There happens to be a parallel stream of literal English usage, called as Slang. For quite few years back, I have been noticing it to be prevalent in mainstream conversation as well. It's fashionably acceptable upto a certain extent as I believed in case of "wanna be", "gotta go" and so on....
However, I could not resist on initiating argument when I repeatedly get noticing usage like:"I ain't going nowhere", "I don't know nothing" and so on. Someone tried to convince me saying that it's used in verbal communication only, and as far as its objective is concerned, it fulfills the criteria to pass on the message in its own way. But it is not used in written ever. Similarly as we use "Hum" in Hindi for "I" in verbal communication, but we use "main" while writing. This example was an attempt to clarify that slang is used in verbal form only and there's no harm in it. I believe that the case is not similar as I have been noticing. I got to listen to such sentences in some documentaries and Hollywood movies that are based on literal scripts. In that case slang upto an extent of single word or proverb or phrase can be used. "I ain't going nowhere" or "I don't know nothing" kind of complete sentences should not have any place there. But these are used repeatedly. In literal dialogue, "I ain't going nowhere" stands as a double negative structure...meaning "I am going somewhere". But the context it is used in, reflects "I am not going anywhere" or "I am going nowhere". Same is the case with "I don't know nothing".. Context: "I don't know anything" or "I know nothing". Literal meaning: "I know something".
Here I would also like to share an interesting fact that, in case of above mentioned kind of expression, the structure we take as wrong one in English- is the correct and perfect structure in European languages. As in Portuguese, "Eu não sei nada" is used to say for "I know nothing" and if you interpret the same sentence literally into English it will be as " I don't know nothing".
(Eu=I, não=not, sei=know, nada=nothing)
Earlier I was convinced to accept the slang structure assuming that such sentences are used by those people whose primary language allows such structures. I got the support while watching "Scarface"*ing Al Pacino as Tony Montana. He used to use such structure throughout the movie and he was a migrated person there, having his primary language Spanish or something, not English.
Even, I had made an assumption that these kinds of structures have started coming up in bulk for only few years back say 4-5 years or post-2K only. However this assumption seems to be wrong as I noticed today while watching Michael Cristofer's "Body Shots" that was released in 1999. At the very beginning, there comes a quote from "Anonymous" on screen saying:"I'll go for a ride on your jelly roll. But I won't give you nothin' from my soul." WON'T GIVE YOU NOTHIN'.......the dialogue continues!
However, I could not resist on initiating argument when I repeatedly get noticing usage like:"I ain't going nowhere", "I don't know nothing" and so on. Someone tried to convince me saying that it's used in verbal communication only, and as far as its objective is concerned, it fulfills the criteria to pass on the message in its own way. But it is not used in written ever. Similarly as we use "Hum" in Hindi for "I" in verbal communication, but we use "main" while writing. This example was an attempt to clarify that slang is used in verbal form only and there's no harm in it. I believe that the case is not similar as I have been noticing. I got to listen to such sentences in some documentaries and Hollywood movies that are based on literal scripts. In that case slang upto an extent of single word or proverb or phrase can be used. "I ain't going nowhere" or "I don't know nothing" kind of complete sentences should not have any place there. But these are used repeatedly. In literal dialogue, "I ain't going nowhere" stands as a double negative structure...meaning "I am going somewhere". But the context it is used in, reflects "I am not going anywhere" or "I am going nowhere". Same is the case with "I don't know nothing".. Context: "I don't know anything" or "I know nothing". Literal meaning: "I know something".
Here I would also like to share an interesting fact that, in case of above mentioned kind of expression, the structure we take as wrong one in English- is the correct and perfect structure in European languages. As in Portuguese, "Eu não sei nada" is used to say for "I know nothing" and if you interpret the same sentence literally into English it will be as " I don't know nothing".
(Eu=I, não=not, sei=know, nada=nothing)
Earlier I was convinced to accept the slang structure assuming that such sentences are used by those people whose primary language allows such structures. I got the support while watching "Scarface"*ing Al Pacino as Tony Montana. He used to use such structure throughout the movie and he was a migrated person there, having his primary language Spanish or something, not English.
Even, I had made an assumption that these kinds of structures have started coming up in bulk for only few years back say 4-5 years or post-2K only. However this assumption seems to be wrong as I noticed today while watching Michael Cristofer's "Body Shots" that was released in 1999. At the very beginning, there comes a quote from "Anonymous" on screen saying:"I'll go for a ride on your jelly roll. But I won't give you nothin' from my soul." WON'T GIVE YOU NOTHIN'.......the dialogue continues!