Date:  Mon, 17 Nov 1997 16:04:37 -0500
From:  Alan Baragona <baragonasa[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]VAX.VMI.EDU>
Subject: Re: Double negatives (was one as a pronoun?)

At 10:44 PM 11/16/97 EST, Larry Horn wrote:

>(P.S. Incidentally, the postings here on langauge vs. logic seem to assume
>there's just one monolithic "logic", with which language may or may not agree.
>But there are as many logics as there languages, and their properties differ
>from each other in interesting ways. The issue isn't really language vs.
>logic, but what the mapping rules are between grammar (morphosyntax) and
>semantics.

Exactly, which is why I said earlier that double negatives are not
necessarily illogical in any absolute sense at all. I also like your point
that "there are as many logics as there [are] languages". And you could add
"dialects." My favorite example of that is the principle of concord or
agreement. In English, agreement of number between subject/verb and
adjective/noun is fundamental to the "logic" of the language. But there's a
fine line between agreement and redundancy, and the dialectical usage "five
dollar" can be justified on the logical grounds that the extra plural marker
on the noun is redundant. And undoubtedly usages that are redundant in
English constitute natural agreement in other languages (wish I could think
of one off the top of my head--anyone?)

Alan Baragona
baragonasa[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]vax.vmi.edu

You know, years ago, my mother used to say to me, she'd say, "In this
world, Elwood, you must be . . ."--she always called me 'Elwood'--"In this
world, Elwood, you must be oh, so smart or oh, so pleasant." Well, for
years I was smart. I recommend pleasant. And you may quote me.

                Elwood P. Dowd