These notes, which augment Rule A-12 in my book “A Thinker’s Guide to Effective Writing”, were written after I spoke to the Woodlands Writers Guild about writing1. Two men who attended my presentation (one of whom was the guild’s president) questioned the wisdom of my book’s Rule A-12, which says, “Avoid double negatives.” Their criticism prompted me to prepare these notes.
In 1887, an educational genius named Anne Sullivan (Helen Keller’s teacher) wrote Table 1’s text.
| Table 1. Anne Sullivan on Learning Language |
|---|
| “I asked myself, ‘How does a normal child learn language?’ The answer was simple, ‘By imitation.’ The child comes into the world with the ability to learn, and he learns of himself, provided he is supplied with sufficient outward stimulus. He sees people do things, and he tries to do them. He hears others speak, and he tries to speak”2. |
Albert Einstein said, “The only rational way of educating is to be an example—if one can’t help it, a warning example”3, and Albert Schwitzer said, “Example is not the main thing in influencing others. It is the only thing."4 Ergo, if we want children and young adults to learn to speak and write properly, then we must do so ourselves. We must set good examples for others to imitate. Using double negatives sets a bad example.
Rarely does one read a newspaper or book without encountering at least one double negative. Even Supreme Court decisions and authors of highly regarded books on writing use double negatives. Here are examples (many others exist)—emphasis added:
Each of those examples contains at least 1 double negative, for the prefixes “un” (examples 1, 4, and 5) and “in” (examples 2, 3, and 5) mean “not,” and 2 consecutive instances of “not” comprise a double negative. Other such prefixes are “ab” (as in abnormal), “dis” (as in dishonest), “il” (as in illegal), and “ir” (as in irrelevant).
To understand the problem with double negatives, consider this case. A large box containing 2 balls, one marked X and one marked Y, is shaken briskly. Sue reaches into the box and retrieves a ball. It’s marked X. To identify that ball, one can say “X” or “not Y.” Similarly, if the extracted ball is marked Y, it can be identified as “Y” or “not X.” Table 2 summarizes the names.
| Table 2. The Balls’ Identifiers | |
|---|---|
| X = not Y | Y = not X |
Return the ball to the box and shake it well. Sue again reaches into the box and retrieves a ball. When asked which ball was drawn, she answers “not not X.” Did she name X or Y?
Let’s parse the name (“not not X”) from right to left. Per Table 2, “not X” equals Y; so we can replace “not X” with Y, thereby reducing “not not X” to “not Y,” and per Table 2, “not Y” equals X. Ergo, “not not X” equals X. Similar reasoning shows that “not not Y” equals Y.
Conclusion: Double negatives cancel; ergo, “not not X” is an inefficient and ugly way of saying “X.”
Double negatives waste resources (the author’s time, the reader’s time, ink or toner, paper, storage space, etc.), and they burden the reader, who mentally must translate “not not X” into “X” to understand the author. Forcing others to read superfluous words is inconsiderate and wasteful. Double negatives also reveal the author’s failure to analyze his writing or speech (i.e., failure to think).
Conclusion: Write well and set a good example by shunning double negatives.
Notes
1 The Woodlands is an upscale neighborhood just north of Houston. To get to it, go north on Interstate Highway 45 from downtown Houston.
2 Shattuck, R., ed. 2003. The Story of My Life. New York. W. W. Norton & Co. Page 151.
3 Einstein, A. 1994. Ideas and Opinions. New York. Modern Library. Page 61.
4 https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Albert_Schweitzer