@@midnightsrequiem3909 well he didn't say "me and her buying milk" he said "me and her buy milk" "me buying milk" makes sense but "me buy milk" might not
@@Rex-golf_player810 Finally! An explanation that actually made sense! I can't tell you how many people missed this thank God it's finally solved. Your human. Are a saint.
Your logic on double negatives was inconsistent. 'It wasn't uninteresting' (which is indeed grammatical) suggests something in it was interesting. Thus, two negatives make a positive. Yet you suggest "there aren't no x" still implies a negative. 'Any' is not a negative. It is neutral. 'Do you have some/any?' are different to, 'Do you have none?' At 6:10 you have adverb written where you are using a preposition. I am interested in your thought process, if you feel inclined to elaborate.
Thanks for these interesting questions. To your first point, the negative inflection is carried by the auxiliary verb, not the quantifier. The quantifier is always neutral; our custom to collocate 'no' with the negative inflection is a historical accident. Second, prepositional phrases are adverbs in the sense that they modify the verb by providing context about the circumstances under which the verbal process occurred. Or so my thinking goes!
@@WriterScience The first half is quite interesting. I am used to the "no tengo nada" and 'ne x pas' (although in casual French 'ne' is dropped. That is quite instructive, thank you. That said, it can still be confusing and inconsistently applied (bienvenue à la grammaire anglaise). The second half doesn't quite work. Adverbs modify when and how a verb is performed: slowly, well, on Saturday, tomorrow, yesterday. They also provide further scope on an existing adverb: very well, quite poorly, that badly. "With me" describes the relationship between the two people in the performance of their action. It doesn't describe how or when it was performed, only with whom. Your steps are a little indirect and roundabout (in my opinion as a book editor/translator). I love your bit on commas. they really do save lives. "I love to eat, Dick." Also, "I love to eat..." Anyway, no more jokes about my Uncle Richard.
@@WriterScience but even if a quantifier isn’t technically a negative, if you said “there aren’t 0 jews” (since 0 should indicate the same quantity as no) aren’t you still expressing the opposite meaning? even if it isn’t technically a double negative in the sense that there’s two ‘negatives’
@@christiansrensen8330 haha well thanks so much for your interest and input! I'm by no means an expert, just a fellow traveller on the way to clear writing.
Good video but I'm still confused about the double negative one. I'm not a native speaker but I always thought "any" basically means "some amount of", which would make it the opposite of "none/no". So if grammar was following logic "not no" and "not any" should also have opposite meanings. I can't think of any example in which "any" by itself is a negation word, you always have to add "not". I get that "aren't any" was the the working class dialect and it cannot be called "wrong" as long as it's still being understood, but I don't get how that makes it a double negative.
"I see some people", "I don't see any people". To make the sentence negative, you need to change "some" to "any", so in this case "any" acts like a negative.
@@Galb39any doesn’t act like a negative there, if anything it’s just part of the single negative “not any”. Just because the negative is two words doesn’t mean it’s a double negative.
Idk; as far as in American spoken English, any usually referd to something like the total amount of things or people in a space, so "any of these items" (gestured to line of things), or "anyone here a doctor?" (anyone who can hear the speaker) if that helps
Agree, the video left me unclear on this point. I have never in my life heard the pairing of "don't" and "any" as being a double negative so would really like to know the explanation.
This is a great idea! I'll keep it in mind. In the meantime, you might be interested in this article I wrote about English expressions using Latin prepositions: www.writerscience.com/prefix-a-latin-preposition/ In addition, this video is also about a superstitious rule carried over from Latin: ua-cam.com/video/rROZsSNfW9I/v-deo.htmlsi=GoqlgkW8LEI1Q35d
I have four walls which I painted blue, pink and gold, lavender, and charcoal. I painted the entrance wall charcoal, and the wall with the window blue. I use a single color for the third wall I painted, which has a closet. What was the feature wall painted as the fourth and final wall? My breakfast in the morning consists of cereal, milk and orange juice, toast, and butter. My friend thinks I am strange and says I should instead have cereal and milk, orange juice, toast and butter. Eventually I was won over, cereal is less dry with milk, the orange juice more sweet without milk, and I use less butter putting it on the toast then just eating a stick. By changing the punctuation of a list allows you to couple items together while continuing the rhythm of a list. Real example I have typed while working doing invoicing for a repair company. "Relubricated, calibrated to manufactures specifications, sandblasted and painted case, reassembled, redampened pointer, and tested speedometer." In this case each stage of the post-repair is punctuated, with the work done on the case coupled due to a lack of comma/pause, and the final testing is separated from the second to last procedure.
Just watched the cold open. If I remember correctly, people think prepositions at the end of sentences are against the rules of grammar, because it is fairly common for languages to have rules against that. Problem is it's not certain that English is one of them. Edit: I see. The synthetic vs analytic language angle works really well to explain the problem, obviously you can't use an inflection in isolation.
I'm glad you found the distinction between synthetic/analytic languages helpful. That difference comes up again in this video about the so-called split infinitive rule: ua-cam.com/video/rROZsSNfW9I/v-deo.htmlsi=GoqlgkW8LEI1Q35d
I would love for you to do a video on phonetics. Like why we don’t have two different characters for the voiced th and unvoiced th like they do in Iceland. The English wrote using runes at one time and some manuscripts they kept the thorn rune to represent the unvoiced th. For awhile we kept it as a Y looking symbol that you see at renaissance faires.
Subcribed to the channel right away, very informative video. The only take I disagree with is the one about the run-on sentences, about 12:29. I don't know whether it is the case in English, so pardon my ESL-ness. The problem with run-on sentences is that a speaker might want to ask a question whenever we end a sentence. While it would be possible during a pause in speech, it becomes impossible to interject without rudely interrupting someone, resulting in an endless flow and a one-sided conversation. The clip in the question was hard to listen to due to its lack of structure (possibly on purpose as the guy is lying). Unfortunately, I'm most guilty of that, haha. Older people I've met are more opposed to it. I have never seen it enforced in public education anywhere; it must be some kind of unwritten Polish grammar rule or just simply good manners.
4:43 I don't like double negatives unless they make sense. "There aren't no Jews" is a double negative that serves no purpose. "This video isn't uninteresting" is a double negative that serves to say that the video isn't a thing, because the speaker doesn't wish to say what the video Is. "Ain't no worries" doesn't serve to say that there are some worries, they are using the double negative as an unnecessary amplifier. "There aren't Any Jews here" is a non intrusive double negative.
But a run on sentence can absolutely happen in a spoken phrase sentence fragments follow one after another the speaker does not pause in the appropriate places talks on and on not separating thoughts with pauses not combining thoughts with conjunctions 😂
Hmm...The challenge in breaking down the grammar nazi video is that it mixes colloquial and written forms of English. For instance, ending sentences with prepositions is generally discouraged in writing within many industries because you want to be clear with your subject and direct-object relations. In contrast, when speaking, many people violate this and other written rules, because the grammar in speech is, generally speaking, developed as a person speaks; hence, why you write a speech if you have something important to say. By the way, the example of entities from the book seem to be more appositive phrases instead of subjects themselves, because without the initial subject, they would be unclear in meaning.
Could you explain to the Americans how they have a broken give-a-damn-o-meter? I mean the complete lack of logic of "I could care less", if that wasn't obvious.
"there aren't any Jews" is not a double negative. Any is from old english meaning "one", so the sentence means "there is not a one Jew", meaning, there is not *even* a one Jew,, there is *less than one*. which holds just a single 'no'. That said, in Polish we do frequently use double negative and it sometimes is helpful to repeat the message, I read it's called "linguistical redundancy" and I don't condemn it. However, it sometimes does get in the way when we need to explicitly underline the doubled negativity - if the sentence "there are no Jews here" is untrue, we'd like to say that there *AREN'T* 'no Jews' here. Which said sentence, here unfortunately, means the same as the former and we need to find a way around that
I left a comment on that video about the preposition myth 11 years ago, but my comment likely got buried under the 30k other comments. . . and wow, that video is 14 years old. i saw it 11 years ago, and the algorithm just recommended it to me agiain today and i was like, i coulda swore i saw this, but couldn't remember and i clicked on it and saw my comment from 11 years ago and i'm doing a run on sentence and i don't care.
Your defense of the Oxford comma got a like out of me. I will die on that hill even if I use run on sentences like a madman and choose to ignore things like She and Me for the sake of She and I sounding better than that or Her and I XD
Recently noticed that Bob Dylan's Positively 4th Street should be "You know as well as I you'd rather see me paralyzed," but it just doesn't have the same ring to it.
But what if the previous sentence ended with reference to ‘him’ and not ‘I’? In order to maintain the flow of ideas, we would want to begin this sentence where the last one left off.
Sure, since "him" implies that the object of your sentence is a person. Since "him" is typically used only for people, the "person" is implied. But what if you mean to express your respect for him in the capacity of something more specific, deserving of mention in that sentence like, say, a leader. "He is a leader for whom I have great respect." Sure, you could also say "I have great respect for him as a leader," but that implies that your respect for him begins and ends with his capacity for leadership, that you, for instance, do not respect him as a friend or colleague.
Regardless of history, double negatives in English are very easily avoidable, illogical constructions where you're not technically saying what you mean, that can even be confusing. The two negatives in itself thing does not equal a double negative; the "it is not uninteresting" example is roundabout but does not conflict with the intended meaning whereas "we don't have no Jews" does. I don't think that double negatives don't have any places. They're just ill fitted to forms where things like clarity and technical accuracy are of great importance. "We don't have no Jews." " We don't have any Jews." The most important thing that both sentences are INTENDING to say equals "We don't have Jews." Why would the "no" in "There are no Jews" differ in meaning from the "no" in "We don't have no Jews"? And why wouldn't someone not in the know necessarily not think "so they have SOME jews"? What does the "no" in the latter mean anyway? It is confusion between "we have no Jews" and "we don't have Jews". It is forgetting that the "don't have" already lets people know that they possess none of what they'll be saying. Double negatives are said to indicate being emphatic and I suppose that sometimes they are, but it suggests a lot of people always being emphatic when they're not, and that doesn't negate the conflict with the intended meaning.
"double negatives cancel each other according to logic" Sorry to break it for you people, but formal logic and languages sometimes have nothing to do with each other. Also in some languages (including my native one) double negative is the ONLY way to express negation. Surprise, right?
You do you, but since we read from left to right most readers expect to find old, given information at the start of the sentence and new, important information at the end. Terminal prepositions are common in speaking, but careful writers will edit so that important content words, not function words, are given that end-of-sentence emphasis.
Want to have fun seeing how people can mangle grammar? Reddit, UA-cam, Insta. A treasure trove of grammatical errors, eggcorns, misspellings. I love seeing how those born speaking English can be so poor at writing English. "Had went" is definitely gaining in popularity. Your/you're, it's/its, their/they're/there. Alot. Ahh . . . Endlessly entertaining.
People who use double neg that way are just weak. They just dont really want to say the Truth. Even if they Hate it they will just say, it's not my favorite
But if I say something in a double negative, it means more that I didn't love it, not that I hated it. There's a very big difference, and if you don't know what that difference is or think that it doesn't exist, perhaps you're the one who needs to strengthen your ability to consider more than two options of love vs hate 😊 but at least you weren't uninteresting to reply to
Amazing video! Very concise and informative. You got a new subscriber :p I think that much like with Korean, context in English can be quite important. A dangling clause with context isn't really a mistake - rather a tool to make things flow better, adding to immersion.
Become a Better Writer in 10 minutes per week: www.writerscience.com/newsletter/
I still don't understand how "I buying milk" makes any more sense than "Me buying milk"
@@midnightsrequiem3909 well he didn't say "me and her buying milk"
he said "me and her buy milk"
"me buying milk" makes sense but "me buy milk" might not
@@Rex-golf_player810 Finally! An explanation that actually made sense! I can't tell you how many people missed this thank God it's finally solved. Your human. Are a saint.
Totally agree with your take on the oxford comma.
In fact, I'm so used to it that when I don't use it, the sentence just looks off to me.
Oxford doesn’t even use the ‘Oxford comma’. Call it the serial comma but not the Oxford comma.
I'm just glad this is what was taught to us as children where I grew up.
Your logic on double negatives was inconsistent. 'It wasn't uninteresting' (which is indeed grammatical) suggests something in it was interesting. Thus, two negatives make a positive. Yet you suggest "there aren't no x" still implies a negative. 'Any' is not a negative. It is neutral. 'Do you have some/any?' are different to, 'Do you have none?' At 6:10 you have adverb written where you are using a preposition. I am interested in your thought process, if you feel inclined to elaborate.
Thanks for these interesting questions. To your first point, the negative inflection is carried by the auxiliary verb, not the quantifier. The quantifier is always neutral; our custom to collocate 'no' with the negative inflection is a historical accident. Second, prepositional phrases are adverbs in the sense that they modify the verb by providing context about the circumstances under which the verbal process occurred. Or so my thinking goes!
@@WriterScience The first half is quite interesting. I am used to the "no tengo nada" and 'ne x pas' (although in casual French 'ne' is dropped. That is quite instructive, thank you. That said, it can still be confusing and inconsistently applied (bienvenue à la grammaire anglaise). The second half doesn't quite work. Adverbs modify when and how a verb is performed: slowly, well, on Saturday, tomorrow, yesterday. They also provide further scope on an existing adverb: very well, quite poorly, that badly. "With me" describes the relationship between the two people in the performance of their action. It doesn't describe how or when it was performed, only with whom. Your steps are a little indirect and roundabout (in my opinion as a book editor/translator).
I love your bit on commas. they really do save lives. "I love to eat, Dick." Also, "I love to eat..." Anyway, no more jokes about my Uncle Richard.
@@WriterScience but even if a quantifier isn’t technically a negative, if you said “there aren’t 0 jews” (since 0 should indicate the same quantity as no) aren’t you still expressing the opposite meaning? even if it isn’t technically a double negative in the sense that there’s two ‘negatives’
@@christiansrensen8330 haha well thanks so much for your interest and input! I'm by no means an expert, just a fellow traveller on the way to clear writing.
@@WriterScience bon voyage monsieur ;)
why is "aren't any" a double negative?
Can't say i understand that one myself. Any isn't a negative, it's a quantitative.
Good video but I'm still confused about the double negative one. I'm not a native speaker but I always thought "any" basically means "some amount of", which would make it the opposite of "none/no". So if grammar was following logic "not no" and "not any" should also have opposite meanings. I can't think of any example in which "any" by itself is a negation word, you always have to add "not". I get that "aren't any" was the the working class dialect and it cannot be called "wrong" as long as it's still being understood, but I don't get how that makes it a double negative.
"I see some people", "I don't see any people". To make the sentence negative, you need to change "some" to "any", so in this case "any" acts like a negative.
@@Galb39any doesn’t act like a negative there, if anything it’s just part of the single negative “not any”. Just because the negative is two words doesn’t mean it’s a double negative.
Idk; as far as in American spoken English, any usually referd to something like the total amount of things or people in a space, so "any of these items" (gestured to line of things), or "anyone here a doctor?" (anyone who can hear the speaker) if that helps
Agree, the video left me unclear on this point. I have never in my life heard the pairing of "don't" and "any" as being a double negative so would really like to know the explanation.
Why does everyone say that they aren’t a native English speaker, then proceed to speak it as well as a native speaker or better?
You should do a video on all the things early english grammarians did to make english more like Latin. As a latin student, it's very entertaining.
This is a great idea! I'll keep it in mind. In the meantime, you might be interested in this article I wrote about English expressions using Latin prepositions: www.writerscience.com/prefix-a-latin-preposition/
In addition, this video is also about a superstitious rule carried over from Latin: ua-cam.com/video/rROZsSNfW9I/v-deo.htmlsi=GoqlgkW8LEI1Q35d
Semper ubi sub ubi. (Three years of Latin.)
I have four walls which I painted blue, pink and gold, lavender, and charcoal.
I painted the entrance wall charcoal, and the wall with the window blue.
I use a single color for the third wall I painted, which has a closet.
What was the feature wall painted as the fourth and final wall?
My breakfast in the morning consists of cereal, milk and orange juice, toast, and butter.
My friend thinks I am strange and says I should instead have cereal and milk, orange juice, toast and butter.
Eventually I was won over, cereal is less dry with milk, the orange juice more sweet without milk, and I use less butter putting it on the toast then just eating a stick.
By changing the punctuation of a list allows you to couple items together while continuing the rhythm of a list.
Real example I have typed while working doing invoicing for a repair company.
"Relubricated, calibrated to manufactures specifications, sandblasted and painted case, reassembled, redampened pointer, and tested speedometer."
In this case each stage of the post-repair is punctuated, with the work done on the case coupled due to a lack of comma/pause, and the final testing is separated from the second to last procedure.
Great examples!
"I use less butter putting it on the toast /than/ just eating a stick." 😉
To me, "I like apples, cherries and oranges" sounds like you are talking to cherries and oranges, and telling them you like apples.
Just watched the cold open. If I remember correctly, people think prepositions at the end of sentences are against the rules of grammar, because it is fairly common for languages to have rules against that. Problem is it's not certain that English is one of them.
Edit: I see. The synthetic vs analytic language angle works really well to explain the problem, obviously you can't use an inflection in isolation.
I'm glad you found the distinction between synthetic/analytic languages helpful. That difference comes up again in this video about the so-called split infinitive rule: ua-cam.com/video/rROZsSNfW9I/v-deo.htmlsi=GoqlgkW8LEI1Q35d
Another informative video, thank you!
It’s called prepositional stranding. Very common and normal for Germanic languages. And it appears because of relative clauses.
Really surprised by that double negative one! Great start to the video. Sure the rest will be just as great
Thanks for your comment! I'm glad you enjoyed :)
@@WriterScience totally understand! Not judging at all 😁
Great video! I really enjoyed this. I wouldn't say it was not uninteresting; I'd say it was
interesting.
haha yeah this was a fun video, I should record another in this format. So glad you enjoyed!
I would love for you to do a video on phonetics. Like why we don’t have two different characters for the voiced th and unvoiced th like they do in Iceland. The English wrote using runes at one time and some manuscripts they kept the thorn rune to represent the unvoiced th. For awhile we kept it as a Y looking symbol that you see at renaissance faires.
I love the historical context reference .. great video
Glad you enjoyed it!
Awesome video!
Subcribed to the channel right away, very informative video.
The only take I disagree with is the one about the run-on sentences, about 12:29. I don't know whether it is the case in English, so pardon my ESL-ness.
The problem with run-on sentences is that a speaker might want to ask a question whenever we end a sentence. While it would be possible during a pause in speech, it becomes impossible to interject without rudely interrupting someone, resulting in an endless flow and a one-sided conversation. The clip in the question was hard to listen to due to its lack of structure (possibly on purpose as the guy is lying).
Unfortunately, I'm most guilty of that, haha. Older people I've met are more opposed to it. I have never seen it enforced in public education anywhere; it must be some kind of unwritten Polish grammar rule or just simply good manners.
4:43 I don't like double negatives unless they make sense.
"There aren't no Jews" is a double negative that serves no purpose.
"This video isn't uninteresting" is a double negative that serves to say that the video isn't a thing, because the speaker doesn't wish to say what the video Is.
"Ain't no worries" doesn't serve to say that there are some worries, they are using the double negative as an unnecessary amplifier. "There aren't Any Jews here" is a non intrusive double negative.
Sure you could say "He is a person for whom I have great."
Or you could get fancier with it.
Great respect have I for a person such as he.
But a run on sentence can absolutely happen in a spoken phrase sentence fragments follow one after another the speaker does not pause in the appropriate places talks on and on not separating thoughts with pauses not combining thoughts with conjunctions 😂
Hmm...The challenge in breaking down the grammar nazi video is that it mixes colloquial and written forms of English. For instance, ending sentences with prepositions is generally discouraged in writing within many industries because you want to be clear with your subject and direct-object relations. In contrast, when speaking, many people violate this and other written rules, because the grammar in speech is, generally speaking, developed as a person speaks; hence, why you write a speech if you have something important to say. By the way, the example of entities from the book seem to be more appositive phrases instead of subjects themselves, because without the initial subject, they would be unclear in meaning.
Could you explain to the Americans how they have a broken give-a-damn-o-meter? I mean the complete lack of logic of "I could care less", if that wasn't obvious.
How in the world is "aren't any" a double negative?
There aren't "any" book, but there's "a specific" book.
I love the Oxford comma.
The mark of a discerning writer
Nominative-accusative.
The objective case includes both accusative and dative, both the direct and indirect object.
@ludviglidstrom6924 okay.
"there aren't any Jews" is not a double negative. Any is from old english meaning "one", so the sentence means "there is not a one Jew", meaning, there is not *even* a one Jew,, there is *less than one*. which holds just a single 'no'. That said, in Polish we do frequently use double negative and it sometimes is helpful to repeat the message, I read it's called "linguistical redundancy" and I don't condemn it.
However, it sometimes does get in the way when we need to explicitly underline the doubled negativity - if the sentence "there are no Jews here" is untrue, we'd like to say that there *AREN'T* 'no Jews' here. Which said sentence, here unfortunately, means the same as the former and we need to find a way around that
I left a comment on that video about the preposition myth 11 years ago, but my comment likely got buried under the 30k other comments. . .
and wow, that video is 14 years old. i saw it 11 years ago, and the algorithm just recommended it to me agiain today and i was like, i coulda swore i saw this, but couldn't remember and i clicked on it and saw my comment from 11 years ago and i'm doing a run on sentence and i don't care.
Still laughing out loud. Excellent video.
Your defense of the Oxford comma got a like out of me. I will die on that hill even if I use run on sentences like a madman and choose to ignore things like She and Me for the sake of She and I sounding better than that or Her and I XD
Recently noticed that Bob Dylan's Positively 4th Street should be "You know as well as I you'd rather see me paralyzed," but it just doesn't have the same ring to it.
"I have great respect for him." There! No prepositional ending, no stuffiness, carries the same meaning.
But what if the previous sentence ended with reference to ‘him’ and not ‘I’? In order to maintain the flow of ideas, we would want to begin this sentence where the last one left off.
Sure, since "him" implies that the object of your sentence is a person. Since "him" is typically used only for people, the "person" is implied. But what if you mean to express your respect for him in the capacity of something more specific, deserving of mention in that sentence like, say, a leader. "He is a leader for whom I have great respect." Sure, you could also say "I have great respect for him as a leader," but that implies that your respect for him begins and ends with his capacity for leadership, that you, for instance, do not respect him as a friend or colleague.
9:22 as german I have to disagree hard
Regardless of history, double negatives in English are very easily avoidable, illogical constructions where you're not technically saying what you mean, that can even be confusing. The two negatives in itself thing does not equal a double negative; the "it is not uninteresting" example is roundabout but does not conflict with the intended meaning whereas "we don't have no Jews" does. I don't think that double negatives don't have any places. They're just ill fitted to forms where things like clarity and technical accuracy are of great importance.
"We don't have no Jews." " We don't have any Jews." The most important thing that both sentences are INTENDING to say equals "We don't have Jews." Why would the "no" in "There are no Jews" differ in meaning from the "no" in "We don't have no Jews"? And why wouldn't someone not in the know necessarily not think "so they have SOME jews"? What does the "no" in the latter mean anyway? It is confusion between "we have no Jews" and "we don't have Jews". It is forgetting that the "don't have" already lets people know that they possess none of what they'll be saying. Double negatives are said to indicate being emphatic and I suppose that sometimes they are, but it suggests a lot of people always being emphatic when they're not, and that doesn't negate the conflict with the intended meaning.
Ironic correction: And why WOULD someone not in the know necessarily not think "so they have SOME jews?" I think I'm saying what I mean now.
"double negatives cancel each other according to logic"
Sorry to break it for you people, but formal logic and languages sometimes have nothing to do with each other. Also in some languages (including my native one) double negative is the ONLY way to express negation. Surprise, right?
As long as a sentence makes sense, I don't care where a preposition is at.
You do you, but since we read from left to right most readers expect to find old, given information at the start of the sentence and new, important information at the end. Terminal prepositions are common in speaking, but careful writers will edit so that important content words, not function words, are given that end-of-sentence emphasis.
Want to have fun seeing how people can mangle grammar? Reddit, UA-cam, Insta. A treasure trove of grammatical errors, eggcorns, misspellings. I love seeing how those born speaking English can be so poor at writing English. "Had went" is definitely gaining in popularity. Your/you're, it's/its, their/they're/there. Alot. Ahh . . . Endlessly entertaining.
Nice video
Par-ti'-ciple? Now explain the apostrophe. That's a-pos'- tro- phe.
Sorry, but some grammar mistakes just sound ignorant and unflattering to the speaker. "He drove Jim and I to the movies" 😵💫
People who use double neg that way are just weak. They just dont really want to say the Truth. Even if they Hate it they will just say, it's not my favorite
Why don't you just come out and say what you really think ;)
But if I say something in a double negative, it means more that I didn't love it, not that I hated it. There's a very big difference, and if you don't know what that difference is or think that it doesn't exist, perhaps you're the one who needs to strengthen your ability to consider more than two options of love vs hate 😊 but at least you weren't uninteresting to reply to
@aff77141 I know what the double neg means (u literally said the same thing as the vid) and I am saying people don't use it like that.
Amazing video! Very concise and informative. You got a new subscriber :p
I think that much like with Korean, context in English can be quite important. A dangling clause with context isn't really a mistake - rather a tool to make things flow better, adding to immersion.
Thanks for your interest and support~!
what about "there are no jews" or "there are any jews"?
Superb content, this is the kind of content for which UA-cam was made. 🫡
Heyyy what a compliment! Glad you liked it:)