940 likes | 1.2k Views
Multiple Negation and Iconicity. Ludovic De Cuypere, Johan van der Auwera and Klaas Willems. F ifth Symposium On Iconicity In Language And Literature. 17-20 March 2005, Krakow . 2 Types. 1. Je ne chante pas. 2 Types. 1. Je ne chante pas NEG1 NEG2. 2 Types.
E N D
Multiple Negation and Iconicity Ludovic De Cuypere, Johan van der Auwera and Klaas Willems Fifth Symposium On Iconicity In Language And Literature. 17-20 March 2005, Krakow
2 Types 1. Je ne chante pas
2 Types 1. Je ne chante pas NEG1NEG2
2 Types 1. Je ne chante pas NEG1NEG2 2. I don’t see nothing
2 Types 1. Je ne chante pas NEG1NEG2 2. I don’t see nothing NEG NEG IND PRON
Type 1: Formal Strategies French Je ne chante pas ‘I don’t sing’ FREE Araona (Tacanan; Bolivia) (Pitman 1980:60) Dizi pi-ba-ma road NEG-see-NEG ‘(S)he didn’t see the road Huallaga Quechua (Quechuan; Peru) (Weber 1989:335) Mana rura-shka-:-chu not do-PERF-1-NEG ‘I did not do it’
Type 1: Formal Strategies French Je ne chante pas ‘I don’t sing’ FREE Araona (Tacanan; Bolivia) (Pitman 1980:60) Dizi pi-ba-ma road NEG-see-NEG ‘(S)he didn’t see the road’ BOUND Huallaga Quechua (Quechuan; Peru) (Weber 1989:335) Mana rura-shka-:-chu not do-PERF-1-NEG ‘I did not do it’
Type 1: Formal Strategies French Je ne chante pas ‘I don’t sing’ FREE Araona (Tacanan; Bolivia) (Pitman 1980:60) Dizi pi-ba-ma road NEG-see-NEG ‘(S)he didn’t see the road BOUND Huallaga Quechua (Quechuan; Peru) (Weber 1989:335) Mana rura-shka-:-chu not do-PERF-1-NEG ‘I did not do it’ COMB.
First Observations Multiple Negation (type 1: e.g. ne...pas) 1. found all over the world 2. not restricted to one language family 3. frequent / not rare
First Observations Multiple Negation (type 1: e.g. ne...pas) 1. found all over the world 2. not restricted to one language family 3. frequent / not rare How may iconicity be involved?
Jespersen’s Cycle • jeo ne di (Old F.) • je ne dis pas (Mod. St. F.) • je dis pas (Mod. Coll. F.) • ‘I do not say’
Jespersen’s Cycle • jeo ne di(Old F.) • je ne dis (pas) • je ne dis pas(Mod.St.F.) • je (ne) dis pas • je dis pas(Mod.Coll. F.) • ‘I do not say’ 1. the negator is strengthened 2. the negator bleaches and becomes part of the negator 3. the original negator loses ground
Jespersen’s Cycle • jeo ne di(Old F.) • je ne dis (pas) • je ne dis pas(Mod.St.F.) • je (ne) dis pas • je dis pas(Mod.Coll. F.)
Jespersen’s Cycle • jeo ne di(Old F.) • je ne dis (pas) • je ne dis pas(Mod.St.F.) • je (ne) dis pas • je dis pas(Mod.Coll. F.) je ne marche unpas ‘I do not walk a step’
ne + V movement + (un) pas ne + V +(pas)
ne + V movement + (un) pas Object/NEG2 ne + V +(pas) NEG2
NEG1 < NEG1 + NEG2 Reinforcement of Form = Reinforcement of Meaning
NEG1 < NEG1 + NEG2 Reinforcement of Form = Reinforcement of Meaning Diagrammatic iconicity
Diagrammatic iconicity • jeo ne di(Old F.) • je ne dis (pas) • je ne dis pas(Mod.St.F.) • je (ne) dis pas • je dis pas(Mod.Coll. F.) • ‘I do not say’ 1 > 2: reinforcement = iconic
Diagrammatic iconicity • jeo ne di(Old F.) • je ne dis (pas) • je ne dis pas(Mod.St.F.) • je (ne) dis pas • je dis pas(Mod.Coll. F.) • ‘I do not say’ 1 > 2: reinforcement = iconic 2 > 3: reanalysis = loss of iconicity
Reinforcement of negation 1. Why does NEG1 need reinforcement? 2. Is NEG2 always the result of reinforcement?
1. Why does NEG1 need reinforcement? 1.1 Phonetically: NEG1 to weak 1.2 [T]he addition serves to make the negative more impressive as being more vivid or picturesque. (Jespersen 1917:15) 1.3 ne...pas as “Discordantiel ... Forclusif”
1.1 Phonetically: NEG1 to weak • another element in the sentence is stressed (Jespersen 1917:4) • danger of becoming unrecognizable (Bernini & Ramat 1996:30) OE menn ne cunnon [mεn:ə kun:õ] men NEG know ‘the men didn’t know’
1.1 Phonetically: NEG1 to weak • another element in the sentence is stressed (Jespersen 1917:4) • danger of becoming unrecognizable (Bernini & Ramat 1996:30) OE mennne cunnon [mεn:ə kun:õ] men NEG know ‘the men didn’t know’
1.1 Phonetically: NEG1 to weak • another element in the sentence is stressed (Jespersen 1917:4) • danger of becoming unrecognizable (Bernini & Ramat 1996:30) OE menn ne cunnon [mεn:ə kun:õ] men NEG know ‘the men didn’t know’ improbable for all type1 languages
1.2 To make the negative more impressive • the chief use of a negative sentence being to contradict and to point a contrast (Jespersen 1917:5) • Givón (2001:370) • A:What’s new? • B:My wife is pregnant. • A: Congratulations! (2) A:What’s new? B: My wife isn’t pregnant. A: Gee, was she supposed to be?
1.2 To make the negative more impressive • the chief use of a negative sentence being to contradict and to point a contrast (Jespersen 1917:5) • Givón (2001:370) • A:What’s new? • B:My wife is pregnant. • A: Congratulations! (2) A:What’s new? B: My wife isn’t pregnant. A: Gee, was she supposed to be? Negation corrects an affirmative (presupposition)
1.3 Discordantiel ... Forclusif Alfred ne chante pas Damourette & Pichon (1930)
1.3 Discordantiel ... Forclusif Alfred ne chante pas D • prepares NEG • breaks the affirmative • ~ non-factual marker Damourette & Pichon (1930)
1.3 Discordantiel ... Forclusif Alfred ne chante pas D • prepares NEG • breaks the affirmative • ~ non-factual marker ~ Je crains qu’il ne vienne Damourette & Pichon (1930)
1.3 Discordantiel ... Forclusif Alfred ne chante pas D F • prepares NEG • breaks the affirmative • ~ non-factual marker • finalizes/realizes NEG • always follows D Damourette & Pichon (1930)
1.3 Discordantiel ... Forclusif Jespersen’s cycle • jeo ne di(Old F.) • je ne dis (pas) • je ne dis pas(Mod.St.F.) • je (ne) dis pas • je dis pas(Mod.Coll. F.) • ne is NEG • ne = D/too weak for NEG • 3. NEG = D + F • 4. F reinterpreted as NEG • 5. pas is NEG
1.3 Discordantiel ... Forclusif Jespersen’s cycle • jeo ne di(Old F.) • je ne dis (pas) • je ne dis pas(Mod.St.F.) • je (ne) dis pas • je dis pas(Mod.Coll. F.) • ne is NEG • ne = D/too weak for NEG • 3. NEG = D + F • 4. F reinterpreted as NEG • 5. pas is NEG At no stage NEG1 + NEG2!
1.3 Discordantiel ... Forclusif Kahrel (1996:78) Quechua Maŋarayi Babungo NEG + NON-FACTUAL Navaho Arabic
1.3 Discordantiel ... Forclusif Kahrel (1996:78) Quechua Maŋarayi Babungo NEG + NON-FACTUAL Navaho Arabic = D + F
1.3 Discordantiel ... Forclusif Kahrel (1996:78) Quechua Maŋarayi Babungo NEG + NON-FACTUAL Navaho Arabic = D + F
1.3 Discordantiel ... Forclusif Kahrel (1996:78) Quechua Maŋarayi Babungo NEG + NON-FACTUAL Navaho Arabic = D + F
2. NEG2: always the result of reinforcement? 2.1 Through Language contact 2.2 Through Sentence Final Negation 2.3 Through reanalysis of another marker
2.1 Language contact • Aikhenvald (2002:134) • Tariana (Arawakan; Brazil) • ne ma-na-kade-mha. • NEG NEG-want-NEG-PRES.NONVIS • Tucano (Tucanoan; Brazil) • neê ia-tí-sa • NEG want-NEG-PRES.NONVIS.nonthird.p • ‘(I) do not want anything at all’
2.1 Language contact • Aikhenvald (2002:134) • Tariana (Arawakan; Brazil) • ne ma-na-kade-mha. • NEG NEG-want-NEG-PRES.NONVIS • Tucano (Tucanoan; Brazil) • neê ia-tí-sa • NEG want-NEG-PRES.NONVIS.nonthird.p • ‘(I) do not want anything at all’
2.1 Language contact • Aikhenvald (2002:134) • Tariana (Arawakan; Brazil) • ne ma-na-kade-mha. • NEG NEG-want-NEG-PRES.NONVIS • Tucano (Tucanoan; Brazil) • neê ia-tí-sa • NEG want-NEG-PRES.NONVIS.nonthird.p • ‘(I) do not want anything at all’ only a few cases