Quote:
Originally Posted by MacEachaidh
Another aspect of "yes" and "no" that has always been pertinent to me is that it seems some languages answer a question, especially a negative one, with yes or no based on whether the answerer is agreeing with the intent of the question, and others by whether the question is a correct statement or not. For instance, if you ask someone in English, "Are you not going to the party?", most native English speakers would say "No" to agree with the question and say that they are not going to the party. They might expand it to say, "No, I'm not" or "No, I'm not going". Personally, I've always found that a bit confusing, and I got into a lot of strife when I was a kid for answering things the other way round. If asked that question, I would have said, "Yes, I'm not going." (As in, "Yes, that statement is correct, I'm not going.") That seems logical to me, and when I'm not concentrating on what I'm saying, I still get myself into strife by saying it "my" way rather than "most people's" way. So I was really relieved when I discovered that some languages think the way I do, that I'm not alone in that approach.
|
in french we have a specific word which is used to answer a negative question in the affirmative. for example if someone asks "are you not going to the party ?" and in fact you *are* going, you would answer "si". "si" means "yes" but only in reply to a negative question ; in all other contexts you would say "oui". i think this cuts down on confusion quite a lot, because if you say "si" it's very clear what you mean, and either of the other options (oui / non) would most likely mean "yes that's corrent, i'm not going" or "no, i'm not".