Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Licensing strong NPIs

  • Published:
Natural Language Semantics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper proposes that both weak and strong NPIs in English are sensitive to the downward entailingness of their licensers. It is also proposed, however, that these two types of NPIs pay attention to different aspects of the meaning of their environment. As observed by von Fintel and Chierchia, weak NPIs do not attend to the scalar implicatures of presuppositions of their licensers. Strong NPIs see both the truth-conditional and non-truth-conditional (scalar implications, presuppositions) meaning of their licensers. This theory accounts for the puzzling inability, noted by Rullmann and Gajewski, of Strawson anti-additive operators to license strong NPIs, as well as for the effects of Zwarts’s hierarchy of negative strength. Additional issues concerning comparative quantifiers, few, and proportional quantifiers are addressed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alonso Ovalle, Luis, and Elena Guerzoni. 2004. Double negatives, negative concord and metalinguistic negation. In The proceedings of CLS 38.1: The main session, ed. Mary Androni, Erin Debenport, Anne Pycha, and Keiko Yoshimura, 15–31. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.

  • Atlas Jay David. (1991) Topic/comment, presupposition, logical form and focus stress implicatures: The case of focal particles only and also. Journal of Semantics 8: 127–147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atlas Jay David. (1993) The importance of being only: Testing the neo-Gricean versus neo-entailment paradigms. Journal of Semantics 10: 301–318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atlas Jay David. (1996) ‘Only’ noun phrases, pseudo-negative generalized quantifiers, negative polarity items, and monotonicity. Journal of Semantics 13: 265–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bernardi, Raffaela. 2002. Reasoning with polarity in categorial type logic. PhD dissertation, University of Utrecht.

  • Chierchia, Gennaro. (2004). Scalar implicatures, polarity phenomena, and the syntax/pragmatics interface. In Adriana Belletti (eds) Structures and beyond. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp 39–103

    Google Scholar 

  • Chierchia Gennaro. (2006) Broaden your views: Implicatures of domain widening and the ‘‘logicality’’ of language. Linguistic Inquiry 37: 535–590

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chierchia, Gennaro in prep. Recursive pragmatics. Ms. Harvard University.

  • de Swart, Henriëtte. (1996) Meaning and use of not. . .until. Journal of Semantics 13: 221–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deprez, Vivienne. 1999. The roots of negative concord in French and French based creoles. In Language creation and language change: Creole, diachrony and development, ed. Michel DeGraff, 375–428. Cambridge: MIT Press.

  • Diesing, Molly. (1992) Indefinites (Linguistic inquiry monograph 20). Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox Danny. (2000) Economy and semantic interpretation. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Fox, Danny. (2003). The interpretation of scalar terms: Semantics or pragmatics, or both? Paper presented at the University of Texas, Austin.

  • Fox, Danny. 2008. Too many alternatives: Density, symmetry, and other predicaments. In Proceedings of SALT 17, 89–111. Ithaca: CLC Publications.

  • Fox Danny, Martin Hackl. (2006) The universal density of measurement. Linguistics and Philosophy 29: 537–586

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gajewski Jon. (2002) L-analyticity and natural language. MIT Press, Ms.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gajewski, Jon. 2005. Neg-raising: Presupposition and polarity. PhD dissertation, MIT Press.

  • Gajewski Jon. (2007) Neg-raising and polarity. Linguistics and Philosophy 30: 289–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giannakidou, Anastasia. (1998) Polarity sensitivity as (non)veridical dependency. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giannakidou, Anastasia. 2002. UNTIL, aspect and negation: A novel argument for two untils. In Proceedings of SALT 12, ed. Brendan Jackson, 84–103. Ithaca: CLC Publications.

  • Giannakidou, Anastasia. 2004. Licensing and sensitivity in polarity items: From downward entailment to nonveridicality. In Chicago Linguistic Society 38: Parasession on polarity and negation, ed. Maria Andronis, Anne Pycha, and Keiko Yoshimura, 29–54. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.

  • Giannakidou Anastasia. (2006) Only, emotive factives, and the dual nature of polarity dependency. Language 82: 575–603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Groenendijk, Jeroen, and Martin Stokhof. 1984. Studies in the semantics of questions and the pragmatics of answers. PhD thesis, University of Amsterdam.

  • Guerzoni Elena. (2004) Even-NPIs in yes/no questions. Natural Language Semantics 12: 319–343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Heim, Irene. 1984. A note on negative polarity and downward entailingness. In Proceedings of NELS 14, ed. Catherine Jones and Peter Sells, 98–107. Amherst: GLSA.

  • Heim Irene. (1992) Presupposition projection and the semantics of attitude verbs. Journal of Semantics 9: 183–221

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hoeksema, Jacob. 2006. In days, weeks, months, years, ages: A class of negative polarity items. In Rejected papers: Feestbundel voor Ron van Zonneveld, ed. Dicky Gilbers and Petra Hendriks, 72–85. Groningen: University of Groningen.

  • Homer, Vincent. 2008. Presuppositions can be disruptors too: A case against Strawson-entailment. In Proceedings of the 27th WCCFL, ed. Natasha Abner and Jason Bishop, 220–228. Somerville: Cascadilla Press.

  • Homer, Vincent. 2009. Disruption of NPI licensing: The case of presuppositions. In Proceedings of SALT 18, 429–446. Ithaca: CLC Publications.

  • Horn Laurence R. (1989) A natural history of negation. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Horn Laurence R. (1996) Exclusive company: Only and the dynamics of vertical inference. Journal of Semantics 13: 1–40

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horn, Laurence R. 2002. Assertoric inertia and NPI licensing. In Chicago Linguistic Society 38: Parasession on negation and polarity, 55–82. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.

  • Horn, Laurence R. To appear. Only connect: How to unpack an exclusive proposition. In A festschrift for Jay Atlas, ed. Martin Hackl and Rosalind Thornton. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Kadmon, Nirit, and Fred Landman.(1993) Any. Linguistics and Philosophy 16: 353–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karttunen, Lauri, Stanley Peters. (1979). Conventional implicature. In: Oh C., Dineen D. (eds) Syntax and semantics 11: Presuppositions. New York, Academic Press, pp 1–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Krifka, Manfred. (1995) The semantics and pragmatics of polarity items. Linguistic Analysis 25: 1–49

    Google Scholar 

  • Krifka, Manfred. (1999) At least some determiners aren’t determiners. In Turner K. (ed) The semantics/pragmatics interface from different points of view. Amsterdam: Elsevier, pp 257–291

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladusaw, William A. 1979. Polarity sensitivity as inherent scope relations. PhD dissertation, University of Texas, Austin.

  • Lahiri Utpal. (1998) Focus and negative polarity in Hindi. Natural Language Semantics 6: 57–123

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linebarger Marcia. (1987) Negative polarity and grammatical representation. Linguistics and Philosophy 10: 325–387

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Löbner, Sebastian. (1987) Quantification as a major module of natural language semantics. In Groenendijk J., Stokhof M., de Jongh D. (eds) Studies in discourse representation theory and the theory of generalized quantifiers. Dordrecht, Foris, pp 53–85

    Google Scholar 

  • Matsumoto Yo. (1995) The conversational condition on Horn scales. Linguistics and Philosophy 18: 21–60

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moltmann Friederike. (1995) Exception sentences and polyadic quantification. Linguistics and Philosophy 18: 223–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nathan Lance. (1999) Either: Negative polarity meets focus sensitivity. Brown University, Ms.

    Google Scholar 

  • Partee, Barbara H. 1989. Many quantifiers. In Proceedings of ESCOL 89, ed. Joyce Powers and Kenneth de Jong, 383–402. Columbus: The Ohio State University.

  • Postal, Paul. 2004. The structure of one type of American English vulgar minimizer. In Skeptical linguistic essays, 159–172. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Rooth, Mats. 1985. Association with focus. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

  • Rullmann Hotze. (2003) Additive particles and polarity. Journal of Semantics 20: 329–401

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, Bernhard. (2006) Covert reciprocity and Strawson-symmetry. Snippets 13: 9–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharvit Yael, Simona Herdan. (2006) Definite and non-definite superlatives and NPI licensing. Syntax 9: 1–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strawson P.F. (1952) Introduction to logical theory. Methuen, London

    Google Scholar 

  • van der Wouden Ton. (1997) Negative contexts: Collocation, polarity and multiple negation. Routledge, London

    Google Scholar 

  • van Rooij R., Schulz K. (2004) Exhaustive interpretation of complex sentences. Journal of Logic, Language and Information 13(4): 491–519

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Fintel Kai. (1999) NPI-licensing, Strawson-entailment, and context-dependency. Journal of Semantics 16: 97–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Fintel, Kai. 2004. Would you believe it? The king of France is back! Presuppositions and truth-value intuitions. In Descriptions and beyond, ed. Marga Reimer and Anne Bezuidenhout, 315–341. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Yablo Stephen. (2005) Non-catastrophic presupposition failure. MIT Press, Ms.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zwarts, Frans. (1998) Three types of polarity. In Hammand F., Hinrichs E.W. (eds) Plurality and quantification. Dordrecht, Kluwer, pp 177–238

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Linguistics, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT, 06269-1145, USA

    Jon R. Gajewski

Authors
  1. Jon R. Gajewski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jon R. Gajewski.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gajewski, J.R. Licensing strong NPIs. Nat Lang Semantics 19, 109–148 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-010-9067-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-010-9067-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation