5

I have heard many (rather most) people, especially in the USA, saying:

I don't know nothing about it.

Is that correct? I always get a weird feeling hearing this and feel the correct one would be saying:

I don't know anything about it.

Improve this question
1
  • This construction calls to mind Prissy's line from GWTW: Lawzy, we got to have a doctor. I don't know nothin' 'bout birthin' babies.
    – moioci
    Commented Sep 1, 2010 at 2:42

6 Answers 6

Reset to default
10

The second one is correct for most dialects of English. The first one is a double negative, or as we call it in linguistics, exhibits negative concord. Wikipedia has a pretty good article on double negatives:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_negative

Most prescriptive grammarians will tell you that a double negative is incorrect because it is "illogical." However, there are many languages that operate just fine using double negative obligatorily. For instance, almost all Romance languages have obligatory negative concord:

  • Italian: Non so niente.
  • French: Je ne sais pas.

Double negatives used to be grammatical in English, but there was a grammatical change sometime during Middle English. The Wikipedia article gives a sentence from a 1644 letter by Oliver Cromwell (emphasis is added by me).

A little after, he said one thing lay upon his spirit. I asked him what it was. He told me it was that God had not suffered him to be no more the executioner of His enemies.

The double negative is still used in many modern dialects, but it is typically very stigmatized.

Improve this answer
3
  • Could you check your first paragraph again: "The second one is a double negative" – isn't the first example the one with double negative?
    – Jonik
    Commented Aug 31, 2010 at 16:01
  • oops! Fixed it.
    – JoFrhwld
    Commented Aug 31, 2010 at 16:13
  • French translation should be "Je ne sais rien". "Je ne sais pas" is simply "I don't know" (en) or "Non so" (it).
    – mouviciel
    Commented Sep 24, 2010 at 14:23
1

The New Oxford American English reports that anything is used

  • in negative, or questions to refer to a thing, no matter what.

    Has she found anything?
    Nobody was saying anything.

  • without negative, for emphasis.

    Albert was ready for anything.

Nothing is used in sentences like

She said nothing.
There's nothing we can do.
They found nothing wrong.

Using nothing (which means not anything) in a sentence with a negative is using a double negation. I imagine the double negation can be used in some particular cases to give emphasis to the sentence.

The NOAD has also the following note (reported in the Oxford Living Dictionaries for double negative) about the usage of double negatives.

In practice this sort of double negative is widespread in dialect and other non-standard usage and rarely gives rise to confusion as to the intended meaning. Double negatives are standard in certain other languages such as Spanish and they have not always been unacceptable in English, either. The double negative was normal in Old English and Middle English and did not come to be frowned upon until some time after the 16th century, when attempts were made to relate the rules of language to the rules of formal logic. Modern (correct) uses of the double negative give an added subtlety to statements: saying I am not unconvinced by his argument suggests reservations in the speaker's mind that are not present in its ‘logical’ equivalent: I am convinced by his argument. According to standard English grammar, a double negative used to express a single negative, such as I don't know nothing (rather than I don't know anything), is incorrect. The rules dictate that the two negative elements cancel each other out to give an affirmative statement, so that I don't know nothing would be interpreted as I know something.

Improve this answer
3
  • 2
    I don't think double negation typically has anything to do with emphasis. Some dialect have obligatory negative concord, and others don't.
    – JoFrhwld
    Commented Aug 31, 2010 at 12:14
  • 1
    @JoFrhwld: That is why I wrote I imagine.
    – avpaderno
    Commented Aug 31, 2010 at 12:38
  • Don't NEVER say you can't use double negation for emphasis!
    – moioci
    Commented Sep 1, 2010 at 2:43
0

The second example is the grammatically correct one.

However, the first is common in certain dialects.

Improve this answer
0

Sometimes double negatives have legitimate uses.

A : You wasted my time! I told you to look for serial downvotes. You searched for hours, and you found nothing!

B : No, I didn't find nothing! I found a single upvote. Good enough?

A : Oh, you donkey slap!

It's true that B "didn't find nothing."

Improve this answer
-1

The correct one is the second. The first one might be used, for instance, by the (educated) speakers just in order to give their speach a pleasant rustic flavor. It sounds even better with "ain't" instead of "don't".

Improve this answer
5
  • 1
    I disagree on two counts: (1) I find it hard to believe that someone who doesn't normally speak like this would use the phrase in order to sound "rustic". (2) "Ain't" normally means "is not" or "am not", so can't be used here.
    – Steve Melnikoff
    Commented Aug 31, 2010 at 10:26
  • 1
    Properly rustic would be pronounced as follows "I dunno nuffin abou' it, guv'nor" :)
    – Benjol
    Commented Aug 31, 2010 at 11:22
  • 1
    Also, "rustic" implies "rural", i.e. used in the countryside. However, this kind of usage is also present in some London dialects, and London would be unlikely to be described as "rustic"!
    – Steve Melnikoff
    Commented Aug 31, 2010 at 15:02
  • @Melnikoff: no implication, since the word has MORE than one meaning. Also, "ain't" has more than two meanings: e.g. "haven't": <i> "I ain't got no clothes left," she replied. "They stole my blue and the yellow cambric with muslin sleeves my lady gave me."</i> (Patrick O'Brian).
    – Olod
    Commented Aug 31, 2010 at 16:13
  • 1
    @SteveMelnikoff - "I find it hard to believe that someone who doesn't normally speak like this would use the phrase in order to sound "rustic". " There are segments of American society in which using precise English is perceived as a hostile act. Specifically, it is construed as an attempt to establish the speaker as superior to those around him. It's like the story about George Bush in his early political days, when he lost an argument and swore that he would never again be "out-Bubba'd".
    – WhatRoughBeast
    Commented Mar 15, 2015 at 3:46
-1

Logically speaking, the negative of negative is positive.

So, the first sentence may be translated as follows:

I don't know nothing = I know something

Nevertheless, some american slangs use this formula to strengthen the negation not to negate the negation!

Improve this answer
1
  • 3
    I think this assumes language is parenthesizeable, so that "I don't know nothing" = "I don't (know nothing)". However, as many note, we really can't treat linguistic statements as straight mathematical statements. For example, "hot dog" is a single word, not a warm canine.
    – user3065
    Commented Dec 28, 2010 at 18:11

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.