Cover not available

Article published In: Language and Linguistics
Vol. 18:2 (2017) ► pp.228–253

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF

Is it syntactic or pragmatic?

A hybrid analysis for lf-intervention effects

 | Sophia University/JSPS
Open Access logo
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.

Published online: 10 April 2017
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/lali.18.2.03kob
Abstract
The main aim of this study is to reconsider Tomioka, Satoshi. 2007. Pragmatics of lf intervention effects: Japanese and Korean wh-interrogatives. Journal of Pragmatics 39.9:1570–1590. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar pragmatic account of the lf-intervention effects (IE), and to claim that Polarity Sensitive Items (psis) are genuine syntactic interveners. I will examine the parallelism among psis in IE configurations, which is distinct from other interveners, and further claim that the study of IE should not be monolithic, but hybrid: Syntactic lf-interveners (psis), blocking scopal interactions/Pragmatic interveners, causing illegal information structures. The predictions will be borne out that psis actually cause IE in other contexts as well, which pragmatic accounts cannot explain (Funakoshi, Kenshi, & Masahiko Takahashi. 2014. lf intervention effects and nominative objects in Japanese. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 20.1:101–110.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). Such hybrid perspectives bring back enormous findings on IE (e.g. lf wh-movement) to the field of syntax, without relegating all of them to pragmatics.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Pragmatic accounts of the intervention effects
    • 2.1Cancellation effects by scrambling
    • 2.2The root-embedded contrasts
    • 2.3Interim conclusion
  • 3.Problems of pragmatic accounts of lf-intervention effects
    • 3.1Why are npis different from other interveners?
    • 3.2The parallelisms among psis in lf-intervention effects
  • 4.Polarity sensitive items as genuine lf-interveners
    • 4.1 npis in nominative object constructions
    • 4.2 apis and bpis in nominative object constructions
    • 4.3Affirmative polarity and bipolar sensitivity as a syntactic phenomena
  • 5.Further discussions: neg-raising and apis/bpis under neg
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (32)
References
Baker, C. L. 1970. Double negatives. Linguistic Inquiry 1.2:169–186.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beck, Sigrid. 2006. Intervention effects follow from focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics 14.1:1–56. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fox, Danny. 2000. Economy and Semantic Interpretation. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Funakoshi, Kenshi, & Masahiko Takahashi. 2014. lf intervention effects and nominative objects in Japanese. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 20.1:101–110.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goro, Takuya. 2006. Positive polarity as a syntactic phenomenon. Paper presented at the 133rd Meeting of the Linguistic Society of Japan, November 18–19, 2006. Sapporo: Sapporo Gakuin University.
. 2007. Language-Specific Constraints on Scope Interpretation in First Language Acquisition. College Park: The University of Maryland dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hasegawa, Nobuko. 1991. Affirmative polarity items and negation in Japanese. Interdisciplinary Approaches to Language: Essays in Honor of S.-Y. Kuroda, ed. by Carol Perkins Georgopoulos & Roberta Ishihara, 271–285. Netherlands: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoji, Hajime. 1985. Logical Form Constraints and Configurational Structures in Japanese. Seattle: University of Washington dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1986. Scope interpretation in Japanese and its theoretical implications. WCCFL 5: Proceedings of the West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, ed. by Mary Dalrymple, Jeffrey Goldberg, Kristin Hanson, Michael Inman, Christopher Piñon & Stephen Wechsler, 87–101. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hirotani, Masako. 2004. Prosody and lf: Processing Japanese Wh-questions. Amherst: University of Massachusetts at Amherst dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ishihara, Shinichiro. 2002. Invisible but audible wh-scope marking: wh-constructions and deaccenting in Japanese. WCCFL 21: Proceedings of the 21st West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, ed. by Line Mikkelsen & Christopher Potts, 180–193. Somerville: Cascadilla.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kato, Takaomi. 2007. The CSC as an lf condition: evidence from neg-raising in Japanese. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 13.1:113–126.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kato, Yasuhiko. 1994. Negative polarity and movement. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, Volume 24: Formal Approaches to Japanese Linguistics: Proceedings of FAJL 1, ed. by Masatoshi Koizumi & Hiroyuki Ura, 101–120. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2000. Interpretive asymmetries of negation. Negation and Polarity: Syntactic and Semantic Perspectives, ed. by Laurence R. Horn, & Yasuhiko Kato, 62–87. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kim, Shin-Sook. 2002. Intervention effects are focus effects. Japanese/Korean Linguistics, Vol. 101, ed. by Noriko Akatsuka & Susan Strauss, 615–628. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kitagawa, Yoshihisa. 2005. Wh-scope puzzles. NELS 35: Proceedings of the Thirty-fifth Annual Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society, Vol. 21, ed. by Leah Bateman & Cherlon Ussery, 335–349. Amherst: GLSA.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kuno, Susumu. 1973. The Structure of the Japanese Language. Cambridge: The MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kuno, Masakazu. 2008. Negation, focus, and negative concord in Japanese. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics 281:195–211.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
1992. Whether we agree or not: a comparative syntax of English and Japanese. Japanese Syntax and Semantics: Collected Papers, ed. by S.-Y. Kuroda, 315–357. Netherlands: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krifka, Manfred. 2001. For a structured meaning account of questions and answers. Audiatur Vox Sapientiae: A Festschrift for Arnim von Stechow, ed. by Caroline Féry & Wolfgang Sternefeld, 287–319. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nagahara, Hiroyuki. 1994. Phonological Phrasing in Japanese. Los Angeles: University of California Dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nishigauchi, Taisuke. 1990. Quantification in the Theory of Grammar. Berlin: Kluwer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nomura, Masashi. 2005. Nominative Case and AGREE(ment). Storrs: University of Connecticut Dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Progovac, Ljiljana. 2005. Negative and positive feature checking and the distribution of polarity items. Negation in Slavic, ed. by Sue Brown & Adam Przepiorkowski, 179–217. Bloomington: Slavica Publishers.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tada, Hiroaki. 1992. Nominative objects in Japanese. Journal of Japanese Linguistics 141:91–108. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tomioka, Satoshi. 2007. Pragmatics of lf intervention effects: Japanese and Korean wh-interrogatives. Journal of Pragmatics 39.9:1570–1590. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2009. Why questions, presuppositions, and intervention effects. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 18.4:253–271. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vallduví, Enric. 1992. A preverbal landing site for quantificational operators. Catalan Working Papers in Linguistics 21:319–343.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1995. Structural properties of information packaging in Catalan. Discourse Configurational Languages, ed. by Katalin É. Kiss, 122–152. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Watanabe, Akira. 1992. Subjacency and s-structure movement of wh-in-situ. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 1.3:255–291. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. Ingredients of polarity sensitivity: bipolar items in Japanese. Strategies of Quantification, ed. by Kook-Hee Gil, Stephen Harlow & George Tsoulas, 189–213. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue