Scholarlink

<p>This paper provides new evidence that syntactic principles that are proposed to explain the (un)grammaticality of a sentence can also hold in sociolinguistic variation. In particular, we argue that two puzzling frequency patterns involving negation in French—the <i>proximity effect</i> on negative concord and the <i>polarity effect</i> on future temporal reference—are deeply related and are both derived from the sensitivity of syntactic agreement to “soft” locality constraints. Recent quantitative studies of future temporal reference reveal that, although all negative items are subject to the polarity effect in Laurentian French, <i>pas</i> does not give rise to the polarity effect in Parisian French. We argue that this dialectal difference can be explained by minor variations in the syntactic and semantic properties of the negative marker <i>pas</i>, given an appropriate analysis of the syntax of negative concord. Our paper therefore shows that incorporating sociolinguistic variation into syntactic theory helps refine our understanding of general syntactic principles, such as locality constraints, and argues that frequency/preference patterns should be included in the full theory of syntactic competence and performance of speakers.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Soft locality restrictions in negative concord: Evidence from the French future polarity effect

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年2月17日

查看全文
  • Yiming Liang,
  • Pascal Amsili,
  • Heather Burnett

摘要

This paper provides new evidence that syntactic principles that are proposed to explain the (un)grammaticality of a sentence can also hold in sociolinguistic variation. In particular, we argue that two puzzling frequency patterns involving negation in French—the proximity effect on negative concord and the polarity effect on future temporal reference—are deeply related and are both derived from the sensitivity of syntactic agreement to “soft” locality constraints. Recent quantitative studies of future temporal reference reveal that, although all negative items are subject to the polarity effect in Laurentian French, pas does not give rise to the polarity effect in Parisian French. We argue that this dialectal difference can be explained by minor variations in the syntactic and semantic properties of the negative marker pas, given an appropriate analysis of the syntax of negative concord. Our paper therefore shows that incorporating sociolinguistic variation into syntactic theory helps refine our understanding of general syntactic principles, such as locality constraints, and argues that frequency/preference patterns should be included in the full theory of syntactic competence and performance of speakers.