Outer negation of universal quantifier phrases

  • Chris CollinsEmail author


This paper discusses two ways of negating DP quantifier phrases. In one way, NEG modifies the quantifier D directly with the structure [[NEG D] NP] (inner negation). In the other way, NEG modifies the whole DP with the structure [NEG DP] (outer negation). I give evidence based on negative polarity items that negated universal quantifier phrases like not every student involve outer negation (contra Hoeksema in Linguist Anal 16:25–40, 1986; in: ESCOL ’87, pp 100–113, 1987).


Negation Quantifiers Weak NPIs Exceptive phrases 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.



I thank Frances Blanchette, Larry Horn and Paul Postal for comments on earlier versions of this paper. I thank Vicki Carstens, Stephanie Harves, Richard Kayne, Maria Tierney and Rachel Szekely for judgments.


  1. Collins, C. (2016). Not even. Natural Language Semantics, 24, 291–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Collins, C. (2017). A scope freezing effect with negated quantifier phrases. Natural Language Semantics, 25, 315–327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Collins, C., & Postal, P. M. (2014). Classical NEG raising. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Gajewski, J. (2002). On analyticity in natural language. Ms., University of Connecticut.Google Scholar
  5. Gajewski, J. (2008). NPI any and connected exceptive phrases. Natural Language Semantics, 16, 69–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gajewski, J. (2011). Licensing strong NPIs. Natural Language Semantics, 19, 109–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Heim, I., & Kratzer, A. (1998). Semantics in generative grammar. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  8. Hoeksema, J. (1986). Monotonicity phenomena in natural language. Linguistic Analysis, 16, 25–40.Google Scholar
  9. Hoeksema, J. (1987). The logic of exception. In ESCOL ’87 (pp. 100–113).Google Scholar
  10. Hoeksema, J. (1996). The semantics of exception phrases. In J. van der Does & J. van Eijk (Eds.), Quantifiers, logic and language (pp. 145–177). Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
  11. Horn, L. R. (1996). Exclusive company: Only and the dynamics of vertical inference. Journal of Semantics, 13, 1–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Horn, L. R. (2005). Diagnosing a diagnostic: Revisiting the quantifier constraint on exceptives. Ms., Yale.Google Scholar
  13. Keenan, E. L. (1996). The semantics of determiners. In S. Lappin (Ed.), The handbook of contemporary semantic theory (pp. 41–65). London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  14. Keenan, E. L., & Stavi, J. (1986). A semantic characterization of natural language determiners. Linguistics and Philosophy, 9, 253–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ladusaw, W. (1980). Polarity sensitivity as inherent scope relations. New York: Garland Publishing.Google Scholar
  16. Ladusaw, W. (2002/1980). On the notion of affective in the analysis of negative-polarity items. In P. Portner & B. H. Partee (Eds.), Formal semantics: The essential readings (pp. 457–470). London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  17. Linebarger, M. C. (1987). Negative polarity and grammatical representation. Linguistics and Philosophy, 10, 325–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Moltmann, F. (1995). Exception sentences and polyadic quantification. Linguistics and Philosophy, 18,(3) 223–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Partee, B., & Rooth, M. (2002/1983). Generalized conjunction and type ambiguity. In P. Portner & B. H. Partee (Eds.), Formal semantics: The essential readings (pp. 443–456). London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  20. Peters, S., & Westerståhl, D. (2006). Quantifiers in language and logic. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
  21. von Fintel, K. (1993). Exceptive constructions. Natural Language Semantics, 1, 123–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of LinguisticsNYUNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations