A Quantifier Approach to Negation in Natural Languages

Nordic Journal of Linguistics

Volumn 25, Issue 2, 2002, Pages 125-153

  Weib, Helmut ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF REGENSBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85011684064     PISSN: 03325865     EISSN: 15024717     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/033258602321093346     Document Type: Article

References (81)

1. Acquaviva, P. 1994. Representation of Operator-Variable Dependencies in Sentential Negation. Studio. Linguistica 48, 91–132.
2. Acquaviva, P. 1997. The Logical Form of Negation. New York: Garland.
3. Anderwald, L. 1999. Negation in Non-Standard British English. Diss. University of Freiburg i.Br.
4. Bach, E. 1986. The Algebra of Events. Linguistics and Philosophy 9, 5–16.
5. Barwise, J. & Cooper, R. 1981. Generalized Quantifiers and Natural Language. Linguistics and Philosophy 4, 159-219.
6. Bayer, J. 1997. Word Order in Bavarian Multiple Negation. Handout. 9. Wuppertaler Kolloquium.
7. Bayer, J. 2000. Wh-in-situ. Ms., University of Jena.
8. Bech, G. 1955/1957. Studien iiber das deutsche verbum infinitum, 2nd ed. Kopenhagen: Munksgaard Ti.ibingen: Niemeyer 1983. Beghelli, F. 1997. The Syntax of Distributivity and Pair-List Readings. In Szabolcsi, A. (ed.), Ways of Scope Taking. Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer, pp. 349–408.
9. Beghelli, F. & Stowell, T. 1997. Distributivity and Negation: The Syntax of each and every. In Szabolcsi, A. (ed.), Ways of Scope Taking. Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer, pp. 71–107.
10. Bornemann E. & Risch, E. 1978. Griechische Grammatik. Frankfurt a.M.: Diesterweg.
11. Brown, S. 1999. The Syntax of Negation in Russian. A Minimalist Approach. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
12. Chierchia, G. 1995. Dynamics of Meaning. Anaphora, Presupposition, and the Theory of Grammar. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
13. Chomsky, N. 1986. Knowledge of Language. Its Nature, Origin, and Use. New York: Praeger.
14. Chomsky, N. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA, and London: MIT Press.
15. Chomsky, N. 1999. Derivation by Phase. MIT Occasional Papers in Linguistics 18. Cambridge, MA: MITWPL.
16. Dahl, O. 1993. Negation. In Jacobs, J., von Stechow, A., Sternefeld, W. & Vennemann, T. (eds), Syntax. Ein internationales Handbuch zeitgenOssischer Forschung. An Interna-tional Handbook of Contemporary Research. 1. Halbband. Berlin, New York: de Gruyter, pp. 914–923.
17. Davidson, D. 1967. The Logical Form of Action Sentences. In Resher, N. (ed.), The Logic of Decision and Action. Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh University Press, pp. 81–95.
18. Deprez, V. 1997. A Non-Unified Analysis of Negative Concord. In Forget, D., Hirsch-biihler, P., Martineau, F. & Rivero, M.-L. (eds), Negation and Polarity. Syntax and Semantics. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins, pp. 53–74.
19. Deprez, V. 2000. Parallel (A)symmetries and che Internal Structure of Negative Expressions. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 18, 253–342.
20. Diesing, M. 1992. Indefinites. Cambridge, MA, and London: MIT Press.
21. Emonds, J. E. 1986. Grammatically Deviant Prestige Constructions. In Brame, M., Contreras, H. & Newmeyer, F. (eds), A Festschrift for Sol Saporta. Seattle: Noit Amrofer, pp. 93–129.
22. Geurts, B. 1998. Dynamic Semantics vs. DRT. Zeitschrift fiir Sprachwissenschaft 16, 209–226.
23. Giannakidou, A. 1997. The Landscape of Polarity Items. Dissertation Universitat Groningen.
24. Giannakidou, A. 2000. Negative Concord? Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 18, 457–523.
25. Giannakidou, A. & Quer, J. 1997. Two Mechanisms for the Licensing of Negative Indefinites. In Gabriele, L., Hardison, D. & Westmoreland, R. (eds), Papers from the 6th Annual Meeting of the Formal Linguistics Society of Midamerica (FLSM) 6, Indiana University Linguistics Club (IULC), Bloomington, pp. 103–114.
26. Haegeman, L. 1995. The Syntax of Negation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27. Haegeman, L. & Zanuttini, R. 1991. Negative Heads and the Neg Criterion. The Linguistic Review 8, 233–251.
28. Haspelmath, M. 1997. Indefinite Pronouns. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
29. Heim, I. 1982. The Semantics of Definite and Indefinite Noun Phrases. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
30. Heim, I. & Kratzer, A. 1998. Semantics in Generative Grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.
31. Higginbotham, J. 1985. On Semantics. Linguistic Inquiry 16, 457–593.
32. Higginbotham, J. 1987. Indefinites and Predication. In Reuland, E. & Meulen, A. ter (eds), The Representation of (In)Definiteness. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 43–70.
33. Hoeksema, J. 1997. Negation and Negative Concord in Middle Dutch. In Forget, D., Hirschbiihler, P., Martineau, F. & Rivero, M.-L. (eds), Negation and Polarity. Syntax and Semantics. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: Benjamins, pp. 139–156.
34. Homstein, N. 1995. Logical Form. From GB to Minimalism. Oxford and Cambridge: Blackwell.
35. Homstein, N. & Uriagereka, J. 2000. Labels and Projections: A Note on the Syntax of Quantifiers. Ms., University of Maryland. Jacobs, J. 1991. Negation. In von Stechow, A. & Wunderlich, D. (eds), Semantik. Semantics. Ein internationales Handbuch der zeitgenossischen Forschung. An Interna-tional Handbook of Contemporary Research. Berlin, New York: de Gruyter, pp. 560–596.
36. Kamp, H. 1981. A Theory of Truth and Semantic Representation. In Groenendijk, J. A. G. et al. (eds), Formal Methods in the Study of Language. Amsterdam: Mathematical Centre Tract 135, pp. 277–322.
37. Kayne, R. 1984. Connectedness and Binary Branching. Dordrecht: Foris.
38. Kiss, K. E. 1991. Logical Structure in Syntactic Structure: The Case of Hungarian. In Huang, J. & May, R. (eds.), Logical Structure and Linguistic Structure. Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer, pp. 111–147.
39. Kratzer, A. 1989. An Investigation of the Lumps of Thought. Linguistics and Philosophy 12, 607–653.
40. Kratzer, A. 1995. Stage-Level and Individual-Level Predicates. In Carlson, G. N. & Pelletier, F. J. (eds), The Generic Book. Chicago and London: University Press of Chicago, pp. 125–175.
41. Krifka, M. 1989. Nominal Reference, Temporal Constitution, and Quantification in Event Semantics. In Bartsch, R. et al. (eds), Semantics and Contextual Expressions. Dordrecht: Foris, pp. 75–115.
42. Krifka, M. 1992. A Framework for Focus-Sensitive Quantification. In Barker, C. & Dowty, D. (eds), SALT II. Proceedings from the Second Conference on Semantic and Linguistic Theory. Columbus: Ohio State University, pp. 215–236.
43. Labov, W. 1972. Negative Attraction and Negative Concord in English Grammar. Language 48, 773–818.
44. Ladusaw, W. A. 1992. Expressing Negation. In Barker, C. & Dowty, D. (eds), SALT II. Proceedings from the Second Conference on Semantic and Linguistic Theory. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University, pp. 237–259.
45. Ladusaw, W. A. 1994. Thetic and Categorial, Stage and Individual, Weak and Strong. In Harvey, M. & Santelmann, L. (eds), SALT IV Proceedings from the Fourth Conference on Semantic and Linguistic Theory. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, pp. 220–229.
46. Ladusaw, W. A. 1996. Negative Concord and Mode of Judgement. In Wansing, H. (ed.), Negation. A Notion in Focus. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, pp. 127–143.
47. Lahiri, U. 1998. Focus and Negative Polarity in Hindi. Natural Language Semantics 6, 57–123.
48. Larson, R. & Segal, G. 1995. Knowledge of Meaning. An Introduction to Semantic Theory. Cambridge, MA, aed London: MIT Press.
49. Lasnik, H. 1999. On Feature Strength: Three Minimalist Approaches to Overt Movement. Linguistic Inquiry 30, 197–217.
50. Lee, C. 1996. Negative Polarity Items in English and Korean. Language Sciences 18, 505–523.
51. Lemer, J.-Y. & Zimmermann, T. E. 1983. Presuppositions and Quantifiers. In Bauerle, R., Schwarze, C. & von Stechow, A. (eds), Meaning, Use and Interpretation of Language. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, pp. 290–301.
52. McDermid, V. 1996. Blue Genes. London: HarperCollins Publishers.
53. Newson, M. 1998. On the Nature of Inputs and Outputs: A Case Study of Negation. In Barbosa, P. et al. (eds), Is the Best Enough? Optimality and Competition in Syntax. Cambridge MA: MIT Press, pp. 315–336.
54. Oku, S. 2000. Definite and Indefinite Strict Identity in VP-Ellipsis. In Schwabe, K. & Zhang, N. (eds), Ellipsis in Conjunction. Tubingen: Niemeyer, pp. 179–194.
55. Ouhalla, J. 1997. The Structure and Logical Form of Negative Sentences. Linguistic Analysis 27, 220–244.
56. Pafel, J. 1998. Skopus und logische Struktur. Studien zum Quantorenskopus im Deutschen. Arbeitspapiere des Sonderforschungsbereiches 340: Sprachtheoretische Grundlagen fur die Computerlinguistik Nr. 129. Stuttgart and Tubingen.
57. Payne, J. R. 1985. Negation. In Shopen, T. (eds), Language Typology and Syntactic Description, vol. 1: Clause Structure. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 197—242. Progovac, L. 1994. Negative and Positive Polarity. A Binding Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
58. Rooth, M. 1995. Indefinites, Adverbs of Quantification, and Focus Semantics. In Carlson, G. N. & Pelletier, F. J. (eds), The Generic Book. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press, pp. 265–299.
59. Rooth, M. 1996. Focus. In Lappin, S. (ed.), The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 321–341.
60. Rowlett, P. 1996. Negative Configurations in French. Doctoral Diss., University of York. Distributed as University of Salford European Studies Research Institute Working Papers in Language and Linguistics 11.
61. Schein, B. 1993. Plural and Events. Cambridge, MA, and London: MIT Press.
62. Schiitze, C. T. 2001. On the Nature of Default Case. Syntax, 205–238.
63. Schwyzer, E. 1996. Griechische Grammatik. Auf der Grundlage von Karl Brugmanns Griechischer Grammatik. Zweiter Band. Syntax und syntaktische Stilistik. Vervoll-standigt und herausgegeben von Albert Debrunner. 3., unveranderte Auflage. Munchen: Beck.
64. Suner, M. 1995. Negative Elements, Island Effects and Resumptive no. The Linguistic Revue 12, 233–273.
65. Svenonius, P. 2000. Quantifier Movement in Icelandic. In Svenonius, P. (ed.), The Derivation of VO and OV. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: Benjamins, pp. 255–292.
66. Svenonius, P. 2002. Strains of Negation in Norwegian. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 69, 121–146.
67. Toth, I. 1999. Negative Polarity Licensing in Hungarian. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 46, 119–142.
68. Uriagereka, J. 1999. Minimal Restrictions on Basque Movements. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 17, 403-444.
69. Utiagereka, J. 2000. Comments on N. Chomsky's Derivation by Phase. Ms. University of Maryland.
70. Vine, B. 2001. Grashopper. London: Penguin Books.
71. WeiB, H. 1998. Syntax des Bairischen. Studien zur Grammatik einer natiirlichen Sprache. Tubingen: Niemeyer.
72. WeiB, H. 1998. Logik und Sprache: der Fall der doppelten Negation im Bairischen. Linguistische Berichte 175, 386–413.
73. WeiB, H. 1999. Duplex negatio non semper affirmat. A Theory of Double Negation in Bavarian. Linguistics 37, 819–846.
74. WeiB, H. 2001. On Two Types of Natural Languages. Some Consequences for Linguistics. Theoretical Linguistics 27, 87–103.
75. WeiB, H. 2001. Information Structure Meets Minimalist Syntax. On Argument Order and Case Morphology in Bavarian. In Meer, G. van der & Meulen, A. ter (eds), Making Sense: from Lexeme to Discourse in Honor of Werner Abraham on the Occasion of his Retirement. Groningen: Center for Language and Cognition, pp. 21–34.
76. WeiB, H. 2002. Three Types of Negation. A Case Study in Bavarian. In Barbiers, S., Comips, L. & van der Kleij, S. (eds), Syntactic Microvariation. Meertens Institute Electronic Publications in Linguistics (MIEPiL) vol. 2, pp. 305–332. (http://www.meertens.knaw.nl/projecten/sand/synmic)
77. WeiB, H. 2002. Indefinite Pronouns. Morphology and Syntax in Cross-linguistic Perspective. In Wiese, H. & Simon, H. (eds), Pronouns: Grammar and Representation. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins, pp. 85–107.
78. WeiB, H. [In progress]. An Evolutionary Model of Language Faculty. A New Proposal.
79. van der Wouden, T. 1997. Negative Contexts. Collocation, Polarity and Multiple Negation. London and New York: Routledge.
80. Zanuttini, R. 1991. Syntactic Properties of Sentential Negation. A Comparative Study of Romance Languages. Ph.D. thesis, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
81. Zanuttini, R. 1997. Negation and Clausal Structure. A Comparative Study of Romance Languages. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press.