Questions with NPIs

This paper investigates how the distribution of negative polarity items (NPIs) can inform our understanding of the underlying semantic representation of constituent questions. It argues that the distribution of NPIs in questions is governed by the same logical properties that govern their distribution in declarative constructions. Building on an observation due to Guerzoni and Sharvit (2007) that strength of exhaustivity in questions correlates with the acceptability of NPIs, I propose a revision of the semantics of questions that can explain this link in terms already familiar from the literature of negative polarity, namely the availability of a local downward entailing environment. I argue for a new theory of questions that takes strength of exhaustivity to be encoded internal to the question nucleus rather than in different answer-hood operators (Heim 1994). This switch, while conceptually a simple move, has far-reaching consequences in the domain of questions. I also show how this new analysis can account for a host of issues related to NPIs, such as the subject–object asymmetry noted by Han and Siegel (1997), the interaction between NPIs and high versus low wh-adjuncts, the varying acceptability of NPIs in the restrictor of which-phrases, and the contrast between weak and strong NPIs.

[1]  Emiel Krahmer,et al.  A Partial Account of Presupposition Projection , 2001, J. Log. Lang. Inf..

[2]  L. Karttunen.  Syntax and Semantics of Questions , 1977 .

[3]  Emmanuel Chemla,et al.  A Psycholinguistic Study of the Exhaustive Readings of Embedded Questions , 2014, J. Semant..

[4]  Daniel Büring,et al.  It's that, and that's it! Exhaustivity and homogeneity presuppositions in clefts (and definites) , 2013 .

[5]  G. Chierchia,et al.  Broaden Your Views: Implicatures of Domain Widening and the Logicality of Language , 2006, Linguistic Inquiry.

[6]  Mats Rooth.  Association with focus , 1985 .

[7]  Floris Roelofsen,et al.  Algebraic foundations for the semantic treatment of inquisitive content , 2013, Synthese.

[8]  Julia Horvath,et al.  Multiple WH-Phrases and the WH-Scope-Marker Strategy in Hungarian Interrogatives , 1998 .

[9]  Vincent Homer.  Presuppositions Can Be Disruptors Too:A Case against Strawson-Entailment , 2008 .

[10]  Márta Abrusán,et al.  Contradiction and grammar : the case of weak islands , 2007 .

[11]  Hisatsugu Kitahara,et al.  Elementary operations and optimal derivations , 1997 .

[12]  Benjamin George,et al.  Question Embedding and the Semantics of Answers , 2011 .

[13]  Ileana Comorovski,et al.  Interrogative phrases and the syntax-semantics interface , 1996 .

[14]  Arnim von Stechow,et al.  Some Remarks on Choice Functions and LF-Movement , 2000 .

[15]  Raj Singh,et al.  Maximize Presupposition! and local contexts , 2011 .

[16]  David Pesetsky,et al.  Paths and categories , 1982 .

[17]  D. Fox.  Antecedent-Contained Deletion and the Copy Theory of Movement , 2002, Linguistic Inquiry.

[18]  Vincent Homer,et al.  Polarity and Modality , 2010 .

[19]  M. Israel.  Polarity sensitivity as lexical semantics , 1996 .

[20]  S. J. Keyser,et al.  The View from Building 20: Essays in Linguistics in Honor of Sylvain Bromberger , 1993 .

[21]  Jeroen Groenendijk,et al.  Semantic analysis of wh-complements , 1982 .

[22]  Paula Menéndez-Benito.  On universal Free Choice items , 2010 .

[23]  Julia Horvath,et al.  FOCUS in the Theory of Grammar and the Syntax of Hungarian , 1986 .

[24]  Jacopo Romoli.  Presupposition wipe-out can’t be all or nothing: a note on conflicting presuppositions , 2011 .

[25]  Veneeta Srivastav.  WH dependencies in Hindi and the theory of grammar , 1991 .

[26]  Benjamin Bruening.  QR Obeys Superiority: Frozen Scope and ACD , 2001, Linguistic Inquiry.

[27]  Mats Rooth.  A theory of focus interpretation , 1992, Natural Language Semantics.

[28]  Ken Safir,et al.  Vehicle Change and Reconstruction in -Chains , 1999, Linguistic Inquiry.

[29]  M. Linebarger.  The grammar of negative polarity , 1981 .

[30]  R. Larson.  On the double object construction , 1988 .

[31]  Regine Eckardt,et al.  Comments to interpreting focus by Bart Geurts and Rob Van der Sandt , 2004 .

[32]  William A. Ladusaw.  Polarity sensitivity as inherent scope relations , 1980 .

[33]  Michael Israel,et al.  The Grammar of Polarity: Pragmatics, Sensitivity, and the Logic of Scales , 2011 .

[34]  Jacopo Romoli,et al.  A Solution to Soames’ Problem: Presuppositions, Conditionals and Exhaustification , 2012 .

[35]  R. Larson.  Double Objects Revisited: Reply to Jackendoff , 1990 .

[36]  Irene Heim,et al.  Semantics in generative grammar , 1998 .

[37]  Nathan Klinedinst,et al.  Exhaustivity in questions with non-factives , 2011 .

[38]  Klaus von Heusinger,et al.  64. Negative and positive polarity items , 2011 .

[39]  Jeroen Groenendijk,et al.  On the semantics of questions and the pragmatics of answers , 1984 .

[40]  Hotze Rullmann,et al.  Maximality in the semantics of wh -constructions , 1995 .

[41]  Robert van Rooy,et al.  Negative Polarity Items in Questions: Strength as Relevance , 2003, J. Semant..

[42]  Ivano Caponigro,et al.  RHETORICAL QUESTIONS AS QUESTIONS , 2007 .

[43]  Michela Ippolito,et al.  On the Meaning of Only , 2007, J. Semant..

[44]  Utpal Lahiri,et al.  Questions and Answers in Embedded Contexts , 2002 .

[45]  Uli Sauerland,et al.  The meaning of chains , 1998 .

[46]  Elena Guerzoni,et al.  Why even ask? : on the pragmatics of questions and the semantics of answers , 2003 .

[47]  Yael Sharvit,et al.  Functional Relative Clauses , 1999 .

[48]  Kai von Fintel,et al.  NPI Licensing, Strawson Entailment, and Context Dependency , 1999, J. Semant..

[49]  Danny Fox,et al.  The universal density of measurement , 2007 .

[50]  Irene Heim,et al.  On the Projection Problem for Presuppositions , 2008 .

[51]  Elena Guerzoni.  Weak Exhaustivity and 'Whether': A Pragmatic Approach , 2007 .

[52]  Laurence R. Horn.  Exclusive Company: Only and the Dynamics of Vertical Inference , 1996, J. Semant..

[53]  Richard Sharvy.  A More General Theory of Definite Descriptions , 1980 .

[54]  Chung-hye Han.  Interpreting interrogatives as rhetorical questions , 2002 .

[55]  K Abels.  Who Gives a Damn about Minimizers in Questions , 2003 .

[56]  Yael Sharvit,et al.  A question of strength: on NPIs in interrogative clauses , 2007 .

[57]  Andreea Cristina Nicolae,et al.  Any Questions? Polarity as a Window into the Structure of Questions , 2013 .

[58]  Godehard Link.  The Logical Analysis of Plurals and Mass Terms: A Lattice‐theoretical Approach , 2008 .

[59]  Stephen Robert Berman,et al.  On the semantics and logical form of {\it wh\/} -clauses , 1991 .

[60]  Vincent Homer.  Disruption of NPI Licensing: the Case of Presuppositions , 2008 .

[61]  Veneeta Dayal.  Locality in Wh quantification , 1996 .

[62]  Gilles Fauconnier,et al.  Implication Reversal in a Natural Language , 1978 .

[63]  Michael Wagner,et al.  Association by movement: evidence from NPI-licensing , 2007 .

[64]  Irene Heim,et al.  Presupposition Projection and the Semantics of Attitude Verbs , 1992, J. Semant..

[65]  Stephen Yablo,et al.  Non-catastrophic presupposition failure , 2006 .

[66]  Benjamin Spector,et al.  Modalized Questions and Exhaustivity , 2007 .

[67]  C. L. Hamblin.  QUESTIONS IN MONTAGUE ENGLISH , 1976 .

[68]  Diane C. Lillo-Martin,et al.  Blackwell Textbooks in Linguistics , 2005 .

[69]  Ljiljana Progovac,et al.  Negative polarity: Entailment and binding , 1993 .

[70]  D. Fox.  Reconstruction, Binding Theory, and the Interpretation of Chains , 1999, Linguistic Inquiry.

[71]  Jon Gajewski,et al.  Licensing strong NPIs , 2011 .

[72]  M. Dalrymple,et al.  Reciprocal Expressions and the Concept of Reciprocity , 1998 .

[73]  Márta Abrusán,et al.  A Semantics for Degree Questions Based on Intervals: Negative Islands and Their Obviation , 2011, J. Semant..

[74]  A. Barss,et al.  A note on anaphora and double objects , 1986 .

[75]  H. Rullmann,et al.  A Flexible Approach to Exhaustivity in Questions , 1999 .

[76]  Noam Chomsky.  A minimalist program for linguistic theory , 1992 .

[77]  Utpal Lahiri.  Focus and Negative Polarity in Hindi , 1998 .

[78]  Ivano Caponigro,et al.  The Semantic Contributions of Wh-words and Type Shifts: Evidence from Free Relatives Crosslinguistically , 2004 .