I accidentally read an advertisement of a thesaurus saying that...

This all-new edition of the classic reference work is the one thesaurus no home or office should be without.

To me, the sentence soulds natural, yet, on the secound thought, I found no and without in the sentence which makes me think that this sentence might have a double negative problem.

Is it really a double negative? If so, is it acceptable as allowed to appear on the back cover of a quite well known thesaurus?
Last edited {1}
Original Post
A double negative is incorrect when it reverses the intended meaning.

Ex: I'm not going nowhere.

With the negative canceling each other out, the sentence logically means I'm going somewhere.

A double negative is not wrong when the negatives are meant to cancel each other out.

Ex: He was not unhappy. --> He is happy.

In your sentence, I think the nagatives can cancel each other out to:

This all-new edition of the classic reference work is the one thesaurus [every???] home or office should be with.

Multiple negatives can sometimes express precise shades of meaning -- every home or office should be with may be an overstatement-- but they are wordy and the reader may have to reread to untangle them; they should not be used indiscriminately. (Am I using double negative here? Big Grin
Last edited {1}

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×