1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Studies in Language. International Journal sponsored by the Foundation “Foundations of Language”
  4. Online First Articles
  5. Online First Article
image of Asymmetry in temporal specification between affirmation and negation
EPUB
PDF

Abstract

Abstract

One cross-linguistically recurrent asymmetry between affirmation and negation is the neutralization of tense-aspect distinctions in negatives. A functional explanation proposed for this is that in their typical discourse context negatives have less need for temporal specification than affirmatives and in some languages this discourse preference is reflected as fewer tense-aspect distinctions in grammar. To examine whether such a discourse preference exists, we compare the use of temporal adverbials in affirmatives and negatives in English, Finnish and Korean corpus data. The results provide qualified support for the hypothesized discourse preference: in English and Korean, affirmatives are likelier to have temporal adverbials than negatives, but Finnish shows no statistically significant difference. In English and Finnish, affirmatives are likelier than negatives to contain adjuncts indicating temporal position. Verb semantics is found to interact with temporal specifications. The study also uncovers further differences between affirmatives and negatives in the use of adverbials.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/sl.23036.mie
2024-05-06
2024-12-10

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/sl.23036.mie
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/10.1075/sl.23036.mie/sl.23036.mie.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/sl.23036.mie&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. ArkiSyn = ArkiSyn database of Finnish conversational discourse, Helsinki Korp version
    ArkiSyn = ArkiSyn database of Finnish conversational discourse, Helsinki Korp version 2017 University of Turku, Department of Finnish and Finno-Ugric Languages. Retrieved fromurn.fi/urn:nbn:fi:lb-2017022801
  2. BNC = Spoken British national corpus 2014
    BNC = Spoken British national corpus 2014 2017 The ESRC Centre for Corpus Approaches to Social Science (CASS), Lancaster University & Cambridge University Press. Retrieved fromhttps://cqpweb.lancs.ac.uk/
     [Google Scholar]
  3. KCSC = Korean conversational speech corpus
    KCSC = Korean conversational speech corpus 2021 Beijing Magic Data Technology Co., Ltd. Retrieved fromhttps://magichub.com/datasets/korean-conversational-speech-corpus/
  4. Aijmer, Karin
    2002 English discourse particles: Evidence from a corpus (Studies in Corpus Linguistics 10) Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scl.10
     https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.10 [Google Scholar]
  5. Anderwald, Lieselotte
    2002 Negation in non-standard British English: Gaps, regularizations and asymmetries. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. van der Auwera, Johan & Olga Krasnoukhova
    2020 The typology of negation. InViviane Déprez & M. Teresa Espinal (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Negation, –. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198830528.013.3
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198830528.013.3 [Google Scholar]
  7. Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad & Edward Finegan
    1999 Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Chung, Inkie
    2007 Suppletive negation in Korean and distributed morphology. Lingua(). –. 10.1016/j.lingua.2005.10.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2005.10.002 [Google Scholar]
  9. Cornyn, William
    1944 Outline of Burmese grammar (Language Dissertation 38. Supplement to Language 20(4)). Baltimore: Linguistic Society of America. 10.2307/522027
     https://doi.org/10.2307/522027
  10. Croft, William
    2003 Typology and universals. 2nd edn.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Dahl, Östen
    1979 Typology of sentence negation. Linguistics. –. 10.1515/ling.1979.17.1‑2.79
     https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1979.17.1-2.79 [Google Scholar]
  12. Diessel, Holger
    2019 The grammar network: How linguistic structure is shaped by language use. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108671040
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108671040 [Google Scholar]
  13. Dryer, Matthews S.
    2013a [2005] Negative morphemes. InMatthew S. Dryer and Martin Haspelmath (eds.), World atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. Available online at: wals.info/chapter/112/. First published byOxford University Press 2005.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. 2013b [2011] Order of negative morpheme and verb. InMatthew S. Dryer and Martin Haspelmath (eds.), World atlas of language structures online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. Available online at: wals.info/chapter/143. First published byMax Planck Digital Library 2011.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Du Bois, John W.
    1985 Competing motivations. InJohn Haiman (ed.), Iconicity in syntax (Typological Studies in Language 6), –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.6.17dub
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.6.17dub [Google Scholar]
  16. Forest, Robert
    1993 Négations: Essai de syntaxe et de typologie linguistique (Collection Linguistique LXXVII). Paris: Klincksieck.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Givón, Talmy
    1978 Negation in language: Pragmatics, function, ontology. InPeter Cole (ed.), Syntax and semantics, Vol. IX. Pragmatics, –. New York: Academic Press. 10.1163/9789004368873_005
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368873_005 [Google Scholar]
  18. 1979 On understanding grammar (Perspectives in Neurolinguistics and Psycholinguistics). New York: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. 2001 Syntax: An introduction. Vol.. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/z.syns
     https://doi.org/10.1075/z.syns [Google Scholar]
  20. Greenberg, Joseph H.
    1966 Language universals, with special reference to feature hierarchies (Janua Linguarum, Series Minor LIX). The Hague: Mouton & Co.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Gries, Stefan Th. & Anatol Stefanowitsch
    2004 Extending collostructional analysis: A corpus-based perspective on ‘alternations’. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics(). –. 10.1075/ijcl.9.1.06gri
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.9.1.06gri [Google Scholar]
  22. Hakulinen, Auli
    2016 The word ny(t) as an adverb and as a particle in Finnish. InPeter Auer & Yael Maschler (eds.), NU/NÅ: A family of discourse markers across the languages of Europe and beyond, –. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110348989‑009
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110348989-009 [Google Scholar]
  23. 2001 On some uses of the discourse particle ‘kyl(lä)’ in Finnish conversation. InMargret Selting & Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen (eds.), Studies in interactional linguistics (Studies in Discourse and Grammar 10), –. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sidag.10.09hak. https://benjamins.com/catalog/sidag.10.09hak
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sidag.10.09hak [Google Scholar]
  24. Hakulinen, Auli, Maria Vilkuna, Riitta Korhonen, Vesa Koivisto, Tarja Riitta Heinonen & Irja Alho
    2004 Iso suomen kielioppi [Comprehensive grammar of Finnish]. Online version. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura. scripta.kotus.fi/visk
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Halliday, M. A. K.
    1994 An introduction to functional grammar. 2nd edn.London: Arnold.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Hardie, Andrew
    2012 CQPweb – combining power, flexibility and usability in a corpus analysis tool. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics(). –. 10.1075/ijcl.17.3.04har
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.17.3.04har [Google Scholar]
  27. Haselow, Alexander
    2011 Discourse marker and modal particle: The functions of utterance-final then in spoken English. Journal of Pragmatics(). –. 10.1016/j.pragma.2011.09.002
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.09.002 [Google Scholar]
  28. Haspelmath, Martin
    2006 Against markedness (and what to replace it with). Journal of Linguistics. –. 10.1017/S0022226705003683
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226705003683 [Google Scholar]
  29. 2008 Frequency vs. iconicity in explaining grammatical asymmetries. Cognitive Linguistics(). –. 10.1515/COG.2008.001
     https://doi.org/10.1515/COG.2008.001 [Google Scholar]
  30. 2021 Explaining grammatical coding asymmetries: Form–frequency correspondences and predictability. Journal of Linguistics(). –. 10.1017/S0022226720000535
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226720000535 [Google Scholar]
  31. Hasselgård, Hilde
    2010 Adjunct adverbials in English (Studies in English language). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511676253
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511676253 [Google Scholar]
  32. Hawkins, John A.
    2004 Efficiency and complexity in grammars. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199252695.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199252695.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  33. Helasvuo, Marja-Liisa
    2001 Emerging syntax for interaction: Noun phrases and clauses as a syntactic resource. InMargret Selting & Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen (eds.), Studies in interactional linguistics (Studies in Discourse and Grammar 10), –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/sidag.10.04hel
     https://doi.org/10.1075/sidag.10.04hel [Google Scholar]
  34. Honda, Isao
    1996 Negation: A cross-linguistic study. Buffalo: State University of New York at Buffalo PhD dissertation.
  35. Horn, Laurence R.
    2001 [1989] A natural history of negation. (The David Hume Series, Philosophy and Cognitive Science Reissues) Stanford: CSLI Publications. First published byUniversity of Chicago Press 1989.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Kang, Beom-mo
    2019 The alternative negative constructions in Korean: A logistic regression analysis. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory(). –. 10.1515/cllt‑2016‑0021
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cllt-2016-0021 [Google Scholar]
  37. Kiuru, Silva
    1977 Suomen kielen kieltohakuiset verbit: murreaineistoon perustuva syntaktis-semanttinen tutkimus [Verbs likely to be negative in Finnish: a syntactic-semantic study on dialectal material]. Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Levshina, Natalia & Steven Moran
    2021 Efficiency in human languages: Corpus evidence for universal principles. Linguistics Vanguard(). –. 10.1515/lingvan‑2020‑0081
     https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2020-0081 [Google Scholar]
  39. Love, Robbie, Claire Dembry, Andrew Hardie, Vaclav Brezina & Tony McEnery
    2017 The Spoken BNC2014: designing and building a spoken corpus of everyday conversations. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics(). –. 10.1075/ijcl.22.3.02lov
     https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.22.3.02lov [Google Scholar]
  40. Matthiessen, Christian M. I. M.
    2006 Frequency profiles of some basic grammatical systems: An interim report. InGeoff Thompson & Susan Hunston (eds.), System and corpus: Exploring connections, –. London: Equinox. 10.1558/equinox.19145
     https://doi.org/10.1558/equinox.19145 [Google Scholar]
  41. Meyer, David, Achim Zeileis & Kurt Hornik
    2021 vcd: Visualizing Categorical Data. R package version 1.4–9.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Miestamo, Matti
    2005 Standard negation: The negation of declarative verbal main clauses in a typological perspective (Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 31). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110197631
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197631 [Google Scholar]
  43. 2007 Symmetric and asymmetric encoding of functional domains, with remarks on typological markedness. InMatti Miestamo & Bernhard Wälchli (eds.), New challenges in typology: Broadening the horizons and redefining the foundations (Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs 189), –. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110198904.5.293
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110198904.5.293 [Google Scholar]
  44. 2011 Polar interrogatives in Uralic languages: A typological perspective. Linguistica Uralica (). –. 10.3176/lu.2011.1.01
     https://doi.org/10.3176/lu.2011.1.01 [Google Scholar]
  45. 2017 Negation. InAlexandra Aikhenvald & R. M. W. Dixon (eds.), Cambridge handbook of linguistic typology, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316135716.013
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316135716.013 [Google Scholar]
  46. Miestamo, Matti, Ksenia Shagal & Olli O. Silvennoinen
    2022 Typology and usage: The case of negation. Linguistic Typology at the Crossroads(). –. 10.6092/issn.2785‑0943/13508
     https://doi.org/10.6092/issn.2785-0943/13508 [Google Scholar]
  47. Murane, Elizabeth
    1974 Daga grammar: From morpheme to discourse (Summer Institute of Linguistics Publications in Linguistics and Related Fields 43). Norman: Summer Institute of Linguistics.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Payne, John. R.
    1985 Negation. InTimothy Shopen (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, Vol. I: Clause structure, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik
    1985 A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. R Core Team
    R Core Team 2021 R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org
     [Google Scholar]
  51. Ramstedt, Gustaf John
    1939 A Korean grammar (Mémoires de la Société Finno-Ougrienne 82). Helsinki: Société Finno-Ougrienne.
     [Google Scholar]
  52. Roberts, John R.
    1987 Amele (Croom Helm Descriptive Grammars). London: Croom Helm.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Shore, Susanna
    2020 Lauseita ja vesinokkaeläimiä: Perinteisestä funktionaaliseen lauseoppiin [Sentences and platypuses: From traditional to functional syntax] (Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seuran toimitteita 1460). Helsinki: Suomalaisen Kirjallisuuden Seura.
     [Google Scholar]
  54. Siegl, Florian
    2015 Negation in Forest Enets. InMatti Miestamo, Anne Tamm and Beáta Wagner-Nagy (eds.), Negation in Uralic Languages (Typological Studies in Language 108), –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.108.02sie
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.108.02sie [Google Scholar]
  55. Sohn, Ho-Min
    1999 The Korean language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  56. Teptiuk, Denys
    2020 Manner deictics in quotative indexes of Finno-Ugric. InÅshild Næess, Anna Margetts & Yvonne Treis (eds.), Demonstratives in discourse (Topics at the Grammar-Discourse Interface 6), –. Berlin: Language Science Press. 10.5281/ZENODO.4055832
     https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.4055832 [Google Scholar]
  57. Tottie, Gunnel
    1991 Negation in speech and writing: A study in variation. San Diego: Academic Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  58. Vandelanotte, Lieven
    2012 Quotative go and be like: Grammar and grammaticalization. InIsabelle Buchstaller & Ingrid van Alphen (eds.), Quotatives: Cross-linguistic and cross-disciplinary perspectives (Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research 15), –. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/celcr.15.11van
     https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.15.11van [Google Scholar]
  59. Varjo, Mikael
    2023 Nollalla jaettua: Korpustutkimus nollasubjektilauseista suomenkielisessä arkikeskustelussa [Divided by zero: A corpus study of zero-subject constructions in Finnish everyday conversation]. University of Turku doctoral dissertation. https://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-951-29-9167-9
  60. Vilkuna, Maria
    2000 Suomen lauseopin perusteet [Basics of Finnish syntax]. 2nd rev. edn. (Kotimaisten kielten tutkimuskeskuksen julkaisuja 90). Helsinki: Edita.
     [Google Scholar]
  61. 2021 The Finnish exclusive-negative construction ei…ku(i)n in the network of exclusion expressions. Eesti ja soome-ugri keeleteaduse ajakiri/Journal of Estonian and Finno-Ugric Linguistics(). –. 10.12697/jeful.2021.12.1.13
     https://doi.org/10.12697/jeful.2021.12.1.13 [Google Scholar]
  62. 2015 Negation in Finnish. InMatti Miestamo, Anne Tamm & Béata Wagner-Nagy (eds.), Negation in Uralic languages (Typological Studies in Language 108), –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.108.17vil
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.108.17vil [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/sl.23036.mie
Loading
Asymmetry in temporal specification between affirmation and negation
John Benjamins ; https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.23036.mie
/content/journals/10.1075/sl.23036.mie
/content/journals/10.1075/sl.23036.mie
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: temporal ; typology ; adverbial ; functional explanation ; negation

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