Multiple Negation and Iconicity - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

slide1 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Multiple Negation and Iconicity PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Multiple Negation and Iconicity

play fullscreen
1 / 94
Multiple Negation and Iconicity
138 Views
Download Presentation
kerry
Download Presentation

Multiple Negation and Iconicity

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Multiple Negation and Iconicity Ludovic De Cuypere, Johan van der Auwera and Klaas Willems  Fifth Symposium On Iconicity In Language And Literature. 17-20 March 2005, Krakow 

  2. 2 Types 1. Je ne chante pas

  3. 2 Types 1. Je ne chante pas NEG1NEG2

  4. 2 Types 1. Je ne chante pas NEG1NEG2 2. I don’t see nothing

  5. 2 Types 1. Je ne chante pas NEG1NEG2 2. I don’t see nothing NEG NEG IND PRON

  6. Type 1: Formal Strategies French Je ne chante pas ‘I don’t sing’ FREE Araona (Tacanan; Bolivia) (Pitman 1980:60) Dizi pi-ba-ma road NEG-see-NEG ‘(S)he didn’t see the road Huallaga Quechua (Quechuan; Peru) (Weber 1989:335) Mana rura-shka-:-chu not do-PERF-1-NEG ‘I did not do it’

  7. Type 1: Formal Strategies French Je ne chante pas ‘I don’t sing’ FREE Araona (Tacanan; Bolivia) (Pitman 1980:60) Dizi pi-ba-ma road NEG-see-NEG ‘(S)he didn’t see the road’ BOUND Huallaga Quechua (Quechuan; Peru) (Weber 1989:335) Mana rura-shka-:-chu not do-PERF-1-NEG ‘I did not do it’

  8. Type 1: Formal Strategies French Je ne chante pas ‘I don’t sing’ FREE Araona (Tacanan; Bolivia) (Pitman 1980:60) Dizi pi-ba-ma road NEG-see-NEG ‘(S)he didn’t see the road BOUND Huallaga Quechua (Quechuan; Peru) (Weber 1989:335) Mana rura-shka-:-chu not do-PERF-1-NEG ‘I did not do it’ COMB.

  9. Dahl (1979)

  10. Honda (1996)

  11. Miestamo (2003)

  12. (De Cuypere, van der Auwera and Willems)

  13. Type 1: 150+ languages

  14. Type 1: 150+ languages

  15. Central Africa

  16. Papua New Guinea - Vanuatu

  17. First Observations Multiple Negation (type 1: e.g. ne...pas) 1. found all over the world 2. not restricted to one language family 3. frequent / not rare

  18. First Observations Multiple Negation (type 1: e.g. ne...pas) 1. found all over the world 2. not restricted to one language family 3. frequent / not rare How may iconicity be involved?

  19. Jespersen’s Cycle • jeo ne di (Old F.) • je ne dis pas (Mod. St. F.) • je dis pas (Mod. Coll. F.) • ‘I do not say’

  20. Jespersen’s Cycle • jeo ne di(Old F.) • je ne dis (pas) • je ne dis pas(Mod.St.F.) • je (ne) dis pas • je dis pas(Mod.Coll. F.) • ‘I do not say’ 1. the negator is strengthened 2. the negator bleaches and becomes part of the negator 3. the original negator loses ground

  21. Jespersen’s Cycle • jeo ne di(Old F.) • je ne dis (pas) • je ne dis pas(Mod.St.F.) • je (ne) dis pas • je dis pas(Mod.Coll. F.)

  22. Jespersen’s Cycle • jeo ne di(Old F.) • je ne dis (pas) • je ne dis pas(Mod.St.F.) • je (ne) dis pas • je dis pas(Mod.Coll. F.) je ne marche unpas ‘I do not walk a step’

  23. ne + V movement + (un) pas ne + V +(pas)

  24. ne + V movement + (un) pas Object/NEG2 ne + V +(pas) NEG2

  25. NEG1 < NEG1 + NEG2

  26. NEG1 < NEG1 + NEG2 Reinforcement of Form = Reinforcement of Meaning

  27. NEG1 < NEG1 + NEG2 Reinforcement of Form = Reinforcement of Meaning Diagrammatic iconicity

  28. Diagrammatic iconicity • jeo ne di(Old F.) • je ne dis (pas) • je ne dis pas(Mod.St.F.) • je (ne) dis pas • je dis pas(Mod.Coll. F.) • ‘I do not say’ 1 > 2: reinforcement = iconic

  29. Diagrammatic iconicity • jeo ne di(Old F.) • je ne dis (pas) • je ne dis pas(Mod.St.F.) • je (ne) dis pas • je dis pas(Mod.Coll. F.) • ‘I do not say’ 1 > 2: reinforcement = iconic 2 > 3: reanalysis = loss of iconicity

  30. Reinforcement of negation 1. Why does NEG1 need reinforcement? 2. Is NEG2 always the result of reinforcement?

  31. 1. Why does NEG1 need reinforcement? 1.1 Phonetically: NEG1 to weak 1.2 [T]he addition serves to make the negative more impressive as being more vivid or picturesque. (Jespersen 1917:15) 1.3 ne...pas as “Discordantiel ... Forclusif”

  32. 1.1 Phonetically: NEG1 to weak • another element in the sentence is stressed (Jespersen 1917:4) • danger of becoming unrecognizable (Bernini & Ramat 1996:30) OE menn ne cunnon [mεn:ə kun:õ] men NEG know ‘the men didn’t know’

  33. 1.1 Phonetically: NEG1 to weak • another element in the sentence is stressed (Jespersen 1917:4) • danger of becoming unrecognizable (Bernini & Ramat 1996:30) OE mennne cunnon [mεn:ə kun:õ] men NEG know ‘the men didn’t know’

  34. 1.1 Phonetically: NEG1 to weak • another element in the sentence is stressed (Jespersen 1917:4) • danger of becoming unrecognizable (Bernini & Ramat 1996:30) OE menn ne cunnon [mεn:ə kun:õ] men NEG know ‘the men didn’t know’ improbable for all type1 languages

  35. 1.2 To make the negative more impressive • the chief use of a negative sentence being to contradict and to point a contrast (Jespersen 1917:5) • Givón (2001:370) • A:What’s new? • B:My wife is pregnant. • A: Congratulations! (2) A:What’s new? B: My wife isn’t pregnant. A: Gee, was she supposed to be?

  36. 1.2 To make the negative more impressive • the chief use of a negative sentence being to contradict and to point a contrast (Jespersen 1917:5) • Givón (2001:370) • A:What’s new? • B:My wife is pregnant. • A: Congratulations! (2) A:What’s new? B: My wife isn’t pregnant. A: Gee, was she supposed to be? Negation corrects an affirmative (presupposition)

  37. 1.3 Discordantiel ... Forclusif Alfred ne chante pas Damourette & Pichon (1930)

  38. 1.3 Discordantiel ... Forclusif Alfred ne chante pas D • prepares NEG • breaks the affirmative • ~ non-factual marker Damourette & Pichon (1930)

  39. 1.3 Discordantiel ... Forclusif Alfred ne chante pas D • prepares NEG • breaks the affirmative • ~ non-factual marker ~ Je crains qu’il ne vienne Damourette & Pichon (1930)

  40. 1.3 Discordantiel ... Forclusif Alfred ne chante pas D F • prepares NEG • breaks the affirmative • ~ non-factual marker • finalizes/realizes NEG • always follows D Damourette & Pichon (1930)

  41. 1.3 Discordantiel ... Forclusif Jespersen’s cycle • jeo ne di(Old F.) • je ne dis (pas) • je ne dis pas(Mod.St.F.) • je (ne) dis pas • je dis pas(Mod.Coll. F.) • ne is NEG • ne = D/too weak for NEG • 3. NEG = D + F • 4. F reinterpreted as NEG • 5. pas is NEG

  42. 1.3 Discordantiel ... Forclusif Jespersen’s cycle • jeo ne di(Old F.) • je ne dis (pas) • je ne dis pas(Mod.St.F.) • je (ne) dis pas • je dis pas(Mod.Coll. F.) • ne is NEG • ne = D/too weak for NEG • 3. NEG = D + F • 4. F reinterpreted as NEG • 5. pas is NEG At no stage NEG1 + NEG2!

  43. 1.3 Discordantiel ... Forclusif Kahrel (1996:78) Quechua Maŋarayi Babungo NEG + NON-FACTUAL Navaho Arabic

  44. 1.3 Discordantiel ... Forclusif Kahrel (1996:78) Quechua Maŋarayi Babungo NEG + NON-FACTUAL Navaho Arabic = D + F

  45. 1.3 Discordantiel ... Forclusif Kahrel (1996:78) Quechua Maŋarayi Babungo NEG + NON-FACTUAL Navaho Arabic = D + F

  46. 1.3 Discordantiel ... Forclusif Kahrel (1996:78) Quechua Maŋarayi Babungo NEG + NON-FACTUAL Navaho Arabic = D + F

  47. 2. NEG2: always the result of reinforcement? 2.1 Through Language contact 2.2 Through Sentence Final Negation 2.3 Through reanalysis of another marker

  48. 2.1 Language contact • Aikhenvald (2002:134) • Tariana (Arawakan; Brazil) • ne ma-na-kade-mha. • NEG NEG-want-NEG-PRES.NONVIS • Tucano (Tucanoan; Brazil) • neê ia-tí-sa • NEG want-NEG-PRES.NONVIS.nonthird.p • ‘(I) do not want anything at all’

  49. 2.1 Language contact • Aikhenvald (2002:134) • Tariana (Arawakan; Brazil) • ne ma-na-kade-mha. • NEG NEG-want-NEG-PRES.NONVIS • Tucano (Tucanoan; Brazil) • neê ia-tí-sa • NEG want-NEG-PRES.NONVIS.nonthird.p • ‘(I) do not want anything at all’

  50. 2.1 Language contact • Aikhenvald (2002:134) • Tariana (Arawakan; Brazil) • ne ma-na-kade-mha. • NEG NEG-want-NEG-PRES.NONVIS • Tucano (Tucanoan; Brazil) • neê ia-tí-sa • NEG want-NEG-PRES.NONVIS.nonthird.p • ‘(I) do not want anything at all’ only a few cases