"...not a reasonable person could not have looked at that conversation and not found it lighthearted"

Со всеми этими отрицаниями очень нелегко докопаться до логики того, что на самом деле сказал автор, хотя по смыслу нет сомнений, что он имел в виду: "...ни один нормальный человек не подумал бы, что это был серьёзный разговор".

Не сказал ли он неправильно, или нет?

Спасибо

в ссылке https://www.timesofisrael.com/out-of-context-nonsense-jon-stewart-says-he-never-accused-rowling-of-antisemitism/

помимо приведенной, есть несколько иная формулировка -

“There is no reasonable person that could have watched it and not seen it as a light-hearted conversation amongst colleagues and chums, having a laugh, enjoying ourselves,” said Stewart.

"So I would just like to say that none of that is true, and not a reasonable person could not have looked at that conversation and not found it lighthearted."

KOMno3uTOP: The version you have is badly-written -- there are too many 'not's, resulting in a double-negative. That's why you (and I) don't understand it.

"none of that is true, and not a reasonable person could not have looked at that conversation and not found it lighthearted." should read:

"none of that is true, and no reasonable person could have looked at that conversation and not found it lighthearted."

-- as leka11 suggests. My guess is that either:

* the speaker has expressed himself badly to your source; or

* your source has misquoted him -- as often happens, for example, when newspapers report stories they've been given by news agencies.

I'm curious: is this sentence confusing to a native English speaker? I mean, may you interpret "lighthearted" not as an antonym of "serious," but rather as an antonym of acrimonious? Because my first though was that their conversation was quite friendly, i.e. they did not quarrel

повторю свою ссылку

http://www.timesofisrael.com/out-of-context-nonsense-jon-stewart-says-he-never-accused-rowling-of-antisemitism/ (

статья - ‘Out of context nonsense’: Jon Stewart says he never accused Rowling of antisemitism) " Comedian Jon Stewart said Wednesday that he was clearly joking during a recent podcast conversation about “Harry Potter,” and said he does not consider author J.K. Rowling to be antisemitic in any way"

С контекстом все конечно понятно. Но мне любопытно (с чисто лингвистической точки зрения) может ли нейтив прочесть ее так, как ее прочел я, не имея контекста

Ни один разумный человек не мог бы, послушав эту беседу, не воспринять ее легкомысленной.

И понятно, и без логики.

Вот же оно, полное:

"So I would just like to say that none of that is true, and not a reasonable person could not have looked at that conversation and not found it lighthearted."

Ну, это правильно, в реальной жизни без контекста - никуда. Просто именно в этом случае мой вопрос был как раз о (возможном) значении вне контекста. В любом случае, я благодарен всем, кто откликнулся

It depends on which sentence you're talking about. If you're talking about the asker's initial quotation (also shown in the Times of Israel article), yes, it is confusing to a native English speaker -- because it's written incorrectly (ungrammatically) and so doesn't make any sense. That's because the Times of Israel has written it incorrectly.

In order to understand it you firstly have to 'translate' this incorrect version into correct English. You then end up with the correct version -- either:

* leka11's version at 20:35: “There is no reasonable person that could have watched it and not seen it as a light-hearted conversation amongst colleagues and chums, having a laugh, enjoying ourselves,” said Stewart."; or

* my version at 22:37: "none of that is true, and no reasonable person could have looked at that conversation and not found it lighthearted ......".

The wording in leka11's suggested иная формулировка and my version are slightly different, but they mean exactly the same. Although they contain a [one] double-negative, this is a common construction in English. However, the asker's/Times of Israel version doesn't make sense, partly because it contains too many not's, resulting in one-and-a-half double-negatives. The meaning in Russian of the corrected иная формулировка provided by leka11 (and also of my version) is as given by leka11 at 20:35.

leka11 says at 20:35 that "помимо приведенной, есть несколько иная формулировка" -- but in fact the "приведенная формулировка" he refers to (as quoted by the asker and given by the Times of Israel article) doesn't make any sense in English.

So would a native English speaker understand the quotation provided by the asker and the Times of Israel article? No. Even if you add the context, they still wouldn't understand it. They'd just be confused by it and would have to ask themselves: "What's the author trying to say?"

I wasn't quoting Times of Israel, I got it from the original video, so the quote is authentic. That is not to say it's grammatically or stylistically correct.

In this case it mainly means 'not said seriously' / 'said just for fun' / 'said as a joke' / 'said for humour', but with the secondary implication that, when he said it, he wasn't trying to be nasty/acrimonious towards Rowling.

In case your hearing is better than mine, here is the original video. The part in question starts at around 2:19

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8x-jxx8WSCg&t=77s

это не Вы цитировали Times of Israel))), а ToI цитировали исходное видео, дословно, тот же текст звучит и в Вашей ссылке с youtube

в поисках контекста, которого Вы не дали, первое, что я выловила, была ссылка на Times of Israel)))

ToI -

“Let me just say this, super clearly, as clearly as I can: Hello, my name is Jon Stewart, I do not think J.K. Rowling is antisemitic, I did not accuse her of being antisemitic, I do not think that the ‘Harry Potter’ movies are antisemitic,” he said. “I really love the Harry Potter movies. Probably too much for a gentleman of my considerable age.

“So I would just like to say that none of that is true, and not a reasonable person could not have looked at that conversation and not found it lighthearted.”

Yes, Stewart got his words slightly mixed up, and the ToI (and no doubt other news outlets and websites) have simply reported what he said word-for-word in quotation marks, without correcting it.

Stewart should have gone to see his local Grammar Wizard before giving the interview!