Cover not available

Article published In: The locus of linguistic variation
Edited by Constantine Lignos, Laurel MacKenzie and Meredith Tamminga
[Linguistic Variation 16:2] 2016
► pp. 267–299

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

Variation as a testing ground for grammatical theory

Variable negative concord in Montréal French

Published online: 27 January 2017
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/lv.16.2.05bur
This paper addresses the contribution that corpus-based studies of syntactic variation can make to the construction, elaboration and testing of formal syntactic theories, with a particular focus on the testing dimension. In particular, I present a new empirical study of obligatory and optional asymmetric negative concord phenomena, and I show how an influential analysis for obligatory concord patterns (de Swart, 2010) can be tested using variation data through looking at the predictions that its natural probabilistic extension makes for the forms, interpretations and frequency distributions of expressions in languages in which asymmetric concord is optional. In obligatory negative concord languages like Spanish, negative indefinites, such as nadie ‘no one’, appear bare in preverbal position (i.e. in an expression like Nadie ha venido ‘No one came’), but they co-occur with the negative marker no in postverbal negative concord structures such as No he visto a nadie ‘I did not see anyone.’ (lit. ‘I did not see no one.’). Furthermore, in this language, co-occurrence between a negative marker and an n-word is either prohibited (*Nadie no ha venido), or it is obligatory (*He visto a nadie). Québec French shows a variable version of the Spanish pattern in which the negation marker optionally co-occurs with postverbal negative indefinites (J’ai (pas) vu personne ‘I saw no one’) but is prohibited with preverbal negative indefinites *Personne est pas venu (Ok: Personne est venu. ‘No one came’). I show how the predictions for Montréal French of de Swart’s analysis of Spanish can be tested (and, in this case, mostly verified) using a quantitative study of the distribution of bare and concord structures in the Montréal 84 corpus of spoken Montréal French (Thibault & Vincent, 1990) through looking at its natural extension within Boersma (1998)’s stochastic generalization of the Optimality Theory framework, which is the framework in which de Swart’s proposal is set.
References (79)
Abeillé, A. & D. Godard. 1996. La complémentation des auxiliaires en français. Langages 1221. 32–61. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1997. The syntax of French negative adverbs. In D. Forget (ed.), Negation and polarity: syntax and semantics, 1–27. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2002. The syntactic structure of French auxiliaries. Language 781. 404–452. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Adger, D. 2014. Variability and grammatical architecture. In C. Picallo (ed.), Linguistic variation in the minimalist framework. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Adger, D. & J. Smith. 2010. Variation in agreement: A lexical feature-based approach. Lingua 1201. 1109–1134. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Barwise, J. & R. Cooper. 1981. Generalized quantifiers and natural language. Linguistics and Philosophy 41. 159–219. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blutner, R. 2000. Some aspects of optimality in natural language semantics. Journal of Semantics 171. 189–216. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blutner, R., P. Hendriks & de H. Hoop. 2003. A new hypothesis on compositionality. Proceedings of ICCS 2003, 53–57.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boersma, P. 1998. Functional Phonology. Formalizing the interaction between articulatory and perceptual drives. Ph.D. thesis, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boersma, P. & B. Hayes. 2001. Empirical tests of the gradual learning algorithm. Linguistic Inquiry 321. 45–86. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boersma, P. & D. Weenik. 2014. Praat: Doing phonetics by computer. Version 5.3.80, retrieved 29 June 2014. from [URL].Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Borsley, R. & B. Jones. 2005. Welsh negation and grammatical theory. University of Wales Press, Cardiff.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bresnan, J. 2000. Optimal syntax. In F. v. d. L. Joost Dekkers & J. van de Weijer (eds.), Optimality theory: Phonology, syntax and acquisition, 334–385. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2007. A few lessons from typology. Linguistic Typology 111. 297–306. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bresnan, J., A. Cueni, T. Nikitina & H. Baayen. 2007. Predicting the dative alternation. In G. Boume, I. Kraemer, & J. Zwarts (eds.), Cognitive foundations of interpretation, 69–94. Royal Netherlands Academy of Science, Amsterdam.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bresnan, J., S. Dingare & C. Manning. 2001. Soft constraints mirror hard constraints: Voice and person in English and Lummi. In M. Butt & T. King (eds.), Proceedings of the LFG01 Conference, Hong Kong.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Burnett, H., M. Tremblay & H. Blondeau. 2015. The variable grammar of Montréal French negative concord. In S. Fisher (ed.), Penn working papers in linguistics, volume 211. University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chambers, J. 2004. Dynamic typology and vernacular universals. In B. Kortmann (ed.), Dialectology meets typology: Dialect grammar from a cross-linguistic perspective, 127–145. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin/New York.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. 1957. Syntactic structures. Cambridge: MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1965. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Comeau, P. 2011. A window on the past, a move towards the future: Sociolinguistic and formal perspectives on variation in Acadian French. Ph.D. thesis, York University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Corblin, F. & L. Tovena. 2003. L’expression de la négation dans les langues romanes. In D. Godard (ed.), Les langues romanes: problèmes de la phrase simple, 279–242. Paris: CNRS Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Daoust-Blais, D. 1975. L’influence de la négation sur certains indéfinis en français québécois. Ph.D. thesis, Université du Québec à Montréal.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
de Hoop, H. & H. de Swart. 2000. Adjunct clauses in optimality theory. Revista di Linguistica/Italian Journal of Linguistics 121. 107–127.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
de Swart, H. 2010. Expression and interpretation of negation: An OT Typology. Springer, Dordrecht. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
de Swart, H. & I. Sag. 2002. Negation and negative concord in Romance. Linguistics & Philosophy 251. 373–415. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
den Besten, H. 1986. Double negation and the genesis of Afrikaans. In P. Muysken & N. Smith (eds.), Substrata versus universals in Creole languages, 185–230. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Déprez, V. 2002. Concordance négative, syntaxe des mots-N et variation dialectale. Cahiers de linguistique française 251. 97–117.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Déprez, V. & F. Martineau. 2004. Pour use analyse microparametrique de la concordance négative. In F. Corblin, S. Ferrando, & L. Kupferman (eds.), Indéfinis et prédications. Presses Universitaires Paris-Sorbonne.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Deshaies, D. & E. Laforge. 1981. Le futur simple et le futur proche dans le français parlé dans la ville de québec. Langues et Linguistique 71. 21–37.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Eckert, P. 2008. Variation and the indexical field. Journal of sociolinguistics 121. 453–476. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Giannakidou, A. 2006. N-words and negative concord. In M. Everaert (ed.), Blackwell companion to syntax (Volume 31), 327–391. Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Givón, T. 1979. On understanding grammar. Academic, New York.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Godfrey, J., E. Holliman & J. McDaniel. 1992. Switchboard: Telephone speech corpus for research and development. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing , 517–520, San Francisco.
Grimshaw, J. 1997. Projection, heads and optimality. Linguistic inquiry 281. 373–422.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hawkins, J. 2004. Efficiency and complexity in grammars. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hendriks, P. & de H. Hoop. 2001. Optimality theoretic semantics. Linguistics and philosophy 241. 1–32. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Horn, L. 1989. A natural history of negation. California: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jäger, G. 2002. Some notes on the formal properties of bidirectional Optimality Theory. Journal of logic, language and information 111. 427–451. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2003. Learning constraint sub-hierarchies: the bidirectional gradual learning algorithm. In R. Blutner & H. Zeevat (eds.), Optimality theory and pragmatics, 217–242. Palgrave McMillan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jelinek, E. & R. Demers. 1983. The agent hierarchy and voice in some Coast Salish languages. International journal of american linguistics 491. 167–185. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jespersen, O. 1917. Negation in English and other languages. Horst, Copenhagen.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1933. Essentials of English grammar. Allen & Unwin, London.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Keenan, E. & B. Comrie. 1977. Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 81. 63–99.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Keenan, E. & S. Hawkins. 1987. The psychological validity of the accessibility hierarchy. In E. Keenan (ed.), Universal grammar: 15 essays. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Keenan, E. & J. Stavi. 1986. A semantic characterization of natural language determiners. Linguistics and Philosophy 91. 253–326. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Keenan, E. & D. Westerstahl. 1997. Generalized quantifiers in linguistics and logic. In van J. Benthem & ter A. Meulen (eds.), Handbook of logic and language, 837–893. Amsterdam: Elsevier. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krifka, M. 2007. Approximate interpretation of number words: A case for strategic communication. In G. Bouma, I. Kräer & J. Zwarts (eds.), Creative foundations of interpretation, 111–126. Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschapen, Amsterdam.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kroch, A. 2000. Syntactic change. In M. Baltin & C. Collins (eds.), The handbook of contemporary syntactic theory, 699–729. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Labelle, M. 2010. Negative words and negation in french. In Larrivée, P. & R. Ingham (eds.), The evolution of negation: Beyond the jespersen cycle. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Labov, W. 1963. The social motivation of a sound change. Word 191. 273–309. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1966. The social stratification of English in New York City. Center for Applied Linguistics, Arlington.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Laka, I. 1990. Negation in Syntax. Ph.D. thesis, MIT.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Larrivée, P. 2014. The continuity of the vernacular. In M.-B Mosegaard Hansen & J. Visconti (eds.), The Diachrony of negation, 253–256. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lemieux, M. 1985. Pas rien. In M. Lemieux & H. Cedegren (eds.), Les tendances dynamiques du français parlé à Montréal, 91–140. Office de la langue française.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
May, R. 1985. Logical Form. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Merchant, J. 2004. Fragments and ellipsis. Linguistics and philosophy 271. 661–738. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Montague, R. 1970. English as a formal language. In B. Visentini (ed.), Linguaggi nella societa e nella tecnica, 189–224. Milan: Edizioni di Communita.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Muller, C. 1991. La négation en français. Droz, Geneva.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Penka, D. & H. Zeijlstra. 2010. Negation and polarity: an introduction. Natural language and linguistic theory 281. 771–786. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Peters, S. & D. Westerstahl. 2006. Quantifiers in language and logic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pollock, J.-Y. 1989. Verb movement, universal grammar and the structure of IP. Linguistic inquiry 201. 365–424.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Poplack, S. & N. Dion. 2009. Prescription vs. praxis: The evolution of future temporal reference in French. Language 851. 557–587. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Poplack, S. & D. Turpin. 1999. Does the futur have a future in (canadian) french? Probus 111. 133–64. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Prince, A. & P. Smolensky. 1993. Optimality theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Rutgers University center for cognitive science technical report, 21.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rosenbach, A. 2002. Genitive Variation in English: Conceptual factors in synchronic and diachronic studies. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2005. Animacy versus weight as determinants of grammatical variation in English. Language 811. 613–644. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sankoff, G. & D. Vincent. 1977. L’emploi productif de ne dans le français parlé à montréal. Le Français moderne 451. 243–256.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sciullo, A.-M.D. & M. Tremblay. 1996. Configurations et interprétations: les morphèmes de la négation. Recherches linguistiques de Vincennes 251. 27–52.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sorace, A. & F. Keller. 2005. Gradience in linguistic data. Lingua 1151. 1497–1524. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Stabler, E. 2013. Two models of minimalist, incremental syntactic analysis. Trends in cognitive science 51. 611–633. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, S. 2011. Variation as a window on universals. In P. Siemund (ed.), Linguistic universals and language variation. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014. A comparative sociolinguistic analysis of the dative alternation. In Torres-Cacoullos, R., N. Dion & A. Lapierre (eds.), Linguistic variation: Confronting fact and theory. Routledge, London and New York (to appear).Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thibault, P. & D. Vincent. 1990. Un corpus de français parlé: Montréal 84. Université Laval, Québec.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thullier, J. 2012. Contraintes préférentielles et ordre des mots en français. Ph.D. thesis, Université Paris-Diderot.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Weinreich, U., W. Labov & M. Herzog. 1968. Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. University of Texas Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zanuttini, R. 1997. Negation and clausal structure. A Comparative study of romance languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zeevat, H. 2001. The asymmetry of optimality theoretic syntax and semantics. Journal of semantics 171. 243–262. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Liang, Yiming, Pascal Amsili & Heather Burnett
2025. Soft locality restrictions in negative concord: Evidence from the French future polarity effect. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 43:3 ► pp. 1731 ff. DOI logo
Labelle, Marie
2017. Negative concord in Quebec French. Probus 0:0 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue