Dave's ESL Cafe's Student Discussion Forums

[alexandra]

Hi,
I know that, sometimes, songs don't follow grammars, as txqtpup said, but, I have to ask:

"... I wouldn't let Hailie listen to me neither ." (Eminem)

Is it correct? Shouldn't it be either instead of neither?

Thanks.

[bud]

I think you are correct, Alexandra, but even so, this is a construction that many people use. Think of it as slang.

[txqtpup]

I agree with Bud, Alexandra. There are wrong sentences used in daily life, but people keep on saying them. It's good for you to be critical, but I myself stress more on people's understanding especially in conversation. For example, it is common using incomplete sentences to answer questions. As long as others get the point, it's OK. And again, songs and poetries don't follow grammars all the time. They are art, and there is no exact rules for art. Imagination and creativity are more important in art. Don't you think so?

[Bill P.]

The singer is using a double negative. This is not correct, but it is common for uneducated, lower-class English speakers to talk this way. The singer is probably intentionally trying to sound uneducated and lower class. Here is another example of a double negative: an educated native speaker of English would say, "I don't have any." An uneducated, lower-class speaker would say, "I don't have none," or "I don't got none."

[LucentShade]

Alexandra--you are correct in recognizing Eminem's lyrics as a "double negative." These things are often found in rap music, perhaps because they are somewhat common among the African-American population. (To be fair, many white people, including white rappers like Eminem, use double negatives as well.)

The pattern of rap and conversational speech often follows this format:

"I don't have no money."
This is heard from time to time, but is incorrect grammar. In English, two negatives together form a positive, so to speak--they cancel each other out. If taken literally, this sentence would mean "I do have money." However, people don't think of it this way--they understand the meaning of the sentence that should be said, which is "I don't have any money."

This applies to other word pairs, like no one/anyone, nowhere/(somewhere or anywhere, nobody/anybody, neither/either, never/ever, nothing/(something or anything)

The general rule is that if you have a "no," "not," or "don't" at the beginning of a sentence, it should be followed by one of the words on the right side of the slash. For example:

"I am not going anywhere."

"I am going nowhere."

These have the same meaning, but use these words differently. The first uses "anywhere" to avoid a double negative, and the second uses "nowhere" because there is not a negative word in the first part of the sentence.

****Please note: My sample sentence of "I don't have no money" was only meant to serve as an example. I certainly was not meaning to say that only poor people talk this way.

[lotus]

Hi Alexandra,

Poor people do not have a monopoly on poor grammar. On the contrary. I find that most lower-income people have a better understanding of English than those in higher income brackets. Don't let an accent fool you. Firstly, most underprivileged individuals learn English as a second language. They're usually very adept at their first language. An understanding of the structure and grammar of a first language usually makes an individual a good learner of a second language. The second reason has to do with motivation. English is a tool for geographical and economical mobility. You'll find that most ESL students are very hard learners because of either necessity, or they simply want to learn the language.

Read the questions in this forum and you'll find that many of them might sound silly or somewhat off-the-wall. What is happening, in fact, is that the learners are noticing the many exceptions and idiosyncrasies of the English language. English, though structured by rule and definition, is not very structured in usage. The many exceptions to the rules and colloquial idioms can make it hard to learn. The questions posed by the learners bring out these exceptions and idiosyncrasies. As a native speaker, when I read these questions, I usually learn something new about the language myself - because they force me to think about why the exceptions exist. Only from the fresh perspective of new learners can such insights be brought out. It is this na�ve ignorance which eventually leads the learner to a better understanding of the English language. Most native speakers usually use the language nonchalantly without really knowing what the rules of the language are, or the reasons why they talk the way they do. So, if you ask me who understands the English language better, I might be compelled to reply that it is the ESL student.

While double negatives are usually bad form, they are not always incorrect. The previous sentence is an example of that. Sometimes we use double negatives to stress (emphasize) a certain point or perspective.

The Eminem sentence may be correct depending on context. It would be correct in the following context.

"During our loud and heated argument, I wouldn't let Hailie speak, and I wouldn't let Hailie listen to me neither."

You can rearrange the sentence to see the correct form. "I neither let Hailie speak nor listen to me." The neither indicates two cases of not doing something.

For those who know Boolean algebra, A nor B = /A & /B

Artistic license (freedom to express in non-conventional form) is the norm in song or poetry. Although lyrics can be helpful, they can also be confusing to the English learner.


- lotus

[bud]

Very well said, Lotus! Thank you.

[LucentShade]

I thought I'd mention this a second time, in case people don't see my edit: I was not implying that only poor people speak this way. My double negative sample was only meant as an example. I would also agree that English learners may often have a better understanding of the rules of English than native speakers. I know that I wouldn't know as much as I do about English grammar if I hadn't studied Spanish. It is true that native speakers can be careless with the language, perhaps because (in the US at least) formal grammar is not emphasized in education these days.

Also, while I'm neither a certified expert nor a teacher, I would still think that "either" needs to be used in your example, lotus.

If I said "On my trip last summer, I didn't visit New York, and I didn't visit Chicago, either," can "neither" really be substituted there? In my opinion, it can't.

[jazzie]

@fruitek
There's no sign on this site which says: "Native English speakers keep out." I think all English learners can learn something from native speakers. So why not mingle with them?
_________________
"You know, people seldom go to the trouble of scratching the surface of things to find the inner truth." James Stewart in The Shop Around The Corner

[asterix]

[bud]

Fruitek, are you confusing the average Yank with George W. Bush? LOL!

On a more serious note, I certainly agree with Jazzie. It is certainly a blessing to have the professionals offering their guidance in here. As a native-speaker, I've learned a lot about the "why's" of English by hanging out in this forum. But it is also good to have the non-professional speakers in here (like me). Students can see how they are "supposed" to use the language, but also see how it is actually spoken. The two are not always the same.

[LucentShade]

Fruitek, you should perhaps ask yourself the same question. You don't seem like a teacher or a language student to me. On a related note, though I am a Yank, I don't support George W. Bush or this war. In reality, I am a teacher, but of Spanish, not English. I'm not a professional, but I know my grammar well enough to answer questions on these forums.

[txqtpup]

Please don't fight, have some peace!

[lotus]

Hi,

Peaceful disagreement is the cornerstone of democracy.

I think it's a matter of interpretation, and of emphasis or perspective.
You can say it from the perspective of the rude man, or you can say it from the perspective of the hapless woman.

He would (not let) her do this, and he would (not let) her do that either.
Emphasis: He would (not let) her do either.

He would not let her do (this), and he would not let her do (that neither).
Emphasis: She could neither (do this nor that).

Let's take the unfortunate situation of a father letting a child play ball near a stairway where she fell.

My response might be, "I would not have let her play ball in the house, and I would not have let her play near the stairway neither."

The emphasis is placed on the child's unsafe behavior. I would have said "neither", because neither behavior is acceptable.


- lotus

[LucentShade]

Sorry, but I still maintain my position. "Either" has the exact same meaning as "neither" in that sentence, because the first negative is already established when you say "would not have." The way I was taught, if there's a negative word (no/not/barely/scarcely/hardly) before a verb, then there can not be a negative word after the verb, i.e. none/no one/nobody/nothing/nowhere/neither. If anyone wants more on this, do a search on the net for "double negative rules."