2

It's nothing a little (something) can't[won't] fix.

I saw this kind of sentences a lot recently but couldn't figure out how to understand those. At first thought, they seem to have meanings such as "(something)" is not gonna help at all because it's too naive, crude or improper way to do that. Am I right? Then again, if my interpretation was correct, wouldn't they violate Double Negation rule? I mean, why don't you use like "It's something a little soap and water can't fix" or "It's nothing a little soap and water can fix"?

4

Consider these two sentences

It’s nothing (a little) plastic surgery can fix.

This implies that the thing can not be fixed by plastic surgery.

It’s something a little plastic surgery can fix.

This implies that the thing can be fixed by plastic surgery.

In this case, nothing can be stated as the opposite of “something”, or as “not a thing”. And so when “something” can be fixed, “nothing” cannot.

Next, consider these two other sentences, which both have nothing in them.

It’s nothing (a little) plastic surgery can fix.

This implies that plastic surgery can not fix it, as it states it is “not a thing” that plastic surgery can fix.

it’s nothing a a little plastic surgery can’t fix.

At last, we arrive at the sentence given. If we “expand” out this sentence, we get

This is not a thing plastic surgery will not be able to fix.

And if we “cancel” out the ‘not’s’, we get

this is a thing plastic surgery will be able to fix.

|improve this answer|||||
2

No, your interpretation is wrong. To understand it, you can negate nothing and can't:

It's something a little plastic surgery can fix.

Or, rephrased to be more natural:

It can be fixed by a little plastic surgery.

It might also help understanding to replace nothing with not something.

|improve this answer|||||

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.