David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
The main focus of this article is the occurrence of some polarity items (PIs) in the complements of emotive factive verbs and only. This fact has been taken as a challenge to the semantic approach to PIs (Linebarger 1980), because only and factive verbs are not downward entailing (DE). A modification of the classical DE account is proposed by introducing the notion of nonveridicality (Zwarts 1995, Giannakidou 1998, 1999, 2001) as the one crucial for PI sanctioning. To motivate this move, it is first shown that two solutions in the direction of weakening classical monotonicity do not work: Strawson DE (von Fintel 1999) and weak DE (Hoeksema 1986). Weakening DE systematically either overgenerates or undergenerates, in either case failing to characterize the correct set of licensers. Nonveridicality is introduced as a conservative extension of DE and is shown to account for PIs also in contexts that are not DE (i.e. questions, modal verbs, imperatives, directive propositional attitudes). This theory, augmented with the premise that certain PIs (i.e. the liberal class represented by any) are subject to a weaker polarity dependency identified not as LICENSING but as RESCUING by nonveridicality, explains the occurrence of this particular class with only and emotive factive verbs. Crosslinguistic comparisons illustrate that the occurrence of PIs with only and emotive factives is not a general phenomenon, and further support the dual nature of polarity dependency and the semantic characterization of the elements that license or rescue PIs.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Jon R. Gajewski (2011). Licensing Strong NPIs. Natural Language Semantics 19 (2):109-148.
Jon Robert Gajewski (2007). Neg-Raising and Polarity. Linguistics and Philosophy 30 (3):289-328.
Michael Wagner (2006). Association by Movement: Evidence From NPI-Licensing. [REVIEW] Natural Language Semantics 14 (4):297-324.
Peter Alrenga & Christopher Kennedy (2014). No More Shall We Part: Quantifiers in English Comparatives. Natural Language Semantics 22 (1):1-53.
Jon Gajewski (2008). NPI Any and Connected Exceptive Phrases. Natural Language Semantics 16 (1):69-110.
Similar books and articles
Anastasia Giannakidou, Negative and Positive Polarity Items: Variation, Licensing, and Compositionality.
Wesley Buckwalter (2014). Factive Verbs and Protagonist Projection. Episteme 11 (4):391-409.
Anastasia Giannakidou, Only and Even: Sanctioning, Compositionality, and Variation in Polarity. (Handout).
Allan Hazlett (2010). The Myth of Factive Verbs. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 80 (3):497 - 522.
Anastasia Giannakidou, The Dependency of the Subjunctive Revisited: Temporal Semantics and Polarity.
Anastasia Giannakidou, Licensing and Sensitivity in Polarity Items: From Downward Entailment to (Non)Veridicality.
Anastasia Giannakidou & Marcel den Dikken, From Hell to Polarity: Aggressively Non-D-Linked Wh-Phrases as Polarity Items.
Paul Egré (2008). Question-Embedding and Factivity. Grazer Philosophische Studien 77 (1):85-125.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads62 ( #72,600 of 1,934,733 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #269,884 of 1,934,733 )
How can I increase my downloads?