Mfcttrf

I do not want you to go nowhere.

According to Grammarly, the above sentence contains a DOUBLE-NEGATIVE and should be modified as either of the following;

1. I do not want you to go anywhere.


2. I want you to go nowhere.

However, I think that the sentence is fine and that it doesn't contain any DOUBLE-NEGATIVE. Here is how I get the meaning of the sentence;

• I do not want SOMETHING.


• What do I not want?


• I do not want that you do XYZ?


• What is the XYZ that I do not want you to do?


• It is that you are going nowhere, ie being in one place (all the time).

What do you think about the sentence? Did Grammarly get it right? Please, explain!

Standard English

Standard English has "negative polarity", which means that a double negative is actually a positive. A double negative is where there are two negatives in the construction; however many people use the phrase only to mean a "double-negative error".

The OED says "double negative n. Grammar a syntactic construction containing two negative elements, esp. where only one is now expected in Standard English; either of the negative elements in such a construction."

• 
  I ate simple positive statement


• 
  I didn't eat simple negative statement


• 
  I didn't eat anything negative statement


• 
  I didn't eat nothing double negative which means "I ate something". This is a very rare construction which which emphasises that it isn't nothing. "I didn't eat nothing, but it was very small."


• 
  I didn't not eat double negative, which means "I ate". This is a very rare construction which emphasises that it happened. "I didn't not eat, but it was so small it wasn't really a meal.

Your example

I do not want you to go nowhere.

This is a double negative, which in standard English is rare and would only be used like this: "I do not want you to go nowhere, I want you to go somewhere."

Alternatively it is a common error for the more usual sentences:

• 
  I do not want you to go or I do not want you to go anywhere Which means "I want you to stay", or


• 
  I want you to go nowhere which means "I want you to stay here" (but is somewhat awkward.)

Negative Concord in Nonstandard English

Be aware that many native speakers do not speak Standard English.

There are many varieties of non-standard English which have "negative agreement", also called "negative concord", and you will hear "I didn't eat nothing" where standard English has "I didn't eat anything".

One of the most famous of English dialects with negative concord is Cockney, and for example Eliza in Pygmalion says: "I ain't done nothing wrong" (for "I have done nothing wrong" in Standard English) or Sergeant Turner in Hot Fuzz who says
"Nobody tells me nothing" (for "Nobody tells me anything" in Standard English, thanks @Bee in comments).

As you'll easily see in many films, African-American vernacular also has negation concord (Jules in Pulp Fiction: "Don't do nothing stupid"), and also Italian American vernacular (Sonny in The Godfather: "Goddamn FBI, don't respect nothing.")

Unless you are living in an area with dialect grammar, you a probably best advised to learn standard grammar. Certainly all tests and exams for learners of English would give Eliza, Sergeant Turner, Jules and Sonny poor grades.

The Wikipedia article on Double negative covers the variety well.

A true "double negative" is usually also a mistake and reverses the meaning of what the speaker really intended to say, for example:

I didn't see nobody.

This may be said by somebody to mean they didn't see anybody and is likely a case of them mixing up two idiomatic phrases:

• I didn't see anybody


• I saw nobody

There are other cases where it may seem a double-negative, but if the meaning is sound and what the speaker intended then it is fine.

For example:

You can't have nothing for breakfast.

The italicised words are technically negatives, but the meaning is sound and probably what the speaker intended. If you change just one of the words for a positive, it makes less sense:

• You can have nothing for breakfast


• You can't have something for breakfast

But, if you make both words positive you have something that does make sense.

You can have something for breakfast.

Your example then may be acceptable in the right context.

A double negative of a verb form that is correctly used would be this:

• I do not want you to go anywhere. Standard usage.




• I do not not want you to go anywhere. Emphatic usage.




• He doesn't want me to go. Standard usage.



• 
  He doesn't want me not to go. Emphatic usage.

Both those are used to mean, respectively, "I am not saying you shouldn't go somewhere." and "He is not telling me not to go."

That is not the same thing as a double negative where the double part is produced by a negative verb + a negative pronoun and is therefore, non-standard.

You either use a negative verb and a non-negative pronoun:

• Don't worry. I won't go anywhere.

OR

You use a declarative verb and a negative pronoun.

• Don't worry. I will go nowhere.

I am leaving aside the non-standard usages as it is too confusing to present everything at once.

Usages such as: "I don't want you to go nowhere." are non-standard.

That does not mean people do use these constructions, it just means they are non-standard. They can be dialectal, regional, local, marked as uneducated, etc.

The other answers have good links so I am not repeating them. I am merely trying to present examples clearly without any jargon.