The Evaluability Hypothesis : the syntax, semantics, and pragmatics of polarity item licensing.

The Evaluability Hypothesis : the syntax, semantics, and pragmatics of polarity item licensing.

Although the field of polarity is well researched, this monograph offers a new take on polarity sensitivity that both challenges and incorporates previous theories. Based primarily on Swedish data, it presents new solutions to long-standing problems, such as the non-complementary distribution of NPI...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Brandtler, Johan
Format: eBook
Language:English
Published: Amsterdam/Philadelphia : John Benjamins Pub. Co., 2012.
Series:Linguistik aktuell ; Bd. 183.
Subjects:
Swedish language > Grammar.
Polarity (Linguistics)
FOREIGN LANGUAGE STUDY > Scandinavian Languages (Other)
FOREIGN LANGUAGE STUDY > Swedish.
Swedish language > Grammar
Svenska språket > semantik.
Svenska språket > syntax.
Online Access:Click for online access
Table of Contents:
  • The Evaluability Hypothesis; Editorial page; Title page; LCC data; Dedication page; Table of contents; Preface; Abbreviations; Introduction; 1.1. Aim of the present work; 1.2. Road map; Negation and polarity; 2.1. Defining polarity items; 2.1.1. Polarity items: Weak and strong; 2.1.2. Swedish polarity items; 2.2. Issues in the study of polarity items; 2.2.1. The licensing problem; 2.2.2. The Downward Entailment Hypothesis; 2.3. Perspective of current work; A syntactic categorization of Swedish; 3.1. A minimalist view on clause structure; 3.1.1. The C-domain: Split or non-split?
  • 3.2. Classifying Swedish clause structure3.2.1. Swedish main clauses; 3.2.2. Swedish subordinate clauses; 3.3. The structural classification; The syntax of NPI-licensing in Swedish; 4.1. Configuration (i); 4.1.1. Declarative main clauses; 4.1.2. Embedded V2-clauses; 4.1.3. Wh-questions; 4.1.4. Summary; 4.2. Configuration (ii); 4.2.1. Att-clauses; 4.2.2. Exclamatives; 4.2.3. Relative clauses; 4.2.4. Summary; 4.3. Configuration (iii) and (iv); 4.3.1. Yes/no-questions; 4.3.2. Conditionals; 4.3.3. Imperatives; 4.3.4. Summary; 4.4. A new classification; The Evaluability Hypothesis.
  • 5.1. Veridicality, realis and irrealis5.1.1. Realis and irrealis; 5.1.2. Veridicality; 5.2. Evaluability; 5.3. Summary; Applying the Evaluability Hypothesis; 6.1. Type 1-clauses; 6.1.1. Declaratives; 6.1.2. Embedded V2-clauses; 6.1.3. Wh-questions; 6.1.4. Exclamatives; 6.1.5. Relative clauses; 6.1.6. Summary; 6.2. Type 2-clauses; 6.2.1. Yes/no-questions; 6.2.2. Conditionals; 6.2.3. Summary; 6.3. Evaluability and edge features; 6.3.1. The edge-feature in C; 6.3.2. A syntactic reflex; 6.3.3. Why the edge-feature in C?; 6.4. Summary; Evaluability and polarity I; 7.1. The general idea.
  • 7.1.1. Open to evaluation, closed to NPIs7.1.2. Closed to evaluation, open to NPIs; 7.2. Progovac (1994): A binding approach; 7.2.1. An operator in C; 7.2.2. Arguments against the operator in C; 7.2.3. Summary; 7.3. Proposal: No operator, no binding; 7.4. Summary; Evaluability and polarity II; 8.1. Veridicality revisited; 8.1.1. Giannakidou (1998): The Veridicality Hypothesis; 8.1.2. Veridicality and monotonicity; 8.2. Evaluability vs. veridicality; 8.2.1. Empirical issues; 8.2.2. Theoretical issues; 8.3. Evaluability and monotonicity; 8.4. Evaluability as polarity sensitivity.
  • Long-distance NPI-licensing9.1. Licensing by superordinate negation; 9.1.1. Factive predicates; 9.1.2. Volitional and non-assertive predicates; 9.1.3. Assertive and perception predicates; 9.1.4. Summary; 9.2. Predicate licensing; 9.2.1. Non-assertive predicates; 9.2.2. Factive predicates; 9.2.3. Summary; 9.3. Previous accounts; 9.3.1. Progovac (1994); 9.3.2. Giannakidou and Quer (1997); 9.3.3. Summary; 9.4. Summarizing discussion; Polarity items in wh-questions; 10.1. Empirical and theoretical issues; 10.2. Three kinds of wh-questions; 10.2.1. Argument wh-questions.

Similar Items