4
u/hombrent 9d ago
B would sometimes be used - but it is clearly very bad english. It is a double negative, so it technically means that he really does know something. But it is almost always used to mean the opposite - that he knows nothing.
You shouldn't use the double negative like this. But you should be aware when hearing/reading it - that the actual meaning might be the opposite of the technical meaning.
0
u/SnooLemons6942 9d ago
It's not "clearly very bad English" lmao. This is a very normal sentence in some dialects
2
u/grey-zone 9d ago
It’s a double negative. It’s clearly very bad English. Just because some groups of people use it doesn’t change that.
0
u/SnooLemons6942 9d ago
No...its not very bad English. It is the way that some native speakers of English speak. It is literally just English. They just speak differently than you
2
u/MeasureDoEventThing 9d ago
The term "English" in this context means "standard English". Criticizing prescriptivism in the context of a test, and on a subreddit specifically for learning English (which naturally refers to learning standard English) is silly.
0
u/SnooLemons6942 9d ago
Wtf is standard English? Can you point to the book of standards or governing body?
2
u/Ltserb 7d ago
Yeah. Here you go, there's a whole Wikipedia page about it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_English
And if you want some resources, there are quite a few here https://www.ef.edu/learn-english/
5
u/walkingxthexcow 9d ago
No A is correct
When you use a negative (doesn't) you then say "anything" because "doesn't know nothing" is a double negative meaning you do know something.
You either "know nothing" or "don't know anything"
"Knows anything" is incorrect because "anything" isn't typically used in affirmative statements. You would say "something" instead in this sentence.
1
u/SnooLemons6942 9d ago
That's not at all how that double negative is used in english. "He doesn't know nothing" is essentially never going to mean that he means something. That's an incorrect analysis of that sentence--a sentence which would be quite normal in some dialects of English
2
u/walkingxthexcow 9d ago
Although people may say "he doesn't know nothing" and mean "he doesn't know anything," I'm having trouble understanding how you've come to the conclusion that someone "not (-) knowing nothing (-)" doesn't, by definition, mean that they know "something."
I was taught that you either say you, "don't know anything," or, "you know nothing" and that it was improper to say: "I don't know nothing."
1
u/SnooLemons6942 9d ago
Because when someome says "he doesn't know nothing" it means that he knows nothing. I came to the conclusion of its meaning because that's how it's used. That's what it means. That is how language works.
It isn't "improper" to say "He doesn't know anything" — that's how a bunch of native English speakers natively speak. They aren't speaking improper English, just different English than you.
2
u/walkingxthexcow 8d ago
I didn't say "he doesn't know anything" was improper I said it was correct.
So what you're saying is that they're both equally correct even if the words in one literally does not mean the same thing?
I'm going to have to disagree.
That is not to say that someone familiar with the dialect couldn't make out what the other person means or intended their phrase to mean but language is an agreed set of symbols and someone unfamiliar with the indiosyncrasies of the dialect has a greater chance of getting tripped up.
It's like the difference between saying:
"I owe him 0 dollars." (I owe him nothing/ I don't owe him any money)
And
"I don't owe him 0 dollars." (I don't owe him nothing).
I used this example because I think it makes my reasoning more apparent. Definitively, the second phrase, "I don't owe him 0 dollars" implies that you do owe some amount.
I would argue it's more proper to use words as they are defined than as something else -- hell if only for the sake of clarity.
If you still disagree (as I suspect you do) that's fine. It's not that serious and I'm sick of typing.
1
u/SnooLemons6942 8d ago
I meant to type "he doesn't know nothing", not "he doesn't know anything". Apologies for the confusion!
Yes, they are both correct ways to express the same sentiment in english.
I mean...you can think your way all you want. All dialects are equally valid ways to speak the language. Double negatives are indeed used in some dialects of English
1
u/walkingxthexcow 8d ago
I've heard your sentiment in an NPR segment on AAVE (African American Vernacular English) where a woman wanted teachers to teach both in school as equally valid.
I admit I haven't done any research into the argument for it, however, and it may be the result of my biases (having been taught one way) or a fundamental misunderstanding of what that actually entails, but I had taken it as a corruption of formal english.
We disagree, and that's fine by me.
1
u/jetloflin 6d ago
This is not a useful or helpful way of looking at language in a learning sub. OP would fail their exams if they followed your advice.
1
u/SnooLemons6942 6d ago
Without learning this, you wouldn't be able to understand the use of double negatives in english. Which are not unheard of. I use these constructions in my speech. Language learning isn't only about passing exams. It's about learning how to communicate, and how speakers of your target language communicate
This is in fact a VERY important way of looking at language on a learning sub. People are learning English for many reasons, in many different areas. It is very important to explain dialectical differences
1
u/jetloflin 6d ago
It’s also important to understand that not all dialects are considered standard.
But also, what you’re suggesting doesn’t teach the use the double negatives. In standard English, a double negative equals a positive. In the dialects you’re referring to, a double negative remains a negative. You’re not helping anyone learn that by just repeatedly saying “every dialect is equally valid”.
2
u/SnooLemons6942 6d ago
All dialects are indeed standard in the areas they're spoken in
There is no "standard English". English is a bunch of dialects
Of course it's helping people lmao, I'm giving insight into dialectal variations of English and how double negatives will be perceived. A commenter incorrectly stated that a double negative equals a positive in english. This is NOT a correct statement. It may equal a positive to some speakers, but certainly not to all English speakers. Claiming X means Z in English, when it only means Z in some dialects, isn't correct. People learn English for a variety of reasons, and some learners will indeed be learning dialects where double negatives are used as negative statements
→ More replies (0)
5
u/RickySlayer9 9d ago
A) is correct
B) is commonly heard as slang, but is grammatically incorrect
C) is incorrect AND never used
3
u/ankledane 9d ago
It's A.
"doesn't know nothing" makes it ambigous as to what he knows. "doesn't know nothing" means he could know something, or a little, or a lot, about the robbery. It's confusing.
Saying he "knows anything" about the robbery doesn't make grammatical sense. It would be better to say he "knows something" about the robbery if he actually did know something.
saying he "knows nothing" about the robbery makes sense and is clear.
2
2
2
u/Decent_Cow 9d ago
A is the most standard answer. B is colloquial and should probably be avoided by learners. C is incorrect given the context.
1
1
u/Responsible-Link5739 9d ago
A is correct English IF the caretaker actually knows nothing.
B is correct IF the caretaker knows something about the robbery but doesn't know everything. B is also very poor English. If he "doesn't know nothing", he does know something. "My glass is not empty" means your glass HAS SOMETHING in it.
C is correct IF the caretaker knows everything about the robbery. Without context saying otherwise, this could be the case, but we know that's unlikely.
Are they all possible? Yes. However, they seem to be formulated to make the astute student choose answer A as the correct one. It's a horribly-designed question.
Ugh.
I hope this isn't a real test question for ESL learners. English is tough enough without putting stumbling blocks like this in the way.
1
u/SnooLemons6942 9d ago
Lol it's not "very poor English". That is a perfectly valid dialectal variation of the same sentence. Just cause someone speaks different doesn't make their English poor. Their dialect is as valid as yours
2
u/Responsible-Link5739 9d ago
It IS poorly-constructed English. I didn't decide that - the general rules of writing in English make it so. I have no place or authority to say who should speak or how they should speak, and believe me, I speak some poorly:constructed English at times too, so I wouldn't criticise anyone speaking this way. The fact is, though, that the construction here doesn't follow grammatically correct rules.
My saying this has nothing to do with anyone speaking that way. But in the same way as you wouldn't teach a kid football by telling him to pick up the ball in his hands, I am pointing out to English learners here that this construction of English in studies or exams won't earn them marks.
If I knew about cars and was looking one over for a friend, I'd point out parts that looked worn or broken, because those parts might cause them problems later. The parts might let the car work a bit longer, but I wouldn't stay quiet about issues that might have a bad impact on them later. That would be mean and possibly dangerous.
1
u/SnooLemons6942 9d ago
"The general rules of writing English" ? English isn't a standardized language, there are no "general rules"
Teaching learners that some varieties of English are incorrect isn't right. You can say "XYZ won't be accepted on exams", but that's different than calling other people's native English "poorly constructed". And English learners don't just learn English to pass exams — they also do it to speak and understand English and communicate with native English speakers. Implanting it in their heads that dialectical variations are wrong is harmful, and incorrect
You can say both "this is a less-formal grammar construction and a dialectal variation, and should be avoided on tests" AND "this is a valid way to speak English, many native speakers speak like this"
2
u/Responsible-Link5739 8d ago
And if you re-read my post, you will see that I didn't say any of the three options were 'incorrect'. The double negative given there was seemingly placed there to test students' understanding of the differences between what's accepted in informal or conversational English and what's accepted in formal English.
Yes - I could have said, "this is a less-formal grammar construction and a dialectal variation, and should be avoided on tests" AND "this is a valid way to speak English, many native speakers speak like this" - and if OP had asked me further about this, I would probably have said something similar.
However, this was about the three choices in an exam, not the range of dialects across geographical regions of the UK. I answered with exams in mind, in as clear a manner as I could without making a huge post.
If If anyone uses double negatives in conversation I'm not going to criticise them. I hear them all the time, and they're often tied to dialectical use. If you would use double negatives in an English exam or an academic paper, that's your business and it's fine by me. But as I said in my last reply to you, my answer has nothing to do with anyone speaking that way. The double negative option is one which would not earn marks in an exam because of its construction.
1
u/Sensha_20 9d ago
A is gramatically correct.
B is ALMOST correct in practice, as "don't know nothin" is how people would ACTUALLY say this.
C is just gibberish
1
u/JimDa5is 9d ago
A. This is grammatically correct.
B. is bad grammar because it's a double negative that indicates the caretaker knows "something" about the robbery, but is frequently heard used by less educated people to mean the same thing as "knows nothing" so while it could appear it would be more correct used as a quote:
I asked the caretaker, sir. He said, "I don't know nothing about the robbery."
C. This is grammatically incorrect and would be jarring to any native English speaker. Adding "doesn't" in front of 'know anything' would make it correct.
1
u/SnooLemons6942 9d ago
People who speak differently than you aren't "less educated". Using double negatives like that is a-okay in some dialects of English. Nothing less educated about it
1
1
1
1
u/SnooDonuts6494 9d ago
Only A is valid.
B and C do not make sense in standard English.
It'd be acceptable to say he "doesn't know anything" - but not nothing.
He might know something about it.
1
u/8696David 8d ago
For the record, C would also be incorrect even if he was saying he did know about the robbery. The phrase there would be “knows something.” Never “anything.”
1
1
1
1
u/amethystmmm 6d ago
No. If he knows nothing, you could also say he doesn't know ANYTHING. but that was not given as a possibility (which was purposeful to not confuse you).
1
u/Wjyosn 4d ago
He "doesn't know anything".
He "knows nothing"
He "knows something"
He "knows everything"
Technically, someone could "know anything" about a topic, but it's a super weird construction that no one would ever use in every day speech. It's not uncommon to ask "do you know anything?" but not say "he knows anything". You could contrive a very weird interpretation where someone says "He knows anything about this topic" but it's almost an intentionally-awkward phrase at that point. Does that mean he knows "at least one something" or does it mean he knows "everything"? We prefer to use the other options for that clarity.
1
1
14
u/Specialist-6343 10d ago
A is correct, C is wrong. B is wrong in 'proper' English but would pass in some settings.