wall you cant wall jump off of!

2005-02-13 02:08:06 am

One shall stand, one shall ball.

It should be Xor nothing...

2005-02-14 12:01:01 pm

The usage of "ain't" often involves an additional negative, as do other constructions usually characterized as ignorant, illiterate, etc. It's probably not really accurate to call them double negatives, though, in the sense of being actual grammatical errors; I'd guess that the usages are correct within the rules of their own grammar, in which successive negatives don't, er, negate each other.

So-called standard English has constructs which don't logically make sense when examined closely, yet are accepted and used. (My last paper for my linguistics degree was on the "just because...doesn't mean" construct, which still bugs me even after analyzing it.) I'm thinking that the prejudice against "ain't never" and "don't got no" and the like is far more societal than it is logical. Lots of languages mark syntactic/grammatical elements twice. I'm wondering if French's two-part negative falls into this category; compare ne...pas / ne...rien / ne...jamais with ne...plus.

Izo

2005-02-14 12:40:53 pm

soaking through

Ne jetez rien á la mer!

Anyway, what's wrong with the "just because...doesn't mean" construct?

DominicanZero

2005-02-14 01:26:46 pm

直死の魔眼使い

You're making my brain explode.

KennyMan666

2005-02-14 02:04:35 pm

Viking

Precursor

That makes another notch on Nate's keyboard.

Edit: roffle @ what I got from DZ's randomizing avatars. This one fits, don't you think? ^__^

Alec

2005-02-14 03:09:20 pm

I'll post something on topic now. Got to that location today & I can officially say that both I & the topic creator are most likely wrong. Unless his game is weird. Because today I had no problems at all when I tried to WJ there. So it must be because I am quite good at not getting close enough to the wall. The vertical boost is still present though. Not sure it does much though...

Nida

2005-02-14 06:56:43 pm

Quote from Chanoire:

The usage of "ain't" often involves an additional negative, as do other constructions usually characterized as ignorant, illiterate, etc. It's probably not really accurate to call them double negatives, though, in the sense of being actual grammatical errors; I'd guess that the usages are correct within the rules of their own grammar, in which successive negatives don't, er, negate each other.

So-called standard English has constructs which don't logically make sense when examined closely, yet are accepted and used. (My last paper for my linguistics degree was on the "just because...doesn't mean" construct, which still bugs me even after analyzing it.) I'm thinking that the prejudice against "ain't never" and "don't got no" and the like is far more societal than it is logical.

Generally agreed, save that I did plenty of study on "ain't" in particular during my English undergrad work, and as such have the hubris to consider myself qualified in such matters. :P Did some dialect sampling around the Southeast and everything. The structure I used is the most common basal theme; I would consider deviations from that theme to be locally-isolated linguistic drift.

[quote="Chanoire"]The usage of "ain't" often involves an additional negative, as do other constructions usually characterized as ignorant, illiterate, etc.  It's probably not really accurate to call them double negatives, though, in the sense of being actual grammatical errors; I'd guess that the usages are correct within the rules of their own grammar, in which successive negatives don't, er, negate each other.

So-called standard English has constructs which don't logically make sense when examined closely, yet are accepted and used.  (My last paper for my linguistics degree was on the "just because...doesn't mean" construct, which still bugs me even after analyzing it.)  I'm thinking that the prejudice against "ain't never" and "don't got no" and the like is far more societal than it is logical.[/quote]

Generally agreed, save that I did plenty of study on "ain't" in particular during my English undergrad work, and as such have the hubris to consider myself qualified in such matters. :P Did some dialect sampling around the Southeast and everything. The structure I used is the most common basal theme; I would consider deviations from that theme to be locally-isolated linguistic drift.