1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Linguistic Variation
  4. Online First Articles
  5. Online First Article
image of A simpler analysis of English negation (and the Bulgarian definite marker)
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

I propose a maximally simple analysis of English negation in which both and are adjuncts. is a phrasal adjunct that can attach to any category, while is a head adjunct that strictly selects the category AuxV. I show that this proposal captures all the facts of English negation, without needing a NegP or even multiple NegPs, as other recent work proposes (e.g., Thoms et al. 2023). There is also no need for a distinction between sentential negation and constituent negation. -support follows from the same mechanisms as insertion of auxiliaries generally. I also extend the analysis of to the definite marker in Bulgarian, and show that it accounts for the placement of this element without the need for post-syntactic mechanisms (as in, e.g., Adamson 2022). Crucial to the proposal is the idea that the syntax is built top-down or left-to-right rather than bottom-up as in most approaches.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/lv.24027.bru
2025-04-28
2025-11-10

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/lv.24027.bru
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Acquaviva, Paolo
    1994 The representation of operator-variable dependencies in sentential negation. Studia Linguistica. –. 10.1111/j.1467‑9582.1994.tb00852.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9582.1994.tb00852.x [Google Scholar]
  2. Adamson, Luke James
    2019 Derivational trapping and the morphosyntax of inflectionlessness. University of Pennsylvania dissertation.
  3. 2022 Transparency of inflectionless modifiers for Bulgarian definite marker placement. Journal of Slavic Linguistics. –. 10.1353/jsl.2022.a923067
     https://doi.org/10.1353/jsl.2022.a923067 [Google Scholar]
  4. Bailey, Laura R. & Claire Childs
    2024 Two negatives in Tyneside English questions: Negative concord or double negation?InJohan van der Auwera & Chiara Gianollo (eds.), Negative concord: A hundred years on, –. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783111202273‑011
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111202273-011 [Google Scholar]
  5. Baker, C. L.
    1991 The syntax of English not: The limits of core grammar. Linguistic Inquiry. –.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Baker, Mark C.
    1988 Incorporation: A theory of grammatical function changing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Beal, Joan
    1993 The grammar of Tyneside and Northumbrian English. InJames Milroy & Lesley Milroy (eds.), Real English: The grammar of English dialects in the British Isles, –. London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Bruening, Benjamin
    2010a Ditransitive asymmetries and a theory of idiom formation. Linguistic Inquiry. –. 10.1162/LING_a_00012
     https://doi.org/10.1162/LING_a_00012 [Google Scholar]
  9. 2010b Language-particular syntactic rules and constraints: English locative inversion and Do-support. Language. –. 10.1353/lan.0.0201
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.0.0201 [Google Scholar]
  10. 2013 By-phrases in passives and nominals. Syntax. –. 10.1111/j.1467‑9612.2012.00171.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9612.2012.00171.x [Google Scholar]
  11. 2014 Precede-and-command revisited. Language. –. 10.1353/lan.2014.0037
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2014.0037 [Google Scholar]
  12. 2016 Alignment in syntax: Quotative inversion in English. Syntax. –. 10.1111/synt.12121
     https://doi.org/10.1111/synt.12121 [Google Scholar]
  13. 2017 Subject auxiliary inversion. InMartin Everaert & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.), The Wiley Blackwell companion to syntax, vol., –. Somerset, NJ: John Wiley and Sons2nd edn. 10.1002/9781118358733.wbsyncom096
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118358733.wbsyncom096 [Google Scholar]
  14. 2018a Brief response to Muller. Language. –. 10.1353/lan.2018.0015
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2018.0015 [Google Scholar]
  15. 2018b The lexicalist hypothesis: Both wrong and superfluous. Language. –. 10.1353/lan.2018.0000
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2018.0000 [Google Scholar]
  16. 2024 Mari/Udmurt negation does not require post-syntactic operations (a reply toGeorgieva 2021) Ms., University of Delaware.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. . to appear. Selectional violations in coordination (a response to Patejuk and Przepiórkowski to appear). Linguistic Inquiryto appear.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Bruening, Benjamin & Eman Al Khalaf
    2019 No argument-adjunct asymmetry in reconstruction for binding condition C. Journal of Linguistics. –. 10.1017/S0022226718000324
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226718000324 [Google Scholar]
  19. 2020 Category mismatches in coordination revisited. Linguistic Inquiry. –. 10.1162/ling_a_00336
     https://doi.org/10.1162/ling_a_00336 [Google Scholar]
  20. Büring, Daniel & Christine Gunlogson
    2000 Aren’t positive and negative polar questions the same?Ms., UCSC.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Chomsky, Noam
    1957 Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton. 10.1515/9783112316009
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783112316009 [Google Scholar]
  22. 1993 A minimalist program for linguistic theory. InKenneth Hale & Samuel Jay Keyser (eds.), The view from building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, –. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. 2000 Minimalist inquiries: The framework. InRoger Martin, David Michaels & Juan Uriagereka (eds.), Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik, –. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Cinque, Guglielmo
    1999 Adverbs and functional heads. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780195115260.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195115260.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  25. Culicover, Peter W.
    1981 Negative curiosities. Bloomington, IN: Indian University Linguistics Club.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. De Clercq, Karen
    2013 A unified syntax of negation. Universiteit Gent dissertation.
  27. Dost, Ascander & Vera Gribanova
    2006 Definiteness marking in the Bulgarian. InDonald Baumer, David Montero & Michael Scanlon (eds.), Proceedings of the 25th west coast conference on formal linguistics, –. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Embick, David & Rolf Noyer
    2001 Movement operations after syntax. Linguistic Inquiry. –. 10.1162/002438901753373005
     https://doi.org/10.1162/002438901753373005 [Google Scholar]
  29. Emonds, Joseph
    1976 A transformational approach to English syntax. New York: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Franks, Steven
    2001 The internal structure of Slavic NPs, with special reference to Bulgarian. InAdam Przepiórkowski & Piotr Bański (eds.), Generative linguistics in Poland: Syntax and morphosyntax, –. Warszawa: Instytut Podstaw Informatyki PAN.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Goodhue, Daniel
    2022 Isn’t there more than one way to bias a polar question?Natural Language Semantics. –. 10.1007/s11050‑022‑09198‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-022-09198-2 [Google Scholar]
  32. Halle, Morris & Alec Marantz
    1993 Distributed morphology and the pieces of inflection. InKenneth Hale & Samuel Jay Keyser (eds.), The view from building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, –. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Halpern, Aaron
    1995 On the placement and morphology of clitics. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Harizanov, Boris
    2018 Word formation at the syntax-morphology interface: Denominal adjectives in Bulgarian. Linguistic Inquiry. –. 10.1162/LING_a_00274
     https://doi.org/10.1162/LING_a_00274 [Google Scholar]
  35. Harizanov, Boris & Vera Gribanova
    2015 How across-the-board movement interacts with nominal concord in Bulgarian. InKsenia Ershova, Joshua Falk & Jeffrey Geiger (eds.), Proceedings of the 51st annual meeting of the chicago linguistic society (cls), . Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Holmberg, Anders
    2015 The syntax of yes and no. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198701859.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198701859.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  37. Iatridou, Sabine & Hedde Zeijlstra
    2013 Negation, polarity, and deontic modals. Linguistic Inquiry. –. 10.1162/LING_a_00138
     https://doi.org/10.1162/LING_a_00138 [Google Scholar]
  38. Jackendoff, Ray S.
    1969 An interpretive theory of negation. Foundations of Language. –.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. 1972 Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Jamieson, E A.
    2018 Questions, biases and ‘negation’: Evidence from Scots varieties. University of Edinburgh dissertation.
  41. Jespersen, Otto
    1917 Negation in English and other languages. Copenhagen: A. F. Host.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Johannessen, Janne Bondi
    1998 Coordination. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198237099.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198237099.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  43. Kim, Jong-Bok & Ivan A. Sag
    2002 Negation without head-movement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory. –. 10.1023/A:1015045225019
     https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015045225019 [Google Scholar]
  44. Klima, Edward
    1964 Negation in English. InJerry A. Fodor & Jerrold J. Katz (eds.), The structure of language: Readings in the philosophy of language, –. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Koev, Todor
    2011 Definiteness as agreement: Evidence from Bulgarian. InMary Byram Washburn, Katherine McKinney-Bock, Erika Varis, Ann Sawyer & Barbara Tomaszewicz (eds.), Proceedings of the 28th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, –. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Kramer, Ruth
    2010 The Amharic definite marker and the syntax-morphology interface. Syntax. –. 10.1111/j.1467‑9612.2010.00139.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9612.2010.00139.x [Google Scholar]
  47. Kratzer, Angelika
    1996 Severing the external argument from its verb. InJohan Rooryck & Laurie Zaring (eds.), Phrase structure and the lexicon, –. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 10.1007/978‑94‑015‑8617‑7_5
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8617-7_5 [Google Scholar]
  48. Krifka, Manfred
    2015 Bias in commitment space semantics: Declarative questions, negated questions, and question tags. InProceedings of semantics and linguistic theory (SALT), –. 10.3765/salt.v25i0.3078
     https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v25i0.3078 [Google Scholar]
  49. Ladd, Robert D.
    1981 A first look at the semantics and pragmatics of negative questions and tag questions. InPapers from the seventeenth regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, –. Chicago: University of Chicago, Chicago Linguistic Society.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Linebarger, Marcia
    1980 The grammar of negative polarity. Massachusetts Institute of Technology dissertation. Distributed by MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, Cambridge, Mass.
     [Google Scholar]
  51. McCloskey, James
    1996 On the scope of verb raising in Irish. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory. –. 10.1007/BF00133403
     https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00133403 [Google Scholar]
  52. Millar, Martin & Keith Brown
    1979 Tag questions in Edinburgh speech. Linguistische Berichte. –.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Moltmann, Friederike
    1992 Coordination and comparatives. Massachusetts Institute of Technology dissertation. Distributed by MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, Cambridge, Mass.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Munn, Alan
    1987 Coordinate structure and X-bar theory. InZ. Laubitz & E. Guilfoyle (eds.), Mcgill working papers in linguistics, vol.(), –. Montreal: McGill University Department of Linguistics.
     [Google Scholar]
  55. 1993 Topics in the syntax and semantics of coordinate structures. University of Maryland College Park dissertation.
  56. Murphy, Andrew & Zorica Puškar
    2018 Closest conjunct agreement is an illusion. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory. –. 10.1007/s11049‑017‑9396‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-017-9396-6 [Google Scholar]
  57. Osborne, Timothy & Thomas Gross
    2017 Left node blocking. Journal of Linguistics. –. 10.1017/S0022226717000111
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226717000111 [Google Scholar]
  58. Penka, Doris
    2012 Split scope of negative indefinites. Language and Linguistics Compass. –. 10.1002/lnc3.349
     https://doi.org/10.1002/lnc3.349 [Google Scholar]
  59. Phillips, Colin
    1996 Order and structure. Massachusetts Institute of Technology dissertation. Distributed by MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, Cambridge, Mass.
     [Google Scholar]
  60. 2003 Linear order and constituency. Linguistic Inquiry. –. 10.1162/002438903763255922
     https://doi.org/10.1162/002438903763255922 [Google Scholar]
  61. Poletto, Cecilia
    2008 On negative doubling. Ms., University of Venice.
     [Google Scholar]
  62. Pollard, Carl & Ivan A. Sag
    1994 Head-driven phrase structure grammar. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  63. Pollock, Jean-Yves
    1989 Verb movement, universal grammar, and the structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry. –.
     [Google Scholar]
  64. Potsdam, Eric
    1997 NegP and subjunctive complements in English. Linguistic Inquiry. –.
     [Google Scholar]
  65. Pullum, Geoffrey K.
    1982 Syncategorematicity and English infinitival to. Glossa. –.
     [Google Scholar]
  66. Repp, Sophie
    2013 ‘common ground management: Modal particles, illocutionary negation and VERUM. InDaniel Gutzmann & Hans-Martin Gärtner (eds.), Beyond expressives: Explorations in use-conditional meaning, –. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004183988_008
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004183988_008 [Google Scholar]
  67. Richards, Norvin
    1999 Dependency formation and directionality of tree construction. InVivian Lin, Cornelia Krause, Benjamin Bruening & Karlos Arregi (eds.), Papers on morphology and syntax, cycle two, vol. 34 MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, –. Cambridge, MA: MITWPL.
     [Google Scholar]
  68. Romero, Maribel
    2015 High negation in subjunctive conditionals and polar questions. InProceedings of sinn und bedeutung, –. 10.18148/sub/2015.v19i0.247
     https://doi.org/10.18148/sub/2015.v19i0.247 [Google Scholar]
  69. Romero, Maribel & Chung-hye Han
    2004 On negative yes/no questions. Linguistics and Philosophy. –. 10.1023/B:LING.0000033850.15705.94
     https://doi.org/10.1023/B:LING.0000033850.15705.94 [Google Scholar]
  70. Ross, John Robert
    1973 Slifting. InMaurice Gross, Morris Halle & Marcel-Paul Schutzenberger (eds.), The formal analysis of natural languages, –. The Hague: Mouton. 10.1515/9783110885248‑009
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110885248-009 [Google Scholar]
  71. Rudin, Catherine
    2018 Multiple determination in Bulgarian and Macedonian: An exploration of structure, usage, and meaning. InStephen M. Dickey & Mark Richard Lauersdorf (eds.), V zeleni drželi zeleni breg: Studies in honor of marc l. greenberg, –. Bloomington, IN: Slavica Publishers.
     [Google Scholar]
  72. Schutze, Carson T.
    2004 Synchronic and diachronic microvariation in English do. Lingua. –. 10.1016/S0024‑3841(03)00070‑6
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-3841(03)00070-6 [Google Scholar]
  73. de Swart, Henriette
    1998 Licensing of negative polarity items under inverse scope. Lingua. –. 10.1016/S0024‑3841(98)00021‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-3841(98)00021-7 [Google Scholar]
  74. Thoms, Gary, David Adger, Caroline Heycock, E. Jamieson & Jennifer Smith
    2023 English contracted negation revisited: Evidence from varieties of Scots. Language. –. 10.1353/lan.2023.a914192
     https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2023.a914192 [Google Scholar]
  75. Wurmbrand, Susi
    2012 Parasitic participles in Germanic: Evidence for the theory of verb clusters. Taal en Tongval: Tijdschrift voor Taalvariatie. –. 10.5117/TET2012.1.WURM
     https://doi.org/10.5117/TET2012.1.WURM [Google Scholar]
  76. Zanuttini, Raffaella
    1997 Negation and clausal structure: A comparative study of Romance languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780195080544.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195080544.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  77. Zeijlstra, Hedde
    2004 Sentential negation and negative concord. University of Amsterdam dissertation. Available atling.auf.net/lingbuzz/000181
  78. Zhang, Niina Ning
    2010 Coordination in syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  79. Zwicky, Arnold M. & Geoffrey K. Pullum
    1983 Cliticization vs. inflection: English n’t. Language. –. 10.2307/413900
     https://doi.org/10.2307/413900 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/lv.24027.bru
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: adjuncts ; definite ; NegP ; constituent negation ; Scots ; English ; negation ; Bulgarian

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error