1

I am new to the group. I am a lifelong poet and enslaved to the written word.

This query spawns from a line in Jurassic Park: Lost World. Whilst the line in question is one of my very favorites, the grammar is atrocious. "She has to touch it! She can't not touch." While ineloquent in its delivery, the dramatic flair is amazing, and I personally can not break down how it would be said differently. In normal double negatives eg. "I don't have none!" (I physically shuddered typing this!) the correction is simple: remove a negative. "I have none!" or "I don't have any!" Both of these are acceptable and appropriate.

Does anyone else have a perspective on this or a solution to the phrase? Until next time!

Disenchanted and Angst-ridden
  • 27
  • 1
    I see more an ear for dialog than poetic license. If you pick up on how language is used in the street, you write what you hear regardless of rulebooks. – Yosef Baskin Aug 01 '21 at 02:12
  • This question is not opinion-based; the source is quoted; the judgment that the quotation is ungrammatical is stated; the question about how to say it properly is implied if not explicit. Why then close? – Xanne Aug 01 '21 at 20:16

3 Answers3

1

You certainly have an ear for language. What may be missing in this case is an ear for punctuation. If I may restate your problem it may become easier to solve.

"She has to touch it! She can't 'not touch it'." You will please pardon the added word.

This of course is a short way of telling us that she is unable to go without touching it despite the repercussions. They need to move the plot along after all.

I do not have the grammatical tool kit to peer into the sentence as many learned folks here, but I am certain that one needs to describe the problem properly to begin the process. Not a solution, but I couldn't "not suggest it".

Elliot
  • 5,371
  • 1
    'An ear for punctuation'? - like Victor Borge? – Michael Harvey Aug 01 '21 at 07:39
  • 'not touch' refers back to the way very small English-speaking children are warned about things that are dangerous, delicate, wet, etc. A parent will say 'Don't touch!'. – Michael Harvey Aug 01 '21 at 07:42
  • This is not a bad response, and certainly one I had not perceived. The concern arises in the form of a query posted by my high-school English teacher. He simply wrote, "Correct all the grammatical error in this entry." – Disenchanted and Angst-ridden Aug 01 '21 at 17:11
  • (I am continuing after being chastised by this page for taking longer than 5 minutes to comment! How infuriating!) The passage was: "I ain't doin' all the wrong stuff and he won't make it better for me and her or no one as long as he be doin' the way he's doin'," he muttered under his breath. That's it. All but 3 people in the class got the answer. I was not included in the victors. The answer is there is nothing grammatically wrong with the passage. It was a direct quote. – Disenchanted and Angst-ridden Aug 01 '21 at 17:23
  • @Joy Harlequin The OP does not say there is anything wrong but longs for a solution, I think, of the perceived wrongness -please forgive- of the quote. Your English teacher's query reminds me of the purported use(?) in non-English speaking hotels of signs such as "Please take advantage of our chamber maids." – Elliot Aug 01 '21 at 19:53
  • @Elliot Yes, the OP does say something is wrong: “The grammar is atrocious.” – Xanne Aug 01 '21 at 22:47
  • @Xanne, Yes I find that you are correct, while I am atrocious. – Elliot Aug 03 '21 at 01:34
1

It’s not a double negative. Both negative words are active.

Merriam Webster https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/double%20negative defines double negative as

: a now nonstandard syntactic construction containing two negatives and having a negative meaning

"I didn't hear nothing" is a double negative

“She can’t not touch” means she is unable not to touch it, but is compelled to touch.

“She cannot refrain from touching it” perhaps seems more comfortable, but “refrain” also has negative force.

See John Lawler’s answer to Origin and correctness of “ain’t no”? for more on negatives and negative polarity.

Xanne
  • 14,836
  • I’ve been boycotting M-W for years; this is a reason why.  AHD says that a double negative is “A construction that employs two negatives, especially to express a single negation.” [emphasis added] with the Usage Note: «It is a truism of traditional grammar that double negatives combine to form an affirmative. Readers coming across a sentence like He cannot do nothing will therefore interpret it as an affirmative statement meaning "He must do something" unless they are prompted to view it as dialect or nonstandard speech.» – Scott - Слава Україні Aug 01 '21 at 22:04
  • @Scott Sure, definitions differ. But the OP’s sentence does not express a single negation. AHD has a good write-up of the historical and current uses of double negatives using different definitions. In fact their “especially” supports M-W’s narrower use. – Xanne Aug 01 '21 at 22:38
0

While surfing for the negative adverbs, I came across the topic Double Negatives here on this site thefreedictionary.com, which I think is somehow related to the OP's question.

In English, we generally cannot use double negatives, which occur when two negative elements are used in the same part of a sentence. We must remember that when we use a negative adverb, we cannot further negate the sentence with no, not or another negative adverb because the two negatives cancel each other out, making the sentence affirmative in meaning. For example:

✖ “You shouldn’t under no circumstances cheat on a test.” (incorrect)

Literal meaning: There are certain circumstances under which you should cheat.

✔ “You should under no circumstances cheat on a test.” (correct)

Meaning: You should never cheat.

Using double negative for emphasis

While we should generally avoid using double negatives in our speech and writing, there are certain circumstances in which they can be used for an emphatic or rhetorical effect to highlight that a negative element is not the case. The most correct way to use a double negative in this manner is to pair a negative adverb with a negative adjective, as in:

“I’m not an ungenerous man, I’m just very conscious of the rules.”

“She proposed a few solutions, some of which were not impractical.”

“He described a not unbelievable scenario of deception and lies.”

This usage is especially common in literary writing. In more day-to-day writing and speech, it is more common to use two adverbial nots together to emphasize that a negative action did not happen. For example:

“Well, I didn’t not tell him the truth; I just didn’t tell him the whole truth.”

Literal meaning: I didn’t lie, I just left out some information.

“You can’t just not go to school!”

Literal meaning: You must go to school.

However, this is a much less formal construction, so it should only be used sparingly and not in formal or professional writing at all.

mahmud k pukayoor
  • 8,500
  • Thank you for the responses. Quite a few mentions to "new" and "less formal". I am always aghast and frequently scoff at the terms non-traditional or non-standard. In most cases, the inference is "I don't want to follow the rules, so I will do as I please until everyone accepts it!" Ain't is a prime example. It progressed from "not acceptable ever", "non-standard", and finally a "colloquialism". I am antiquated in my prose and speech alike. I acquiesce to this end: English is not Latin. It is ever-evolving. While she can't "not touch" (good add), I am unable to refrain from poking this bear! – Disenchanted and Angst-ridden Aug 01 '21 at 17:06