LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Larrivée, Pierre
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects:
Received wisdom has it that positive polarity items such as someone are incompatible with negation (?*Someone didn't come). Yet negative contexts are attested with such items not only in their specific indefinite reading (e.g. There's someone who didn't come), but also in their non-specific reading (It isn't the case that someone came). It is the non-specific reading of indefinite quelqu'un as subject of a negative verb phrase which is analysed by the present paper. On the basis of a corpus of attested cases, it demonstrates that polemic contrast is the crucial condition of the considered interpretation. As quelqu'un is included within a presupposed proposition that is rejected as a whole by negation, negative contexts can accommodate an item which does not normally yield the interpretations negation does. Interpretation is thus presented as process of mutual adjustment between contextual readings allowed for by items, readings which can be modalised by discursive values.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • Attal, P. (1979). Ne´gation et quantificateurs. The`se de doctorat d' E´tat, Universite´ de Paris VIII.
    • Attal, P. (1976). Un argument en faveur de l'existence d'un acte illocutoire de ne´gation. In: J.-C. Chevalier et M. Gross (dir.), Me´thodes en grammaire fran¸caise. Paris: Klincksieck, pp. 175-182.
    • Attal, P. (1972). Tout le monde n'est pas beau. Essai sur les rapports entre tous et ne pas. Recherches Linguistiques de Vincennes, 1: 3-33.
    • Authier, M. et Reed, L. (1999). Structure and Interpretation in Natural Languages. Munich: Lincom Europa.
    • Baker, C. L. (1970). Double negatives. Linguistic Inquiry, 1.2: 169-186.
    • Borillo, A. (1979). La ne´gation et l'orientation de la demande de confirmation. Langue fran¸caise, 44: 27-41.
    • Bu¨ ring, D. (1997). The Meaning of Topic and Focus: The 59th Street Bridge Accent. Londres et New York: Routledge.
    • Corblin, F. et Tovena, L. (1999). On the multiple expression of negation in Romance. In: Y. D'Hulst, J. Rooryck et J. Schroten (dir.), Romance languages and linguistic theory. Amsterdam et Philadelphie: Benjamins, pp: 88-95.
    • Defrancq, B. et Willems, D. (1998). Quelque chose: un objet pas comme les autres. Travaux de Linguistique, 35: 91-102.
    • Ducrot, O. (1973). La Preuve et le Dire. Paris: Mame.
    • Giannakidou, A. (1998). Polarity Sensitivity as (Non)Veridical Dependency. Benjamins: Amsterdam and Philadelphia.
    • Givo´ n, T. (1978). Negation in language: pragmatics, function, and ontology. In: P. Cole (dir.), Syntax and Semantics. New York: Academic Press, 9: 69-112.
    • Horn, L. R. (1989). A Natural History of Negation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    • Iannucci, D. E. et Dodd, D. H. (1980). The development of some aspects of quantifier negation in children. Stanford Child Language Research Forum.
    • Kleiber, G. (1981). Proble`mes de re´fe´rence: descriptions de´finies et noms propres. Paris: Klincksieck.
    • Kra¨mer, I. (1998). Negation and the acquisition of 'specific' indefinites. Communication pre´sente´e a` la confe´rence Negation: Syntax and Semantics, octobre 1998, Universite´ de Salford.
    • Ladusaw, W. A. (1980). Polarity sensitivity as inherent scope relations. New York: Garland.
    • Lambrecht, K. (1994). Information Structure and Sentence Form: Topic, Focus, and the Mental Representations of Discourse Referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    • Larrive´e, P. (Sous e´valuation). Qui que ce soit, polarite´ ne´gative et organisation du sens linguistique. 188 pages.
    • Larrive´e, P. (2003). Conditions d'interpre´tation, termes a` polarite´ ne´gative sujets et groupes verbaux ne´gatifs. In: F. Corblin, S. Ferrando et L. Kupferman (dir.), Actes du Colloque Inde´finis et pre´dications en fran¸cais, Universite´ Paris-Sorbonne, 3-5 octobre 2002. Paris: Presses universitaires de Paris-Sorbonne.
    • Larrive´e, P. (2001). L'interpre´tation des phrases ne´gatives: porte´e et foyer des ne´gations en fran¸cais. Bruxelles: Duculot.
    • Larrive´e, P. (1996). Polyse´mie de la ne´gation de proposition. In: K. Fall, J.-M. Le´ard et P. Siblot (dir.), Polyse´mie et construction du sens. Montpellier: Presses de l'Universite´ Paul-Vale´ry, pp. 63-77.
    • Larrive´e, P. (1995). De quelque chose a` de quoi. In: R. Fournier et H. Wittmann (dir.), Le fran¸cais des Ame´riques. Trois-Rivie`res: Presses universitaires de Trois-Rivie`res, pp. 119-125.
    • Lasnik, H. (1975). On the semantics of negation. In: D. J. Hockney, W. Harper et B. Freed (dir.), Contemporary Research in Philosophical Logic and Linguistics Semantics: Proceedings of a Conference Held at the University of Western Ontario, London, Canada. Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 279-311.
    • Lasnik, H. (1972). Analyses of Negation in English. The`se de doctorat, MIT.
    • Martin, R. (1966). Le mot rien et ses concurrents en fran¸cais. Paris: Klincksieck.
    • Milsark, G. (1974). Existential Sentences in English. The`se de doctorat, MIT.
    • Muller, C. (2002). Les bases de la syntaxe, e´tudes de grammaire contrastive. Pessac: Presses universitaires de Bordeaux.
    • Muller, C. (1991). La ne´gation en fran¸cais: syntaxe, se´mantique et e´le´ments de comparaison avec les autres langues romanes. Gene`ve: Droz.
    • Muller, C. (1977). Analyses linguistiques des relations de champ entre quantificateur et ne´gation. Langages, 48: 60-83.
    • Oukada, L. (1982). On On. The French Review, 56.1: 93-105.
    • Smet-Bosveld, L. de. (1987). Ne´gation et expressions quantifiantes. In: R. de Dardel, C. Vet et B. Kampers-Manhe (dir.), E´ tudes de linguistique fran¸caise offertes a` Robert de Dardel par ses amis et colle`gues. Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 143-159.
    • Tovena, L. M. (1998). The Fine Structure of Polarity Sensitivity. New York et Londres: Garland.
    • Tsai, W.-T. D. (2003). Three types of existential quantification in Chinese. Y. A. Li et A. Simpson (dir.), Functional Structure(s), Form and Interpretation. Perspectives from East Asian languages. Londres et New York: Routledge Curzon.
    • Van Driessche, W. (2000). A` la recherche de quelque chose. E´ tude morphosyntaxique du grand me´connu des 'pronoms inde´finis' fran¸cais. Me´moire de maˆıtrise, Universiteit Gent.
    • Vogeleer, S. (2001). French negative sentences with avant 'before'-phrases and jusqu'a` 'until'-phrases. In: Y. D'Hulst, J. Rooryck et J. Schroten (dir.). Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 1999. Selected papers from 'Going Romance' 1999, Leiden, 9-11 December 1999. Amsterdam et Philadelphie: Benjamins, pp. 355-382.
    • Willems, D. (1998). Un petit rien sur quelque chose. In: M. Pierrard, L. Rosier, D. Van Raemdonck, A. Englebert (dir.), La ligne claire: de la linguistique a` la grammaire. Me´langes offerts a` Marc Wilmet a` l'occasion de son 60e anniversaire. Bruxelles: Duculot, pp. 137-145.
    • Wilson, D. (1999). Metarepresentation in linguistic communication. UCL Working Papers in Linguistics, 11: 127-161.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article