The effects of negation on discourse structure

IF 1.8 1区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Eva Klingvall, Fredrik Heinat
{"title":"The effects of negation on discourse structure","authors":"Eva Klingvall,&nbsp;Fredrik Heinat","doi":"10.1016/j.pragma.2024.11.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>In five sentence continuation studies we investigated how different forms of negation (negative quantifier, clausal negation, lexical negation) impact discourse structure in Swedish. We looked at what set of referents (the reference set for which some property holds, or the complement set, for which the property does not hold) speakers considered most noteworthy (speaker salient), and what form they used to refer to this set (reflecting its givenness status, i.e. hearer salience) in their sentence continuations. Most continuations targeted the complement set when the prompt included a negative quantifier. When negation was in the form of clausal negation, the reference set was targeted. Having a lexically negated verb in addition to the negative quantifier as subject mattered only when speakers were not prompted to make one of the sets the sentence topic. In this case, reference set continuations were also common. The conclusion is that although the types of negation convey similar negative meanings, they give rise to differences in discourse structure, and crucially the lexical properties of the predicate can influence the strong tendency of negative quantifier to focus the complement set.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16899,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pragmatics","volume":"235 ","pages":"Pages 115-131"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pragmatics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378216624002133","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In five sentence continuation studies we investigated how different forms of negation (negative quantifier, clausal negation, lexical negation) impact discourse structure in Swedish. We looked at what set of referents (the reference set for which some property holds, or the complement set, for which the property does not hold) speakers considered most noteworthy (speaker salient), and what form they used to refer to this set (reflecting its givenness status, i.e. hearer salience) in their sentence continuations. Most continuations targeted the complement set when the prompt included a negative quantifier. When negation was in the form of clausal negation, the reference set was targeted. Having a lexically negated verb in addition to the negative quantifier as subject mattered only when speakers were not prompted to make one of the sets the sentence topic. In this case, reference set continuations were also common. The conclusion is that although the types of negation convey similar negative meanings, they give rise to differences in discourse structure, and crucially the lexical properties of the predicate can influence the strong tendency of negative quantifier to focus the complement set.
否定对话语结构的影响
在五个句子接续研究中,我们考察了不同形式的否定(否定量词、小句否定、词汇否定)对瑞典语语篇结构的影响。我们研究了说话者认为最值得注意的是哪一组指称物(具有某些属性的指称集,或不具有该属性的补语集)(说话者显著性),以及他们在句子延续中使用什么形式来指代这一组(反映其给定状态,即听者显著性)。当提示包含否定量词时,大多数延续针对补语集。当否定以小句否定的形式出现时,参照集是有针对性的。除了否定量词外,还有一个词汇上否定的动词作为主语,只有在说话者没有被提示将其中一个词作为句子主题的情况下才有意义。在这种情况下,引用集延续也很常见。结论是,尽管否定类型传达了相似的否定意义,但它们在话语结构上产生了差异,而且至关重要的是,谓语的词汇特性会影响否定量词集中于补语集的强烈倾向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
18.80%
发文量
219
期刊介绍: Since 1977, the Journal of Pragmatics has provided a forum for bringing together a wide range of research in pragmatics, including cognitive pragmatics, corpus pragmatics, experimental pragmatics, historical pragmatics, interpersonal pragmatics, multimodal pragmatics, sociopragmatics, theoretical pragmatics and related fields. Our aim is to publish innovative pragmatic scholarship from all perspectives, which contributes to theories of how speakers produce and interpret language in different contexts drawing on attested data from a wide range of languages/cultures in different parts of the world. The Journal of Pragmatics also encourages work that uses attested language data to explore the relationship between pragmatics and neighbouring research areas such as semantics, discourse analysis, conversation analysis and ethnomethodology, interactional linguistics, sociolinguistics, linguistic anthropology, media studies, psychology, sociology, and the philosophy of language. Alongside full-length articles, discussion notes and book reviews, the journal welcomes proposals for high quality special issues in all areas of pragmatics which make a significant contribution to a topical or developing area at the cutting-edge of research.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信