thing, then they must both be self contradictory.

Example.

I am not not heterosexual.

I am heterosexual.

They mean the same thing, but the first one is a double negation. If the first one is self-contradictory, and the second one means the same as the first, then the second must also be self-contradictory, which would make it a double negation, which it's not.

I think the best way to say it would be something like: "a double negation is the usage of a negative representation of an expression when an equivalent positive representation exists" or some shit like that.

Damn... that last sentence sounded like something out of my Logic for Computer Science book - a ton of bullshit for which there is no practical use other than to scrutinize the harmless errors of others.

BTW George: I'm still pissed about that preposition. Post an apology and make it a sticky.

-Warik

 

[Warik]

damn i could've use all you guys in high school english, just go to the chat board and type down my paper and have people critique it.... lol

No way man... I'm a real asshole when I critique papers. I talked major shit about my friend's philosophy paper the other day because he had one of those paragraph-long sentences that were filled with bullshit that said absolutely nothing in an attempt to make him look smart. I flat out told him that this sentence and many of the others were bullshit that took away from the quality of his paper. He didn't care. Turned it in and only got a 90... haha sucker.

-Warik

 

[Citruscide]

Either way... double negative or not... it shouldn't have been said like it was... bottom line.

C

 

[TheProject]

ah, c'mon Citruscide, just concede defeat!



j/k, btw....

 

[Citruscide]

ah, c'mon Citruscide, just concede defeat!



j/k, btw....

Well, I may agree it isn't a double negitive... although I'm not sure this is true... it just may be an acceptable one. I hold firm that there is a better way to say it... the sentence was awkward to say the least.
C

 

[Warik]

Either way... double negative or not...

It's not.

it shouldn't have been said like it was...

How should it have been said?

bottom line

I demand your best "'CAUSE STONE COLD SAID SO!" impression by morning.

good night.. my grammatically challenged mimic.

-Warik

 

[HighIntensity]

He-man is gay

 

[Citruscide]

He-man cannot afford to not be gay.

He-man isn't the only one who cannot be a flaming homosexual.

C

 

[smallmovesal]

 

[OMEGA]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Double Negative??? -- Sorry George

Actually not. The two phrases, though similar, mean completely distinct things. Let's use a broken pipe in your toilet that makes the bathroom flood with fecal water after every flush.

Citruscide runs to his mommy immediately.

"Mommy, we need to install a new pipe for the bathroom. We can't afford not to."

Does this mean the same as: "Mommy, we need to install a new pipe for the bathroom. We can afford to."

#2 implies that the pipe must be put in the bathroom because you can afford it. #1 implies that it must be put in because you can't afford NOT to put it in. #1 gives a reason that suggests urgency or a lack of alternatives, #2 just says "we can, so let's."

The concern here is finding logically equivalent sentences. If "we can afford to" is logically equivalent to, and as important as, "we can't afford not to," then telling you that you have to sell me your car for cheap because you can afford to (that is, you can afford to sell me your car for cheap because you have enough money to get a new one) is as valid a reason to sell me your car for cheap as "you have to sell me your car for cheap because you can't keep up with the payments. You CAN'T afford NOT to sell your car."



These two, on the other hand, are logically equivalent.

Remembering something means retaining it in your mind.
Forgetting something means once retaining something in your mind, and then no longer retaining it.

Failure to forget something means the opposite of forgetting it, which is just remembering it. Remembering it is the positive form, while "failing to forgetting" it is the negative form. That's double negation - having two ways of expressing something and choosing the one with two negatives.

Now the most important question:

What's more pathetic? The fact that I accurately conjured all of this up as I went without any reference material, or the fact that I took the time to do so at 12:40 AM knowing that I have to wake up tomorrow (today!) at 8:00 AM for a midterm for which I have not studied.




muhaha.

-Warik

WARIK YOU BELONG IN THE 25 TH CENTURY.......AND YOUR TOO SMART FOR YOU OWN GOOD

 

[VicTusDeuS]

I fail to understand how locking a thread or leaving one open will affect th affordability of the site..Can someone fill me in..

 

[Rockafella Skank]

No matter how this was written, the structure was clumsy and THAT was its trouble.

While the following -- "We can't afford to not lock this thread" -- does nothing to make it less clumsy, to mine ears and eyes it makes it clearer.

Locking the thread, by the way, affects the affordability of the site because dead threads use considerably less bandwidth ... and bandwidth costs money.

 

[VicTusDeuS]

No matter how this was written, the structure was clumsy and THAT was its trouble.

While the following -- "We can't afford to not lock this thread" -- does nothing to make it less clumsy, to mine ears and eyes it makes it clearer.

Locking the thread, by the way, affects the affordability of the site because dead threads use considerably less bandwidth ... and bandwidth costs money.

That is true..We need to conserve space so there's room for more ass eating threads..HAHA

 

[Rockafella Skank]

That is true..We need to conserve space so there's room for more ass eating threads..HAHA

Of course! Our priorities are well in order.

 

[Warik]

haha

I got negative karma for giving everyone a grammar lesson. Someone must be mad. Was it youuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu Citruscide? Shame on you.

-Warik

 

[manny78]

 

[George Spellwin]

Re: Re: Double Negative??? -- Sorry George

1) we cannot afford not to

However, I must express my deepest disapproval with George's use of a preposition to conclude his sentence. The shame.


-Warik

Ok, how's this, "we cannot afford not to asshole!"

Just kidding, just kidding,

 

[saint808]

Re: Re: Re: Double Negative??? -- Sorry George

Ok, how's this, "we cannot afford not to asshole!"

Just kidding, just kidding,

much better.

 

[Warik]

Re: Re: Re: Double Negative??? -- Sorry George

Ok, how's this, "we cannot afford not to asshole!"

Just kidding, just kidding,

There should be a comma between "to" and "asshole," asshole.

=)

-Warik