Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This paper is concerned with the derivation of English sentences in which negation (NEG) surfaces in a matrix clause but is interpreted as if it were in an embedded clause. The cases we are interested in allow NEG to be interpreted as having scope over a quantified subject NP in the embedded clause or over the verbal predicate in the same embedded clause. Syntactic approaches to this phenomenon have proposed a rule of NEG-raising which proceeds upwards in multi-clause structures, very much like a garden-variety movement transformation. Pragma-semantic approaches, in contrast, appeal in general to either a combination of the excluded middle law and a pre-suppositional analysis or scalar implicatures. Here we will argue that while the syntactic treatment of NEG seems to be generally correct, a leftwards/upwards approach to NEG movement does not yield the appropriate semantic representations for the sentences under consideration; rather, we propose a syntactic rule of NEG-lowering to account for the data we examine.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Diego Gabriel Krivochen (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: