The positive side of the negative

People don't like thinking in anything other than straight lines. Anything with subtlety to it, or a curve that moves in a new direction is too much for them to take in. And anything that points in totally the opposite direction is just not understood at all.

Take negative and positive. It seems that many are incapable of seeing that using a negative in speech might indicate a positive in action. Yet people deplore the use of negative language. For them, all negatives are bad, and all positives are good. The confusion between negative and positive has been moved from the field of electricity or grammatical analysis and applied to the world of morality, behaviour and meaning. It's crazy.  To illustrate, here are just a few phrases that use the negative which are wholly positive in meaning, and a few positive phrases that are wholly negative in meaning.

1) 'Don't touch that hot poker!' A negative sentence that may save someone from being badly burned.

2) A second bottle of whisky is a great idea. Though couched as a positive, it may be disastrous.

3) Don't talk to strangers. A negative sentence that may keep someone safe.

4) Never judge a book by its cover. A negative sentence that gives good, positive advice.

5) The best thing for cutting throats is a nice sharp blade. Very positive, but negative for those with throats.

6)  Steer for the shore. Positive, but not if you're driven on to the rocks.

7) I hate potatoes. Negative, but helpful if you are dispensing food to a friend.

8) I love potatoes. Positive, but negative if you haven't cooked any for your guest.

9) I love my country right or wrong. Positive, but deadly.

10) I don't discriminate. Negatively couched, intended to be positive until you realise that the person saying it just hates everyone without exception.

So, to put it simply, everything depends on the meaning. Yet people persist in judging the meaning of a sentence based on its grammatical structure and whether words or verbs are couched in the negative or the positive. This has nothing to do with the meaning. A sentence can use all positive words, but have a profoundly negative meaning. Equally a sentence can use negative tenses but be wholly positive in meaning.

How is it possible, you might ask, that people haven't grasped this?  They prefer thinking in straight lines. If it's negative grammatically, in their minds it is a negative thing to say. They are applying an analysis of grammar to a judgement on meaning. This is very unobservant, and it demonstrates a very basic misunderstanding of our language. It is widespread. And that's a negative, but not grammatically.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Let's get on board

8th August, 2020 Once again we face a high summer of inflatables, awash to the gunwales with refugees, trying desperately and at the risk of their lives, to get to Britain.  Here, in the country itself, everyone is exhausted by Covid-19. No-one wants to talk about it. It's all been said anyway. And if it hasn't, no-one wants to hear it. Pretty much the same can be said about Brexit, politics generally, the economy, government, and so on. No-one wants to know any more. We are hunkering down inside our castles, pulling up the drawbridge and sitting down in front of our televisions and drinking beer from the bottle. Our bellies increase as our bank accounts decrease. But we can't be bothered to deal with it. It is mercilessly hot. We have all the curtains closed to shut out the appalling heat. We slurp in a sweaty lassitude drinking cold things hoping this will change everything: Covid, the refugee problem, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, China, USA, the murder of the innocent everywher...
Read more

So long, and thanks for all the fish

The Douglas Adams headline is a thank you to him for making me laugh over the years, and as good a way of saying goodbye to the watching world as I can think of, especially given the fact that no-one is watching at all. I promised myself that I would continue it until the last desperate reader had at last been shaken off by my prose or ideas or both. No-one has read this blog for a week or so, and thus the moment has come to disappear gracefully from the stage. What a relief I don't hear you say. You might like to not know that there were a total of 538 reads of the posts, the vast majority from the UK (421), 63 from Portugal, 23 from Canada, 9 from Germany, 8 from Ireland, 5 from South Korea, 2 from Belgium, 2 from France, 2 from the United States of America, 2 from an unknown region, and 1 from the Netherlands. I only told three people about it, so where they all came from I don't know. The dogged loyalty of the Portuguese reader in particular is quite amazing. To him or her ...
Read more

Until November

12 August 2020 And there you go! Right on the button! Exactly on time! Precisely as predicted! In my last blog entry I speculated that my use of the word 'assassination' triggered an algorythmic search in America. I'd only used it once, and the next day I had my first and only reader in the USA. I felt these events were obviously connected, but I couldn't be sure, so I thought I'd try an experiment. I used the word five time in Monday's piece. Today I checked the analytics for the countries where readers had read my blog, and sure enough, there is the USA. A single reader. One hit. So twice I have had a single reader in the USA, and on both occasions the day after I used the word 'assassination'. And I am betting that because I have used it here, I will have a single solitary reader in the USA tomorrow or Friday. Twice might be a co-incidence. Three times wouldn't be. Well that's that sorted. It's so good to know we are being kept safe for de...
Read more