What is the best solution to an empty coal company?
I am writing my thesis and I have a problem analysing this
sentence “Ain’t got no use for no coal company” (Grisham 2014: 157).
When a subject is in the positional ellipsis, is the position an ellipsis of the molecule? I know so, is there no subject? What is the noun that is missing? How much is a piece of land worth?
“Mrs.
Wilbur Clyde. She said: “A lot more than anybody knows,” she said. Crump was unable to speak with her. You see, the coal company came out last year and tried to buy the land, had been trying, had he ran ’em off again. Good and bad news, he is back. Ain’t selling to no coal company. No ma’am! That’s a huge bang on a great mountains from off the coast of my country, too, bringing down Cat Mountain for people to run. It’s pure shame. Ain’t got no benefit for no coal company. ”
Carter and McCarthy (2006) provided me terms such as multiple negation and ain’t as a negative contraction.
The use of “no use for no coal company” is a classic example of a double negative resulting from a attempt to be emphatic.
A simpler form of a subject is an implied “i”, and a more grammatical version would be; I haven’t any use for the coal company. Since only a single coal company has been showing interest in her land “, since only a single coal company has been showing interest in her land. I haven’t any use for coal companies. ”
It’s actually triple negative, rather than double negative, and so the negative overall meaning is preserved.
- Ain’t got no use for no coal company
This sentence has been done many times.
What’s the use of the subject “I” by conversational deletion.
Where do idiomatic got mean will?
As an example, use ain’t with a negative (instead of haven) in the sense of got.
Can “nain’t are dialectal,” and be is the right auxiliary verb anyway? In most situations, “no”
is used instead of “positive” (in fact, we know it feels like): the fourth thing is applying Negative Concord instead of Negative Polarity.
That means using extra, non-cancellable negatives to emphasize negation instead of NPIs like any. (unincorporated, illustratively, but only slightly simplified).
Many dialects of American English, including AAVE, use ain’t with got (or worse, ain’t with got) and use negative concord for emphasis. Why is the stuff grammatically correct, but not standard? It’s local, and therefore more heartfelt.
