As to whether multiple negations (in language, as opposed to algebra) really

DO strengthen or reinforce each other in the relevant dialects/languages, my

sense is that the phenomenon is basically akin to other sorts of concord. We

wouldn't expect singular (or plural) agreement on a verb to strengthen or

reinforce the singularity (or plurality) of the subject, nor the

masculine/feminine/neuter form of an article to reinforce the gender of the

head noun with which they agree, and the same is generally true of negative

concord. This is not to say that negative sentences may not (!) have other

devices to strengthen the negative force; Bolinger has written insightfully on

the differences between "not...any" and "no" in the standard dialect (I don't

want any of that vs. I want none of that), but this distinction is independent

of the negative concord question.


(P.S. Incidentally, the postings here on langauge vs. logic seem to assume

there's just one monolithic "logic", with which language may or may not agree.

But there are as many logics as there languages, and their properties differ

from each other in interesting ways. The issue isn't really language vs.

logic, but what the mapping rules are between grammar (morphosyntax) and