Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-jr42d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T20:05:22.041Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Medial adjunct PPs in English: Implications for the syntax of sentential negation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 August 2012

Karen De Clercq ,
Liliane Haegeman  and
Terje Lohndal
Karen De Clercq
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, Ghent University, Blandijnberg 2, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium. karen.declercq@ugent.be; liliane.haegeman@ugent.be
Liliane Haegeman
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, Ghent University, Blandijnberg 2, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium. karen.declercq@ugent.be; liliane.haegeman@ugent.be
Terje Lohndal
Affiliation:
Department of Modern Foreign Languages, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Dragvoll, 7491 Trondheim, Norway. terje.lohndal@ntnu.no
Get access

Abstract

This paper provides evidence that medial adjunct PPs in English are possible. On the basis of corpus data, it is shown that sentence-medial adjunct PPs are not unacceptable and are attested. Our corpus data also reveal a sharp asymmetry between negative and non-negative adjunct PPs. The analysis of the corpus revealed the following pattern: Non-negative adjunct PPs such as at that time resist medial position and instead tend to be postverbal; negative adjunct PPs such as at no time appear medially rather than postverbally. In the second part of the paper, we broaden the empirical domain and include negative complement PPs in the discussion. It is shown that when it comes to the licensing of question tags, English negative complement PPs, which are postverbal, pattern differently from postverbal negative adjunct PPs. That is, sentences with a postverbal negative adjunct PP pattern with negative sentences in taking a positive question tag, while sentences containing a postverbal negative argument PP pattern with affirmative sentences in taking a negative tag. To account for the observed adjunct–argument asymmetry in the licensing of question tags, we propose that clauses are typed for polarity and we explore the hypothesis that a polarity head in the left periphery of the clause is crucially involved in the licensing of sentential negation.

Keywords

adjunctscomplementsnegationpolarityprepositions
Type
Research Article
Information
Nordic Journal of Linguistics , Volume 35 , Issue 1 , May 2012 , pp. 5 - 26
Copyright
Copyright © Nordic Association of Linguistics 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Belletti, Adriana. 1990. Generalized Verb Movement: Aspects of Verb Syntax. Turin: Rosenberg and Sellier.Google Scholar
Belletti, Adriana & Rizzi, Luigi. 2010. Moving verbal chunks. Ms., University of Siena.Google Scholar
BNC. 2010. The British National Corpus Online Service. Mark Davies. November–December 2010. http://corpus.byu.edu/bnc/ (accessed 15 January 2011).Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Kenstowicz, Michael (ed.), Ken Hale: A Life in Language, 1–52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 2008. On phases. In Freidin, Robert, Otero, Carlos P. & Zubizaretta, Maria Luisa (eds.), Foundational Issues in Linguistic Theory: Essays in Honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud, 133–166. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, Ken Ramshøj. 2005. Interfaces: Negation–Syntax–Brain. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Aarhus.Google Scholar
Christensen, Ken Ramshøj. 2008. NEG-shift, licensing, and repair strategies. Studia Linguistica 62 (2), 182–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 1999. Adverbs and Functional Heads. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cinque, Guglielmo. 2004. Issues in adverbial syntax. Lingua 114, 683–710.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
COCA. 2010. The Corpus of Contemporary American English Online Service. Mark Davies. November–December 2010. http://corpus.byu.edu/coca/ (accessed 15 January 2011).Google Scholar
Collins, Chris. 2005. A smuggling approach to the passive in English. Syntax 8, 81–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Clercq, Karen. 2010a. Neg-shift in English: Evidence from PP-adjuncts. In An, Duh-Ho & Kim, Soon-Yeon, The 12th Seoul International Conference on Generative Grammar: 2010 Movement in Minimalism, 231–251. Seoul: Hankuk Publishing Company.Google Scholar
De Clercq, Karen. 2010b. No in PPs: Evidence for Neg-shift in English. Handout for The Fifth Newcastle-Upon-Tyne Postgraduate Conference in Linguistics. Newcastle University, 23 March 2010.Google Scholar
De Clercq, Karen. 2011a. Negative PP-adjuncts and Scope. Presented at ConSOLE XIX. Groningen University, 5–8 January 2011.Google Scholar
De Clercq, Karen. 2011b. SQUAT, zero and no/nothing: Syntactic negation vs. semantic negation. In Nouwen, Rick & Elenbaas, Marion, Linguistics in the Netherlands 2011, 14–24. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Emonds, Joseph E. 1976. A Transformational Approach to English Syntax: Root, Structure-preserving, and Local Transformations. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Ernst, Thomas. 2002a. The Syntax of Adjuncts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Ernst, Thomas, 2002b. Adjuncts and word order asymmetries. In Di Sciullo, Anna Maria (ed.), Asymmetry in Grammar, vol. I: Syntax and Semantics, 178–207. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Frey, Werner & Pittner, Karin. 1998. Zur posiionierung von Adverbialen in deutschen Mittlefeld. Linguistische Berichte 176, 489–534.Google Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane. 1995. The Syntax of Negation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane. 2000. Negative preposing, negative inversion and the split CP. In Horn & Kato (eds.), 29–69.Google Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane. 2002. Sentence-medial NP-adjuncts in English. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 25 (1), 79–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane & Lohndal, Terje. 2010. Negative concord and multiple Agree: A case study of West Flemish. Linguistic Inquiry 41 (2), 181–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane & Zanuttini, Raffaella. 1991. Negative heads and the NEG-criterion. The Linguistic Review 8, 233–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane & Zanuttini, Raffaella. 1996. Negative concord in West Flemish. In Belletti, Adriana & Rizzi, Luigi (eds.), Parameters and Functional Head: Essays in Comparative Syntax, 117–180. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haumann, Dagmar. 2007. Adverb Licensing and Clause Structure in English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horn, Laurence R. 1989. A Natural History of Negation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Horn, Laurence R. & Kato, Yasuhiko (eds.). 2000. Negation and Polarity: Syntactic and Semantic Perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney & Pullum, Geoffrey K. et al. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jackendoff, Ray S. 1977. X′ Syntax: A Study of Phrase Structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Jayaseelan, K. A. 2008. Topic, focus and adverb positions in clause structure. Nanzan Linguistics 4, 43–68.Google Scholar
Jayaseelan, K. A. 2010. Stacking, stranding, and pied-piping: A proposal about word order. Syntax 13, 298–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kato, Yasuhiko. 2000. Interpretive asymmetries of negation. In Horn & Kato (eds.), 62–87.Google Scholar
Klima, Edward S. 1964. Negation in English. In Fodor, J[erry] A. & Katz, J[errold] J. (eds.), The Structure of Language, 246–323. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Laka, Itziar. 1990. Negation in Syntax: On the Nature of Functional Categories and Projections. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
Lambotte, Paul. 1998. Aspects of Modern English Usage. Paris & Brussels: De Boeck Université.Google Scholar
McCawley, James D. 1998. The Syntactic Phenomena of English, 2nd edn., 2 vols. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
McCloskey, James. 2011. Polarity and case-licensing: The cartography of the inflectional layer in Irish. Presented at GIST [Generative Initiatives in Syntactic Theory] 3: Cartographic Structures and Beyond. Ghent University, 14–15 May 2011.Google Scholar
Mittwoch, Anita, Huddleston, Rodney & Collins, Peter. 2002. The clause: Adjuncts. In Huddleston & Pullum et al., 663–784.Google Scholar
Vincenzo, Moscati. 2006. The Scope of Negation. Ph.D. dissertation, Università di Siena.Google Scholar
Moscati, Vincenzo. 2011. Negation Raising: Logical Form and Linguistic Variation. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Nakajima, Heizo. 1991. Transportability, scope ambiguity of adverbials, and the generalized binding theory. Journal of Linguistics 27, 337–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pittner, Karin. 1999. Adverbiale im Deutschen. Untersuchungen zu ihrer Stellung und Interpretation. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
Pittner, Karin. 2004. Adverbial positions in the German middle field. In Austin, Jennifer R., Engelberg, Stefan & Rauch, Gisa (eds.), Adverbials: The Interplay between Meaning, Context and Syntactic Structure, 253–287. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Progovac, Liliana. 1993. Negative polarity: Entailment and binding. Linguistics and Philosophy 20, 149–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Progovac, Liliana. 1994. Negative and Positive Polarity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pullum, Geoffrey K. & Huddleston, Rodney. 2002. Negation. In Huddleston & Pullum et al., 785–849.Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffrey & Svartvik, Jan. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Radford, Andrew. 2004. English Syntax: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Haegeman, Liliane (ed.), Elements of Grammar, 289–330. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Ross, John Robert. 1973. Slifting. In Gross, Maurice, Halle, Morris & Schützenberger, Marcel (eds.), The Formal Analysis of Natural Languages, 133–169. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudanko, Juhani. 1987. Towards a description of negatively conditioned subject operator inversion in English. English Studies: A Journal of English Language and Literature 68 (4), 348–352.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinclair, John (ed.). 1990. COBUILD English Grammar. London: Collins.Google Scholar
Smith, Neil & Cormack, Annabel. 1998. Negation, polarity and V positions in English. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics 10, 285–322.Google Scholar
Sobin, Nicolas. 2003. Negative inversion as nonmovement. Syntax 6, 183–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swan, Michael. 2005. Practical English Usage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tottie, Gunnel. 1983. Much about Not and Nothing: A Study of the Variation between Analytic and Synthetic Negation in Contemporary American English (Scripta Minora. Regiae Societatis Humanorum Litterarum Lundensis). Lund: CWK Gleerup.Google Scholar
Tubau, Susagna. 2008. Negative Concord in English and Romance: Syntax–Morphology Interface Conditions on the Expression of Negation. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
Zanuttini, Raffaella. 1997. Negation and Clausal Structure: A Comparative Study of Romance Languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeijlstra, Hedde. 2004. Sentential Negation and Negative Concord. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar