Linguistics and Philosophy

, Volume 19, Issue 6, pp 619–666 | Cite as

Polarity sensitivity as lexical semantics

  • M. Israel


Artificial Intelligence Computational Linguistic Polarity Sensitivity Lexical Semantic 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Anscombre, Jean-Claude and Oswald Ducrot: 1983, L'Argumentation dans la Langue, Mardaga, Bruxelles.Google Scholar
  2. Baker, C. L.: 1970, ‘Double Negatives’,Linguistic Inquiry 1, 169–86.Google Scholar
  3. Bolinger, Dwight: 1972,Degree Words, Mouton, The Hague.Google Scholar
  4. Borkin, Ann: 1971, ‘Polarity Items in Questions’,CLS 7, 53–62.Google Scholar
  5. Brown, Penelope and Stephen Levinson: 1978, ‘Universals in Language Usage: Politeness Phenomena’, in E. Goody (ed.),Questions and politeness, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 56–289.Google Scholar
  6. Carlson, Greg: 1980, ‘Polarity Any is Existential’,Linguistic Inquiry 11, 799–804.Google Scholar
  7. Edmondson, J. A.: 1981, ‘Affectivity and Gradient Scope’,CLS 17, 38–44.Google Scholar
  8. Edmondson, J. A.: 1983, ‘Polarized Auxiliaries’, in F. Heny and B. Richards (eds.),Linguistic Categories: Auxiliaries and Related Puzzles, Vol. I, D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, pp. 49–68.Google Scholar
  9. Fauconnier, Gilles: 1975a, ‘Polarity and the Scale Principle’,CLS 11, 188–99.Google Scholar
  10. Fauconnier, Gilles: 1975b, ‘Pragmatic Scales and Logical Structures’,Linguistic Inquiry 6, 353–75.Google Scholar
  11. Fauconnier, Gilles: 1979, ‘Implication Reversal in a Natural Language’, in F. Guenther and S. J. Schmidt (eds.),Formal Semantics and Pragmatics for Natural Languages, D. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 289–301.Google Scholar
  12. Fauconnier, Gilles: 1980,Etude de Certains Aspects Logiques et Grammaticaux et de la Quantification et de L'Anaphore en Français et en Anglais, Thèse présentée devant L'Université de Paris VII, 1976. Atelier Reproduction des Thèses, Lille.Google Scholar
  13. Fillmore, Charles J., Paul Kay, and Mary Catherine O'Connor: 1988, ‘Regularity and Idiomaticity in Grammatical Constructions: The Case of Let Alone’,Language 64, 501–38.Google Scholar
  14. Francescotti, Robert M.: 1995, ‘Even: the Conventional Implicature Approach Reconsidered’,Linguistics and Philosophy 18, 153–173.Google Scholar
  15. Giannakidou, Anastasia: 1994, ‘The Semantic Licensing of Negative Polarity Items and the Modern Greek Subjunctive’, inLanguage and Cognition 4: Yearbook of the Research Group for Theoretical and Applied Linguistics of the University of Groningen.Google Scholar
  16. Haspelmath, Martin: 1993, ‘A Typological Study of Indefinite Pronouns’, Ph.D. thesis, Freie Universität Berlin.Google Scholar
  17. Heim, Irene: 1984, ‘A Note on Negative Polarity and Downward Entailingness’,Proceedings of NELS 14, 98–107.Google Scholar
  18. Hinds, Marilyn: 1974, ‘Doubleplusgood Polarity Items’,CLS 10, 259–268.Google Scholar
  19. Hoeksema, Jack: 1983, ‘Negative Polarity and the Comparative’,Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 1, 403–434.Google Scholar
  20. Hoeksema, Jack: 1994, ‘On the Grammaticalization of Negative Polarity Items’,Proceedings of the Berkeley Linguistics Society XX.Google Scholar
  21. Horn, Laurence R.: 1969, ‘A Presuppositional Analysis of only and even‘,CLS 5, 97–108.Google Scholar
  22. Horn, Laurence R.: 1970, ‘Ain't it Hard (anymore)’,CLS 6, 318–327.Google Scholar
  23. Horn, Laurence R.: 1972, ‘On the Semantic Properties of Logical Operators in English’, Ph.D. dissertation, distributed by IULC, 1976.Google Scholar
  24. Horn, Laurence R.: 1985, ‘Metalinguistic Negation and Pragmatic Ambiguity’,Language 61, 121–74.Google Scholar
  25. Horn, Laurence R.: 1989,A Natural History of Negation, University of Chicago Press, Chicago and London.Google Scholar
  26. Horn, Laurence R.: 1996, ‘Exclusive Company: Only and the Dynamics of Vertical Inference’,Journal of Semantics 13, 1–40.Google Scholar
  27. Hübler, Axel: 1983,Understatements and Hedges in English, John Benjamins, Amsterdam/ Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  28. Israel, Michael: 1995a, ‘Negative Polarity and Phantom Reference’,Proceedings of BLS XXI, 162–173.Google Scholar
  29. Israel, Michael: 1995b, ‘Review of Negative Contexts by Ton van der Wouden’,Glot International 1(5), 10–12.Google Scholar
  30. Israel, Michael, 1995c, ‘The Scalar Model of Polarity Sensitivity’, paper delivered at theOttawa Conference on Negation: Syntax and Semantics.Google Scholar
  31. Kadmon, Nirit and Fred Landman: 1993, ‘Any’,Linguistics and Philosophy 16, 353–422.Google Scholar
  32. Kay, Paul: 1983, ‘Linguistic Competence and Folk Theories of Language: Two English Hedges’,Proceedings of BLS IX, 128–37.Google Scholar
  33. Kay, Paul: 1989, ‘Contextual Operators: respective, respectively, and vice versa’,Proceedings of BLS XV, 181–192.Google Scholar
  34. Kay, Paul: 1990, ‘Even’,Linguistics and Philosophy 13, 59–111.Google Scholar
  35. Klima, Edward S.: 1964, ‘Negation in English’, in J. Fodor and J. Katz (eds.),The Structure of Language: Readings in the Philosophy of Language, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., pp. 246–323.Google Scholar
  36. Krifka, Manfred: 1990, ‘Some Remarks on Polarity Items’, in D. Zaefferer (ed.),Semantic Universals and Universal Semantics, Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 150–189.Google Scholar
  37. Krifka, Manfred: 1994, ‘The Semantics and Pragmatics of Weak and Strong Polarity Items in Assertions’,Proceedings of SALT IV, 195–219.Google Scholar
  38. Ladusaw, William: 1980,Polarity Sensitivity as Inherent Scope Relations, Garland Publishing, New York and London.Google Scholar
  39. Ladusaw, William: 1983, ‘Logical Form and Conditions on Grammaticality’,Linguistics and Philosophy 6, 373–92.Google Scholar
  40. Laka, Itziar: 1990, ‘Negation in Syntax: On the Nature of Functional Categories and Projections’, Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
  41. Lakoff, George: 1972, ‘Hedges: A Study in Meaning Criteria and the Logic of Fuzzy Concepts’,CLS 8, 183–228.Google Scholar
  42. Lakoff, Robin: 1973, ‘The Logic of Politeness; or, minding your p's and q's’,CLS 9 149–62.Google Scholar
  43. Langacker, Ronald W.: 1987,Foundations of Cognitive Grammar vol. 1: Theoretical Prerequisities, Stanford University Press, Stanford.Google Scholar
  44. Lee, Young-Suk and Laurence Horn: 1994, ‘Any as Indefinite plusEven’, Ms. Yale University.Google Scholar
  45. Linebarger, Marcia: 1980, ‘The Grammar of Negative Polarity’, Ph.D. Dissertation, MIT.Google Scholar
  46. Linebarger, Marcia: 1987, ‘Negative Polarity and Grammatical Representation’,Linguistics and Philosophy 10, 325–87.Google Scholar
  47. Linebarger,Marcia: 1991, ‘Negative Polarity as Linguistic Evidence’,Papers from the Parasession on Negation, CLS 27, 165–188.Google Scholar
  48. Löbner, Sebastian: 1987, ‘Quantification as a Major Module of Natural Language Semantics’, in J. Groenendijk et al. (eds.)Studies in Discourse Representation Theory and the Theory of Generalized Quantifiers, pp. 53–85. Foris: Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  49. Löbner, Sebastian: 1989, ‘German schon-erst-noch: An Integrated Analysis’,Linguistics and Philosophy 12, 167–212.Google Scholar
  50. Michaelis, Laura A.: 1992, ’Aspect and the Semantics-pragmatics Interface: The Case of already’,Lingua 87, 321–339.Google Scholar
  51. Michaelis, Laura A.: 1993. “‘Continuity” within Three Scalar Models: The Polysemy of Adverbial still’,Journal of Semantics 10, 193–237.Google Scholar
  52. Moxey, Linda M. and Anthony J. Sanford: 1993,Communicating Quantities: A Psychological Perspective. Hove (UK) and Hillsdale (USA): Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Ltd.Google Scholar
  53. Moxey, Linda M. and Anthony J. Stanford: 1994, ‘Psychological Studies of Quantifiers’,Journal of Semantics 11(3), 153–170.Google Scholar
  54. Progovac, Ljiljana: 1992, ‘Negative Polarity: A Semantico-Syntactic Approach’,Lingua 86, 271–299.Google Scholar
  55. Progovac, Ljiljana: 1994,Negative and Positive Polarity, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  56. Raghibdoust, Shahla: 1994, ‘The Semantic-Pragmatic Nature of the Persian Polarity Items’, Ms. University of Ottawa.Google Scholar
  57. Rullmann, Hotze: 1996, ‘Two Types of Negative Polarity Items’,Proceedings of NELS 26.Google Scholar
  58. Schmerling, Susan: 1971, ‘A Note on Negative Polarity’,Papers in Linguistics 4, 200–206.Google Scholar
  59. Spitzbardt, Harry: 1963, ‘Overstatement and Understatement in British and American English’,Philologica Pragensia 6(45), 277–286.Google Scholar
  60. Stern, Gustaf: 1931,Meaning and Change of Meaning, Indiana University Press, Bloomington.Google Scholar
  61. Sweetser, Eve: 1990,From Etymology to Pragmatics: Metaphorical and Cultural Aspects of Semantic Structure, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  62. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs: 1988, ‘Pragmatic Strengthening and Grammaticalization’,Proceedings of BLS XIV, 204–214.Google Scholar
  63. Traugott, Elizabeth Closs and Ekkehard König: 1991, ‘The Semantics-pragmatics of Grammaticalization Revisited’, in E. C. Traugott and B. Heine (eds.),Approaches to Grammaticalization, vol. 1, John Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, pp. 189–218.Google Scholar
  64. Uribe-Etxebarria, Marfa: 1994,Interface Licensing Conditions on Negative Polarity Items: A Theory of Polarity and Tense Interactions, Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
  65. van der Auwera, Johan: 1993, ‘Already and Still: Beyond Duality’,Linguistics and Philosophy 16, 613–53.Google Scholar
  66. van der Wouden, Ton: 1994,Negative Contexts, Groningen Dissertations in Linguistics: University of Groningen.Google Scholar
  67. van Os, Charles: 1989,Aspekte der Intensivierung im Deutschen, Tübingen: Gunter Narr Verlag.Google Scholar
  68. Verhagen, Arie: 1995, ‘Meaning and the Coordination of Cognition’, Paper presented at ICLA 4, Albuquerque, New Mexico.Google Scholar
  69. von Bergen, Anke and Karl von Bergen: 1993,Negative Polarität im Englischen, Narr Tübingen.Google Scholar
  70. Yoshimura, Akiko: 1994, ‘A Cognitive Constraint on Negative Polarity Phenomena’,Proceeedings of BLS XX.Google Scholar
  71. Zwarts, Frans: 1990, ‘The Syntax and Semantics of Negative Polarity’, to appear inViews on the Syntax-Semantics Interface II, S. Busemann et al. (eds.), Berlin.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Israel
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Linguistics 0108The University of California — San DiegoLa Jolla, CAUSA

Personalised recommendations