A friend and I had a question about a sentence that we encountered:
Didn't you want to pay for something that was too much?
My friend argues that sentence is fairly neutral clarifying in a neutral tone with the Boolean answer, whereas I think it's confirming their bias about the subject.
To explain, I said (as an example):
Do you want to eat dead animals?
Clarifying if they want that option.
Don't you want to eat dead animals?
Confirming that wouldn't they want to eat dead animals, as if they're double checking.
It's an example, and was not meant to trigger them, I could have used wanting to eat an apple, or something else (that feels less distasteful to others' subjective tastes) but that's what came to my mind at that particular moment.
We are both non-native speakers passionate about expressing ourselves in the least ambiguous way possible.
Could someone please shed some light on this who amongst is right, i.e. is the statement (without any context) is considered a question, or just a confirmation of something speaker already made their mind towards based on past experiences (as a context)?