1 / 60

Expression and interpretation of negation: a bidirectional OT typology

Expression and interpretation of negation: a bidirectional OT typology. Henri ëtte de Swart Utrecht University. Expressing negation. Natural languages: ways to express negation/denial : not . First-order propositional connective  Natural languages: negative indefinites , nobody .

gwendolyn-winters
Download Presentation

Expression and interpretation of negation: a bidirectional OT typology

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Expression and interpretation of negation: a bidirectional OT typology Henriëtte de Swart Utrecht University

  2. Expressing negation • Natural languages: ways to express negation/denial: not. • First-order propositional connective  • Natural languages: negative indefinites, nobody. • First-order quantifier x.

  3. Negation and cognition • Assumption: something like or something equivalent to first-order logic part of general human cognition. • Prediction: negation and negative quantifiers behave alike across languages. • Prediction falsified by data.

  4. Quanta Costa?

  5. DN and NC • Nobody said nothing. (Eng) xy • Niemand zei niets. (Dutch) xy • Nadie miraba a nadie. (Spa) xy • Nessuno ha parlato con nessuno. (Ital) xy • Personne n’a rien dit. (Fr) ambiguous

  6. Negation in context • Double negation versus negative concord • negative quantifiers versus n-words. • In isolation: same form, same meaning. • In a sequence: same forms, different meanings.

  7. De Swart & Sag (2002) • Lexical claim: n-words denote negative quantifiers, just like negative indefinites. • Syntax-semantics interface (HPSG): N-store collects all negative quantifiers; interpretation upon retrieval. • Semantic claim: polyadic quantification. Iteration  double negation. Resumption negative concord.

  8. Main insights • Polyadic quantification/HPSG grammar: defines space of possible meanings in language. • No lexical difference between negative quantifiers and n-words. • No ‘hidden’ negations in syntax. • Retrieval determines meaning at the syntax-semantics interface.

  9. Grammar and typology • Grammar does not predict when iteration or resumption arises. • Cross-linguistic variation: typology. • Two main classes: negative concord languages (NC) and double negation languages (DN).

  10. Modeling typology? • Richter and Sailer (2006): complement general rules of grammar with language specific constraints. • NC languages: Negation Complexity constraint (Romance, Slavic..). • DN languages: Negation Faithfulness constraint (English, German, ..).

  11. Evaluation • Why do languages ‘bother’ to develop these additional constraints? • Relation between constraints? Typological theory? • How to account for language change in the system of negation?

  12. Typology in OT • All constraints are universal. • Constraints are soft (violable). • Ranking of constraints determined by language-specific grammar. • Typology by reranking. • Diachronic change: (gradual) process of promotion/demotion of constraints.

  13. Syntax-semantics interface • OT syntax: choose the optimal form for a given meaning. • OT semantics: choose the optimal interpretation for a given form. • Bi-directional OT: evaluate pairs of form and meaning.

  14. Propositional negation • Production issue: how does a language express the meaning p? • FaithNeg: reflect non-affirmativity of the input in the output. • Faithfulness constraint • ‘double-edged’ constraint: both in OT syntax, and in OT semantics.

  15. Markedness of negation • *Neg: avoid negation in the output. • Markedness constraint • FaithNeg >> *Neg • Ranking fixed across languages • Negation is marked in form/meaning (opposed to affirmation).

  16. Propositional negation

  17. Negative sentences • It is not raining. [English] • No vino Pedro. [Spanish] Not came Pedro. • Ni fydd Sioned yna. [Welsh] • Not be.fut Sioned there.

  18. Interpretation

  19. Bi-directional optimization

  20. Indefinites under negation • Production: how do languages express the meaning x1 x2 x3 P(x1,x2, x3)? • Three cases: • plain indefinites, • negative polarity items, • n-words.

  21. indefinites • Example: Dutch, Turkish, .. • Ik heb niet onmiddellijk iets gekocht. I have not immediately something bought. • Niemand heeft iets aan iemand gezegd. No one has something to someone said.

  22. Negative polarity items • Languages in which plain indefinites are positive polarity items may use negative polarity items. • Example: English, Basque, .. • *I did not buy something • I did not buy anything. • Nobody said anything to anyone.

  23. N-words • Languages in which plain indefinites are positive polarity items may use n-words. • N-words denote x in isolation, but express a single negative statement together with sentential negation or other n-words (x1 x2 x3).

  24. Example: Spanish • A: Qué viste? B: Nada A: What did you see? B: nothing. • No vino nadie. Not came nobody. • Nadie miraba a nadie Nobody looked at nobody.

  25. NPIs and n-words • N-words denote x in isolation, NPIs (n particular minimizers) denote x. • NPIs have to be licensed, n-words are ‘self-licensing’ (preverbal, fragment answers). • Negative concord is limited to anti-additive contexts, many NPIs occur in decreasing or non-veridical contexts.

  26. N-words in OT • N-words mark ‘negative’ variables (Corblin and Tovena 2003). • Functional motivation: mark focus of negation (Haspelmath 1997). • In OT terms: faithfulness constraint MaxNeg. • MaxNeg: Mark an argument under negation as negative (use negative indefinites in the scope of an anti-additive operator).

  27. Constraint interaction • Relevant Rankings (OT syntax) • FaithNeg >> *Neg >> MaxNeg [produce indefinites] • FaithNeg >> MaxNeg >> *Neg [produce n-words]

  28. Indefinites (production)  Dutch, German, Turkish,..

  29. N-word (production)  Romance, Slavic, Greek, Hungarian..

  30. Interpretation • Issue: Does a sequence of neg items that express x in isolation express a single or a double (multiple) negation? • InterpretNeg (IntNeg): Interpret all neg expressions in the input as contributing a negative meaning in the output.

  31. Ranking • MaxNeg and IntNeg are mirror images of each other (syntax/semantics). • Relevant rankings to consider for interpretation: • FaithNeg >> *Neg >> IntNeg [NC] • FaithNeg >> IntNeg >> *Neg [DN]

  32. DN (interpretation)

  33. NC (Interpretation)

  34. Bi-directional grammar • Negative concord: MaxNeg >> *Neg >> IntNeg ‘Mark negative variables’ • Double negation: IntNeg >> *Neg >> MaxNeg ‘First-order compositional meaning’

  35. Results so far • Whether a neg expression is interpreted as a negative quantifier or as an n-word depends on bi-directional grammar, not on lexical meaning (uniformly ). • Constraints are universal, ranking is language-specific (NC vs. DN). • Reranking = typology in OT

  36. Other rankings? • Three constraints allow 6 rankings: • MaxNeg >> *Neg >> IntNeg NC • MaxNeg >> IntNeg >> *Neg unstable • *Neg >> MaxNeg >> IntNeg unstable • *Neg >> IntNeg >> MaxNeg unstable • IntNeg >> MaxNeg >> *Neg unstable • IntNeg >> *Neg >> MaxNeg DN

  37. Recoverability problem

  38. Sentential negation • Haspelmath (1997): subtypes of negative indefinites, depending on relation to marker of negation. • Class I: SN mandatory (Rumanian, Greek, Afrikaans, Polish,..) (strict NC) • Class II: SN impossible (Dutch, English) • Class III: SN with postverbal n-words only (Italian, Spanish, Portuguese). (non-strict NC)

  39. Non-strict NC: asymmetry • Preverbal versus postverbal n-words, e.g. Spanish, Portuguese, Italian, .. • Maria non ha parlato con nessuno. Maria sn has talked to nobody. • Nessuno ha parlato con nessuno. • *Maria ha parlato di niente con nessuno • *Nessunonon ha parlato con nessuno.

  40. Non-strict NC in OT • NegFirst: Negation is preverbal (Horn) • Postverbal n-word with SN (Ladusaw 1992: clausal scope).

  41. Preverbal n-word • Relevant for production only!

  42. Strict NC: mandatory SN • Negative indefinites always co-occur with SN: Rumanian, Greek, Polish,.. • Nikt nie przyszekl [Polish] • Nobody SN came. • Nie widzialam nikogo. • SN saw nobody

  43. Strict NC in OT • MaxSN: a negative clause must bear a marker of sentential negation (sn) Relevant for production only!

  44. Special Case: Catalan • En Pere no ha fet res. The Peter SN has done nothing. • *En Pere ha fet res. • Ningú (no) ha vist en Joan. Nobody (SN) has seen John. • Preverbal SN required for postverbal n-word, optional for preverbal n-word.

  45. Postverbal n-word • NegFirst active: insertion of SN.

  46. Pre-verbal n-word • MaxSN and *Neg equal in ranking. • Language change in progress: Spanish influence leads to demotion MaxSN.  

  47. Special case: French • Written French: type I language, preverbal ne always required. • Il ne vient pas. Il ne dit rien. He SN comes SN. He SN says nothing. • Spoken French: demotion of MaxSN. • Il vient pas. Il dit rien. He comes SN He says nothing

  48. Written French • Preverbal ànd postverbal n-words require ne: Il ne dit rien.

  49. Spoken French • Neither preverbal nor postverbal n-word requires ne: Il dit rien. • Language change in progress: demotion of MaxSN.

  50. Negative clauses • Written French: Il ne vient pas

More Related