Negative PPs and Negative Inversion

This study explores various issues related to negative PPs, focusing on (i) why some negative PPs trigger negative inversion, whereas some do not, (ii) why negative phrases can have scope beyond their c-domain, and (iii) why the distribution of negative PPs is restricted. This study is divided into two parts. The first part demonstrates that negative phrases exhibit a pattern similar to wh-phrases. They cooccur with a zero morpheme NEG_ø, which carries out the function of extending their restriction. Just as Q extends the restriction of a wh-operator and triggers pied-ping, NEG_ø extends the restriction of a negative operator, enabling it to have scope beyond its c-domain. The second part argues that English employs covert negative concord in that in negative sentences T must be merged with a covert head called Polarity, which has the feature [u(ninterpretable) Neg]. Additionally, it suggests that (i) the [uNeg]-feature on Polarity can be deleted via a mutual c-command relationship with a NegP, and (ii) when the [uNeg]-feature on it cannot be deleted in situ, it triggers head movement as a last resort. This claim provides a principled account for negative inversion and the distribution of negative PPs.