If I am "not going" nowhere, that means I am going somewhere.

but

score: 1

Not going nowhere does not necessarily imply that you "are going" somewhere. You could be somewhere that is not nowhere already.

sender:
saber

4 years, 1 month ago

 permalink
but

score: 1

You could be not going nowhere because you are already nowhere and you stay there

sender:
kataquax

4 years, 1 month ago

 permalink
but

score: 1

I am not going nowhere is always true.
You never go nowhere, you don’t go, or you go somewhere.

sender:
dionisos

4 years, 1 month ago

 permalink
but

score: 1

You could just not be going.

sender:
quantumapoptosi

4 years ago

1 supporter.

 permalink
- but
  
  score: 1
  
  You would then say you either:
  1. Aren't going anywhere.
  Or
  2. Are going nowhere.
  
  sender:
  vicvic38
  
  4 years ago
  
   permalink
- 0 branch
- ‒
because

score: 0

A double negative in the English language, which this question is fundamentally about, evaluates to a positive.

sources:
http://www.grammarly.com/handbook/sentences/negatives/2/double-negatives/

sender:
vicvic38

4 years ago

 permalink
- however
  
  score: 2
  
  Your proof is a bit poor.
  Logically your statement means: "It is not the case that I'm going nowhere".
  "I'm going nowhere" can be paraphrased as "I'm not going anywhere".
  If it is put under negation we get "It is not the case that I'm not going anywhere".
  Now, this implies going somewhere.
  
  sender:
  syntaxfairy
  
  4 years ago
  
  1 supporter.
  
   permalink
- but
  
  score: 1
  
  We may not be talking about standard English. If we were to take AAVE (African American Vernacular English) into account for example, it would, indeed mean "I'm not going anywhere"
  
  sources:
  http://youtu.be/pkzVOXKXfQk (Skip to about 5:30)
  
  sender:
  vicvic38
  
  4 years ago
  
   permalink
- 1 branch
- ‒
4 branch
‒

sender

source

view

If I am "not going" nowhere, that means I am going somewhere.

Idea is a Content

Meaning is a Message