Advertisement

Linguistics and Philosophy

, Volume 10, Issue 3, pp 325–387 | Cite as

Negative polarity and grammatical representation

  • Marcia C. Linebarger
Article

Keywords

Artificial Intelligence Computational Linguistic Negative Polarity Grammatical Representation 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anderson, S.: 1972, ‘How to Get Even’,Language 48, 893–906.Google Scholar
  2. Aoun, J., N. Hornstein, and D. Sportiche: 1980, ‘On Some Aspects of Wide Scope Quantification’,Journal of Linguistic Research 1, 69–96.Google Scholar
  3. Baker, C. L.: 1970a, ‘Double Negatives’,Linguistic Inquiry 1, 169–186.Google Scholar
  4. Baker, C. L.: 1970b, ‘Problems of Polarity in Counterfactuals’, in J. Sadock and A. Vanek (eds.),Studies Presented to Robert B. Lees by his Students, PIL Monograph Series 1, Linguistic Research, Inc, Edmonton.Google Scholar
  5. Barwise, J.: 1978, ‘Monotone Quantifiers and Admissible Sets’, in J. Fenstad, R. Grandy, and G. Sacks (eds.),Generalized Recursion Theory, North-Holland, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  6. Bolinger, D.: 1960, ‘Linguistic Science and Linguistic Engineering’,Word 16, 364.Google Scholar
  7. Borkin, A.: 1971, ‘Polarity Items in Questions’,Papers from the Seventh Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago.Google Scholar
  8. Carden, G.: 1973,Quantifiers in English: Logical Structure and Linguistic Variation, Taishukan Publishing Co., Tokyo.Google Scholar
  9. Carlson, G.: 1980, Polarity Any is Existential',Linguistic Inquiry 11, 799–804.Google Scholar
  10. Chomsky, N.: 1977, ‘Conditions on Rules of Grammar’, inEssays on Form and Interpretation, North-Holland, New York, pp. 163–210.Google Scholar
  11. Chomsky, N.: 1981, ‘On the Representation of Form and Function’,The Linguistic Review 1, 3–40.Google Scholar
  12. Fauconnier, G.: 1975a, ‘Pragmatic Scales and Logical Structure’,Linguistic Inquiry 6.Google Scholar
  13. Fauconnier, G.: 1975b, ‘Polarity and the Scale Principle’, inPapers from the Eleventh Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago.Google Scholar
  14. Fraser, B.: 1971, ‘An Analysis of Even in English’, in C. Fillmore and D. T. Langendoen (eds.),Studies in Linguistic Semantics, Holt, New York.Google Scholar
  15. Heim, I.: 1983, ‘A Note on Negative Polarity and Downward Entailingness’, paper presented to NELS.Google Scholar
  16. Hintikka, J.: 1977, ‘Quantifiers in Natural Language: Some Logical Problems II’,Linguistics and Philosophy 1, 135–172.Google Scholar
  17. Hintikka, J. 1980, ‘On the Any-Thesis and the Methodology of Linguistics’,Linguistics and Philosophy 4, 101–122.Google Scholar
  18. Hoeksema, J.: 1983, ‘Negative Polarity and the Comparative’,Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 1, 403–434.Google Scholar
  19. Horn, L.: 1969, ‘A Presuppositional Analysis of Only and Even’. inPapers from the Fifth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago.Google Scholar
  20. Horn, L.: 1972,On the Semantic Properties of Logical Operators in English, Ph.D. dissertation, UCLA.Google Scholar
  21. Horn, L.: 1978, ‘Remarks on Neg-Raising’, in Cole (ed.),Syntax and Semantics 9;Pragmatics, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  22. Horn, L., and Bayer, S.: 1984, ‘Short-Circuited Implicature: A Negative Contribution’,Linguistics and Philosophy 7, 397–414.Google Scholar
  23. Horn, L.: 1985, ‘Metalinguistic Negation and Pragmatic Ambiguity’,Language 61, 121–174.Google Scholar
  24. Hornstein, N.: 1984,Logic as Grammar: An Approach to Meaning in Natural Language. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  25. Jackendoff, R.: 1969, ‘An Interpretive Theory of Negation’,Foundations of Language 5, 218–241.Google Scholar
  26. Jackendoff, R.: 1972,Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  27. Karttunnen, L. and S. Peters: 1979, ‘Conventional Implicature’, in C.-K. Oh and D. D Dinneen (eds.),Syntax and Semantics 11, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  28. Kayne, R.: 1981, ‘Two Notes on the NIC’, in A. Belletti, L. Brandi, and L. Rizzi (eds.),Theory of Markedness in Generative Grammar: Proceedings of the 1979 GLOW Conference, Scuola Normale Superiore, Pisa, pp. 317–341.Google Scholar
  29. Kempson, R.: 1975,Presupposition and the Delimitation of Semantics, Cambridge University Press, England.Google Scholar
  30. Kempson, R.: 1984, ‘More on Any: Reply to Ladusaw’, paper presented toNELS.Google Scholar
  31. Klima, E.: 1964, ‘Negation in English’, in J. Fodor and J. Katz (eds.),The Structure of Language, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs.Google Scholar
  32. Kroch, A.: 1979,The Semantics of Scope in English, Garland, New York.Google Scholar
  33. Ladusaw, W.: 1979,Polarity Sensitivity as Inherent Scope Relations, Ph.D. dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.Google Scholar
  34. Ladusaw, W.: 1980, ‘On the Notion “Affective” in the Analysis of Negative Polarity Items’,Journal of Linguistic Research 1.Google Scholar
  35. Ladusaw, W.: 1983, ‘Logical Form and Conditions on Grammaticality’,Linguistics and Philosophy 6, 373–392.Google Scholar
  36. Lakoff, G.: 1972, ‘Linguistics and Natural Logic’, in D. Davidson, and G. Harman, (eds.),Semantics of Natural Language, D. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 545–665.Google Scholar
  37. Lakoff, R.: 1969, ‘Some Reasons Why There Can't Be Any Some-Any Rule’,Language 45 Google Scholar
  38. Lasnik, H.: 1975, ‘On the Semantics of Negation’, in Hockney et al. (eds.),Contemporary Research in Philosophical Logic and Linguistic Semantics, D. Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  39. Linebarger, M.: 1980a,The Grammar of Negative Polarity, Ph.D. dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  40. Linebarger, M.: 1980b, ‘Polarity Any as an Existential Quantifier’, inPapers from the Sixteenth Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago.Google Scholar
  41. May, R.: 1977,The Grammar of Quantification, Ph.D. dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  42. May, R.: 1980, ‘Logical Form as a Level of Linguistic Representation’, Indiana University Linguistics Club.Google Scholar
  43. May, R.: 1985,Logical Form: Its Structure and Derivation, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  44. McCawley, J.: 1968, ‘The Role of Semantics in Grammar’, in Bach and Harms (eds.),Universals in Linguistic Theory, Holt Rinehart and Winston, New York, pp. 125–170.Google Scholar
  45. Partee, B.: 1982, ‘Belief -Sentences and the Limits of Semantics’, in Peters and Saarinen (eds.),Processes, Beliefs, and Questions, D. Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  46. Quine, W.: 1960,Word and Object, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  47. Rizzi, L.: 1982, ‘Negation, Wh-Movement, and the Null Subject Parameter’, inIssues in Italian Syntax, Foris, Dordrecht, pp. 117–185.Google Scholar
  48. Safir, K.: 1982,Syntactic Chains and the Definiteness Effect, Ph.D. dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  49. Schmerling, S.: 1971, ‘A Note on Negative Polarity’.Papers in Linguistics 4, 200–206.Google Scholar
  50. Sperber, D. and D. Wilson: 1981, ‘Irony and the Use-Mention Distinction’, in P. Cole, (ed.),Syntax and Semantics 9: Pragmatics, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  51. Stalnaker, R. C.: 1974, ‘Pragmatic Presuppositions’, in M. K. Munitz and P. K. Unger (eds.),Semantics and Philosophy, New York University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  52. Williams, E.: 1974,Rule Ordering in Syntax, Ph.D. dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  53. Wilson, D.: 1975,Presuppositions and Non-Truth-Conditional Semantics, Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© D. Reidel Publishing Company 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marcia C. Linebarger
    • 1
  1. 1.Research and Development Division System Development CorporationPaoliUSA

Personalised recommendations