Muutke küpsiste eelistusi

Negation and Negative Dependencies [Kõva köide]

(Professor of English Linguistics and Theory of Grammar, University of Göttingen)
  • Formaat: Hardback, 496 pages, kõrgus x laius x paksus: 240x160x30 mm, kaal: 866 g
  • Sari: Oxford Studies in Theoretical Linguistics 80
  • Ilmumisaeg: 14-Oct-2022
  • Kirjastus: Oxford University Press
  • ISBN-10: 0198833237
  • ISBN-13: 9780198833239
Teised raamatud teemal:
Negation and Negative DependenciesSuurem pilt
  • Formaat: Hardback, 496 pages, kõrgus x laius x paksus: 240x160x30 mm, kaal: 866 g
  • Sari: Oxford Studies in Theoretical Linguistics 80
  • Ilmumisaeg: 14-Oct-2022
  • Kirjastus: Oxford University Press
  • ISBN-10: 0198833237
  • ISBN-13: 9780198833239
Teised raamatud teemal:
Püsilink: https://www.kriso.ee/db/9780198833239.html
Märksõnad:
This book presents a novel overarching account of negation and negative dependencies, based on novel data from language variation, language acquisition, and language change. Negation is a universal property of natural language, but languages can significantly differ in how they express it: there is variation in the form and position of negative elements, the number of manifestations of negative morphemes, and in the restrictions on the use of Negative and Positive Polarity Items. In this volume, Hedde Zeijlstra explores the hypothesis that all known syntactic, semantic, pragmatic, and lexical ways of encoding dependencies should be also be attested in the domain of negation, unless they are independently ruled out. He shows that the pluriform landscape of negative dependencies and markers of negation that emerges has broader implications for theories of syntax and semantics and their interface.
Acknowledgements xii
General Preface xiii
List of Abbreviations
xiv
I INTRODUCTION AND OUTLINE
1 Introduction: Negation and negative dependencies
3(31)
1.1 Introduction
3(1)
1.2 The syntax of sentential negation
4(13)
1.2.1 Sentential and constituent negation
5(1)
1.2.2 Ways of expressing sentential negation
6(4)
1.2.3 On the syntactic status of negative markers
10(4)
1.2.4 On the syntactic position of negative markers
14(3)
1.3 Polarity-sensitivity
17(11)
1.3.1 The licenser question
18(5)
1.3.2 The licensee question
23(3)
1.3.3 The licensing question
26(2)
1.4 The landscape of negative dependencies
28(5)
1.4.1 Negative Concord
28(3)
1.4.2 Positive Polarity-sensitivity
31(2)
1.5 Conclusions
33(1)
2 Outline: The pluriform landscape of negative dependencies
34(11)
2.1 The pluriform landscape of negative dependencies
34(6)
2.2 Outline
40(1)
2.3 Relation to earlier work
41(4)
II NEGATIVE CONCORD AND NEGATIVE QUANTIFIERS
3 Negative Concord is syntactic agreement
45(32)
3.1 Introduction: Negative Concord and neg-words
45(4)
3.2 The negative-quantifier approach
49(9)
3.2.1 Proposal
49(4)
3.2.2 Problems for the negative-quantifier approach
53(5)
3.2.3 Concluding remarks
58(1)
3.3 The Negative Polarity Item approach
58(8)
3.3.1 Proposal
58(1)
3.3.2 Challenges for the Negative Polarity Item approach
59(6)
3.3.3 Concluding remarks
65(1)
3.4 Negative Concord is syntactic agreement
66(10)
3.4.1 Proposal
66(3)
3.4.2 Application
69(4)
3.4.3 Challenges for the syntactic-agreement approach
73(3)
3.5 Conclusions
76(1)
4 Types of Negative Concord systems
77(34)
4.1 Variation on the domain of Negative Concord
77(1)
4.2 Strict vs Non-strict Negative Concord languages
78(10)
4.2.1 Strict vs Non-strict Negative Concord
78(8)
4.2.2 Obligatoriness and optionality of Negative Concord
86(2)
4.3 In search of a missing language: A closer look at Afrikaans
88(7)
4.4 Partial and/or invisible Negative Concord
95(14)
4.4.1 Negative Concord in French: Partial Negative Concord
95(5)
4.4.2 Negative Concord in English: Invisible Negative Concord
100(6)
4.4.3 Other invisible Negative Concord languages: Hindi and Punjabi
106(3)
4.5 Conclusions
109(2)
5 The flexibility of negative features
111(29)
5.1 The nature of negative features
111(1)
5.2 The Flexible Formal Feature Hypothesis
112(9)
5.2.1 A universal set of formal features?
113(3)
5.2.2 The algorithm
116(2)
5.2.3 Consequences
118(3)
5.3 Acquiring types of Negative Concord systems
121(13)
5.3.1 Double Negation: Dutch
121(1)
5.3.2 Non-strict Negative Concord: Italian
122(1)
5.3.3 Strict Negative Concord: Czech
123(1)
5.3.4 Negative Concord in Afrikaans Variety A
124(1)
5.3.5 Optional Negative Concord: Catalan and West Flemish
125(3)
5.3.6 Partial Negative Concord: French
128(1)
5.3.7 Invisible Negative Concord: English and Hindi/Punjabi
129(2)
5.3.8 Non-negative licensers of neg-words
131(3)
5.4 Consequences in the domain of language variation, acquisition, and change
134(4)
5.4.1 Types of Negative Concord systems: Language variation
134(1)
5.4.2 Types of Negative Concord systems: Language acquisition
135(3)
5.4.3 Consequences for language change
138(1)
5.5 Conclusions
138(2)
6 Diachronic developments in the domain of negation and Negative Concord
140(31)
6.1 The nature of negative features
140(1)
6.2 Jespersen's Cycle
141(3)
6.3 The emergence of Negative Concord
144(10)
6.3.1 The emergence of French Negative Concord
145(2)
6.3.2 From Strict to Non-strict Negative Concord
147(2)
6.3.3 The emergence of the Negative Concord system of Afrikaans A
149(1)
6.3.4 The emergence of French partial Negative Concord
150(1)
6.3.5 The emergence of English invisible Negative Concord
151(3)
6.4 The disappearance of Negative Concord and the emergence of double negatives
154(8)
6.4.1 En/ne-deletion in Dutch
154(4)
6.4.2 Emphatic Multiple Negative Expressions in Dutch and German
158(4)
6.5 Possible and impossible changes: The NALL-problem
162(8)
6.5.1 Emerging negative indefinites
162(1)
6.5.2 The NALL-problem
163(3)
6.5.3 A diachronic solution
166(4)
6.6 Conclusions
170(1)
7 Negative indefinites and split-scope readings
171(28)
7.1 The problem
171(1)
7.2 The phenomenon
172(5)
7.2.1 Modal verbs
173(2)
7.2.2 Object-intensional verbs
175(1)
7.2.3 Idiomatic expressions
176(1)
7.2.4 Concluding remarks
177(1)
7.3 Proposal
177(11)
7.3.1 Negative indefinites as pieces of syntactic structure
177(3)
7.3.2 Deriving the split-scope readings: Modal verbs
180(3)
7.3.3 Deriving the split-scope readings: Object-intensional verbs
183(2)
7.3.4 Deriving the split-scope readings: Idiomatic expressions
185(1)
7.3.5 Concluding remarks
186(2)
7.4 Comparison with other accounts
188(10)
7.4.1 Amalgamation and incorporation (Jacobs/Rullmann)
189(2)
7.4.2 Quantification over abstract individuals (Geurts)
191(2)
7.4.3 Higher-order quantification (De Swart)
193(1)
7.4.4 Negative indefinites and choice-functions (Abels and Marti)
194(2)
7.4.5 Negative indefinites are neg-words (Penka)
196(2)
7.5 Conclusions
198(1)
8 Neg-raising
199(27)
8.1 Introduction
199(3)
8.2 Arguments in favour of the syntactic approach
202(10)
8.2.1 Neg-raising and strict Negative Polarity Items
203(2)
8.2.2 Neg-raising and Horn-clauses
205(3)
8.2.3 Neg-raising and negative parentheticals
208(3)
8.2.4 Summing up
211(1)
8.3 Problems for CP14
212(9)
8.3.1 Horn-clauses and Cloud-of-Unknowing predicates
212(2)
8.3.2 Phonologically deleted negations
214(5)
8.3.3 Islands and Neg-raising
219(1)
8.3.4 Summing up
220(1)
8.4 Reinstalling the standard, pragma-semantic approach
221(3)
8.5 Conclusions
224(2)
INTERMEZZO
9 Intermezzo. The landscape of polarity-sensitive elements: Convergence vs divergence
226(7)
9.1 Neg-words and/or (other) Negative Polarity Items
226(1)
9.2 Convergence vs divergence
227(2)
9.3 Outline
229(4)
III POLARITY-SENSITIVITY
10 Strong vs weak Negative Polarity Items
233(21)
10.1 Introduction: Strong and weak Negative Polarity Items
233(1)
10.2 Exhaustification approaches to NPI-hood and the strong-weak distinction
234(8)
10.2.1 Exhaustification approaches to NPI-hood
234(3)
10.2.2 The strong-weak distinction among Negative Polarity Items
237(2)
10.2.3 Preliminary evidence for this treatment of the strong-weak distinction
239(3)
10.3 Problems for the exhaustification approach and the strong-weak Negative Polarity Item distinction
242(3)
10.3.1 Encoding weak and strong NPI-hood
242(1)
10.3.2 Syntactic locality and the exhaustification approach
243(2)
10.4 Syntactic vs pragmatic exhaustification
245(4)
10.5 Negative Polarity Items and domain-wideners: A re-appreciation
249(4)
10.6 Conclusions
253(1)
11 Other types of NPIs
254(26)
11.1 Introduction: Superstrong, strong/weak, and superweak Negative Polarity Items
254(1)
11.2 Strong/weak Negative Polarity Items
255(12)
11.2.1 Distribution
255(4)
11.2.2 Strong/weak Negative Polarity Items and split-scope constructions
259(2)
11.2.3 The source of need/hoeven/brauchen's NPI-hood
261(2)
11.2.4 Acquiring hoeven
263(4)
11.3 Superweak Negative Polarity Items
267(9)
11.3.1 Non-veridicality
267(1)
11.3.2 Negative Polarity Items and Free Choice Items
268(3)
11.3.3 Chinese shenme: A superweak Negative Polarity Item
271(3)
11.3.4 The Non-Entailment-of-Existence Condition and non-veridicality
274(1)
11.3.5 Acquiring shenme
275(1)
11.4 Acquiring weak Negative Polarity Items
276(2)
11.5 Conclusions
278(2)
12 Not a light negation
280(21)
12.1 Introduction
280(6)
12.2 Light negation (Schwarz and Bhatt)
286(2)
12.3 Proposal
288(10)
12.3.1 Negated indefinites
290(5)
12.3.2 Negated definites
295(2)
12.3.3 Negated disjunctions
297(1)
12.4 Conclusions
298(3)
13 Universal Quantifier PPIs
301(27)
13.1 Introduction
301(4)
13.1.1 Exhaustification approaches to Negative Polarity Items
301(2)
13.1.2 Question: Universal Positive Polarity Items
303(2)
13.1.3 Outline
305(1)
13.2 Modal Positive Polarity Items
305(11)
13.2.1 Modal auxiliaries and their scope with respect to negation
305(3)
13.2.2 Metalinguistic/contrastive negation
308(2)
13.2.3 Intervention effects
310(1)
13.2.4 Clause-external negation
311(1)
13.2.5 Variation among Positive Polarity Items
311(5)
13.3 Why Positive Polarity Items?
316(7)
13.3.1 Universal modal Positive Polarity Items as the mirror image of existential Negative Polarity Items
316(3)
13.3.2 Universal Positive Polarity Items as self-interveners
319(4)
13.4 Positive Polarity Items in the domain of universal quantifiers over individuals
323(4)
13.5 Conclusions
327(1)
14 The landscape of PPIs
328(23)
14.1 Introduction
328(1)
14.2 Strong vs weak Positive Polarity Items
329(5)
14.3 Hybrid Polarity Items
334(9)
14.3.1 Durative vs punctual until
335(3)
14.3.2 Durative until is punctual until
338(4)
14.3.3 Deriving the inferences
342(1)
14.4 Existential Polarity Items
343(6)
14.4.1 Existential Negative Polarity Items and Positive Polarity Items
343(4)
14.4.2 Modal existential Positive Polarity Items
347(2)
14.5 Conclusions
349(2)
15 Negation and clause types
351(30)
15.1 Introduction: Two phenomena
351(4)
15.1.1 The ban on True Negative Imperatives
351(2)
15.1.2 The ban on single negative markers in sentence-initial position in V2 languages
353(2)
15.1.3 Outline
355(1)
15.2 The ban on True Negative Imperatives
355(15)
15.2.1 Previous analyses
356(6)
15.2.2 Explaining the ban on True Negative Imperatives
362(5)
15.2.3 Additional evidence
367(3)
15.3 The ban on single negative markers in sentence-initial position in V-to-C languages
370(6)
15.3.1 Previous analysis: Barbiers (2002)
370(2)
15.3.2 Account
372(4)
15.4 Conclusions
376(5)
IV CONCLUSIONS, OPEN QUESTIONS, AND AVENUES FOR FURTHER RESEARCH
16 Conclusions and open questions
381(21)
16.1 Outline
381(1)
16.2 Conclusions concerning Negative Concord, and negative quantifiers and their internal complexity
381(4)
16.2.1 Negative Concord
381(3)
16.2.2 Negative quantifiers and their internal complexity
384(1)
16.3 Conclusions and open questions concerning the landscapes of Negative Polarity Items and Positive Polarity Items
385(4)
16.3.1 The landscape of Negative Polarity Items
385(2)
16.3.2 The landscape of Positive Polarity Items
387(2)
16.4 Open questions
389(11)
16.4.1 Open questions concerning Negative Concord
389(2)
16.4.2 Open questions concerning negative quantifiers and their internal complexity
391(3)
16.4.3 Open questions concerning the landscape of Negative Polarity Items
394(3)
16.4.4 Open questions concerning the landscape of Positive Polarity Items
397(3)
16.5 Final remarks
400(2)
17 Avenues for further research
402(33)
17.1 Outline
402(1)
17.2 Upward Agree, the FFFH, and the derivational behaviour of formal features
403(9)
17.2.1 Upward Agree
403(4)
17.2.2 The FFFH and the derivational behaviour of formal features
407(5)
17.3 Uninterpretable features, Positive Polarity Items, and the nature of V-to-I movement
412(10)
17.3.1 The Rich Agreement Hypothesis
412(5)
17.3.2 Alleged V-to-I movement in Korean
417(5)
17.4 Other types of syntactic dependencies
422(11)
17.4.1 Sequence of Tense
422(4)
17.4.2 Pro-drop
426(4)
17.4.3 Modal Concord
430(3)
17.5 Finally
433(2)
References 435(27)
Index 462
Hedde Zeijlstra is Professor of English Linguistics and Theory of Grammar at the University of Göttingen, and previously held positions at the universities of Amsterdam and Tübingen, and at MIT. He is an expert on the syntax-semantics interface, and has worked intensively on negation and negative dependencies, including negative concord, negative polarity sensitivity, and positive polarity sensitivity. He has also worked agreement phenomena, as well as tense, modality, and word order constraints. He is the co-author, with Olaf Koeneman, of Introducing Syntax (CUP, 2017).