Types of NPIs and Nonveridicality

A universal property of natural language is that every language is able to express negation, i.e., every language has some device at its disposal to reverse the truth value of the propositional content of a sentence. However, languages may differ to quite a large extent as to how they express this negation. Not only do languages vary with respect to the form of negative elements, but the position of negative elements is also subject to cross-linguistic variation. Moreover, languages also differ in terms of the number of manifestations of negative morphemes: in some languages negation is realized by a single word or morpheme, in other languages by multiple morphemes. The syntax of negation is indissolubly connected to the phenomenon of (negative) polarity. In short, and leaving the formal discussion for later, negative polarity items (NPIs) are items whose distribution is limited to a number of contexts, which in some sense all count as negative. NPIs surface in various kinds of environments and may also vary in terms of the restrictions they impose on their licensing contexts and the type of licensing relation. Therefore, studying NPIs provides more insight not only into the nature of such context-sensitive elements, but also into the syntax of negation itself. Finally, it should be mentioned that the distinction between negative elements and NPIs is not always that clear-cut. In many languages negative indefinites, quite often referred to as n-words (after Laka 1990) appear to be semantically negative in certain constructions, while exhibiting NPIlike behavior in other configurations. The same may also apply to negative markers in some languages. This chapter aims at providing an overview of the most important recent findings and insights gained in the study of the syntax of negation and polarity.

Language, 2006

The main focus of this article is the occurrence of some polarity items (PIs) in the complements of emotive factive verbs and only. This fact has been taken as a challenge to the semantic approach to PIs , because only and factive verbs are not downward entailing (DE). A modification of the classical DE account is proposed by introducing the notion of nonveridicality as the one crucial for PI sanctioning. To motivate this move, it is first shown that two solutions in the direction of weakening classical monotonicity do not work: Strawson DE (von Fintel 1999) and weak DE (Hoeksema 1986). Weakening DE systematically either overgenerates or undergenerates, in either case failing to characterize the correct set of licensers. Nonveridicality is introduced as a conservative extension of DE and is shown to account for PIs also in contexts that are not DE (i.e. questions, modal verbs, imperatives, directive propositional attitudes). This theory, augmented with the premise that certain PIs (i.e. the liberal class represented by any) are subject to a weaker polarity dependency identified not as LICENSING but as RESCUING by nonveridicality, explains the occurrence of this particular class with only and emotive factive verbs. Crosslinguistic comparisons illustrate that the occurrence of PIs with only and emotive factives is not a general phenomenon, and further support the dual nature of polarity dependency and the semantic characterization of the elements that license or rescue PIs.* seminal work on English negation. In earlier works the main goal has been to describe the conditions under which English PIs like any and ever appear, but recent crosslinguistic studies have extended the empirical domain of polarity and made obvious a complexity that in the earlier works went unnoticed. We now know that any is one of many PI paradigms in the world's languages, and that the various PIs are not subject to identical distributional restrictions. At the same time, in order to predict whether an expression can act as a licenser, we have come to expect a coherent and relatively homogenous characterization of the set of expressions that allow PIs within and across languages.

2013

The distribution with respect to negation of verbs and auxiliaries in English needs a new analysis. Using data from the behaviour of modals, we argue for three negation positions: Echoic, Polarity, and Adverbial. The main claim we make is that Polarity Negation and Echoic Negation (and their Positive counterparts) have a categorial feature [V]. This fact explains why a verb cannot, but an auxiliary may, occur higher than Pol[NEG]. Soft constraints on the distribution of the Infl with which each [V] head must be associated determine the PF positions of the inflected heads.

Journal of Semantics, 2013

We discuss four experiments in which we investigated the acceptability of a large set of Negative Polarity Items (NPIs) in semantically and syntactically different environments. The first two experiments distinguish two subsets of NPIs whose behavior patterns with semantic definitions of weak and strong NPIs: One set (strong NPIs) is less acceptable in the local environment of non-anti-additive downward entailing operators than the other set (weak NPIs), but they are all equally acceptable in anti-additive environments. In the next two experiments we use these two sets of NPIs to investigate the impact of Neg-Raising environments with and without intervening quantifiers on their acceptability. Weak NPIs turn out to be more acceptable than strong NPIs, and intervening quantifiers lead to an equal reduction in acceptability for both sets, without making the occurrence of NPIs in these environments categorically unacceptable. We discuss the relevance of these theoretically unexpected results for an adequate analysis of NPIs in the grammatical system.

1 Sohng, Hong-Ki. 2014. On negative polarity items and free choice items in English with special reference to inherently negative predicate constructions. Linguistic Research 31(1), 135-163. This paper explores the uses of any that has a free choice interpretation in generic contexts and an existential interpretation in polarity contexts, with special focus on the uses of any in inherently negative predicate constructions. Following the approaches by Giannakidou (2001:673) and Montague (1969), I argue that inherently negative predicates are verbs with negation inherent in them, and that they are nonveridical operators. Considering any as a unitary lexical item, I have put forth the Licensing Conditions on Any, modifying Giannakidou's Condition and incorporating Chung's (2010) Free Choice Condition. I have shown that the uses of any in inherently negative predicate construction as well as the other uses of any in this paper can be adequately handled via the Licensing Conditions proposed. I have shown that the c-command requirement of the Licensing Conditions follows from the structural relationship between a nonveridical operator and any, and that the Condition on free choice of the Licensing Conditions is derived from the lexical semantics of any. (Korea Aerospace University)

Introduction of 'Negation and Polarity', Special Issue of Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 28:4. This introduction addresses some key issues and questions in the study of negation and polarity. Focussing on negative polarity and negative indefinites, it summarizes research trends and results. Special attention is paid to the issues of synchronic variation and diachronic change in the realm of negative polarity items, which figure prominently in the articles and commentaries contained in this special issue.

1998

The distribution with respect to negation of verbs and auxiliaries in English needs a new analysis. Using data from the behaviour of modals, we argue for three negation positions: Echoic, Polarity, and Adverbial. The main claim we make is that Polarity Negation and Echoic Negation (and their Positive counterparts) have a categorial feature [V]. This fact explains why a verb cannot, but an auxiliary may, occur higher than Pol [NEG]. Soft constraints on the distribution of the Infl with which each [V] head must be associated determine the PF positions of the inflected heads. * We are grateful to John Anderson, Keith Brown, John Harris and Dick Hudson for discussion.

Journal of Psycholinguistic Research

Negation is a universal component of human language; polarity sensitivity (i.e., lexical distributional constraints in relation to negation) is arguably so while being pervasive across languages. Negation has long been a field of inquiry in psychological theories and experiments of reasoning, which inspired many follow-up studies of negation and negation-related phenomena in psycholinguistics. In generative theoretical linguistics, negation and polarity sensitivity have been extensively studied, as the related phenomena are situated at the interfaces of syntax, semantics and pragmatics, and are thus extremely revealing about the architecture of grammar. With the now long tradition of research on negation and polarity in psychology and psycholinguistics, and the emerging field of experimental semantics and pragmatics, a multitude of interests and experimental paradigms have emerged which call for re-evaluations and further development and integration. This special issue contains a co...

The received view on the distribution of polarity items is that positive polarity items (PPIs) such as something are found in positive contexts; they are anti-licensed by negative contexts, which license negative polarity items (NPIs) such as anything. PPI some can however be found under the scope of clause-mate negation. Such a paradoxical use has been analyzed by Szabolcsi (2004) as a special case of licensing: two negative polarity licensors are required by the internal constitution of some. Some is however shown to occur under the scope of a single clause-mate negative. Single and dual negative environments are argued to depend on the same determinism. This determinism is shown to be activated propositions in the sense of Dryer (1996). Propositions accessible to the hearer characterize the contexts where some and other PPIs come under the scope of clause-mate negation in English and other languages, as demonstrated by the transferable diagnostics proposed. The reason for this correlation is that activation brings the whole proposition into the focus of negation, which does not interact directly with the PPI to produce infelicitous interpretations. A simple and general pragmatic determinism accounts for the marked character of the sequences, that allows a clear distinction to be maintained between licensed NPIs and anti-licensed PPIs.