What I did is quite standard use of a double negative (you may look it up); the other one is called bad grammar. If you didn't go nowhere, you went somewhere ('I went everywhere' follows nothing), but there's no reason to phrase it that way and no one does. The usage I formed there follows context. No, I absolutely did not state a negative by its use, why twist what I did having as much context as you do?Does this double negative resolve into a positive, like:I'm speaking English there.Isn't it? ... Or isn't it not never?... but music never isn't a form of communication.But I have my doubts, because there are also phrases... but music IS a form of communication
likeI didn't go nowhere today.
I would suppose that in the UK it's not a lot different than in the US where a whole lot of people talk like that for one reason or another, a fair degree of which will be from ignorance; some prefer to be that colloquial and fit in with the other people that 'don't talk good' (also grammatically a faux pas).BTW I do not make music 'just for myself' just because I don't make it for 'the marketplace'. I make music for the sake of making music. I actually share almost all of it, so I am not the 'just for myself' type or whatever as posited there; and if it's anything, music communicates. "just for myself", sounds suspect, insular, as though one is expected as happy with a closed loop if not within a type of vacuum. Absent all feedback, one is not likely to become very good at it.
I tend to doubt cats have any interest in it. When I was a child practicing trumpet a naborhood dog swung by to join in about every time.
There's also a concept in language known as a false (or unnecessary) dilemma, since you used that word. Unnecessary dichotomy. 'Doesn't make music for marketplace ie., makes music just for herself' is an example.
Statistics: Posted by jancivil — Fri Feb 09, 2024 4:54 pm