The Syntax of Complement Clauses

LECture 2 

NEGATIVE SENTENCES IN ENGLISH

Affirmative Sentence: (1) They like syntax vs.

Negative Sentence: (2) They do not/don’t like syntax.
From the p.o.v. of meaning, negative sentences deny the truth of their affirmative
counterpart.
Negation in English – marked by the negative marker ‘not’ & its contracted form
‘n’t’ but also by words which incorporate negative meaning (no one, nothing,
nobody, never, nowhere, etc.):
(3) I’ve never told her the truth. / No one knows him. / Neither of them could come.

A. Negation is an important problem in English because:

1. negation is a very mobile constituent
a. it can be in the auxiliary (as the free morpheme ‘not’ or the affix ‘n’t’)
(4) He has not / hasn’t lost my respect
b. it can be incorporated into a quantifier, an adverb or determiner,
(5) He has seen nobody there / He went nowhere / He has found no money there.
c. it can be fronted in emphatic negative sentences (the negative word occupies
sentence-initial position and there is SAI): Neg word + aux + Su + V + ....
(6) Never have I attended a more entertaining LEC lecture.

2. the presence of negation may trigger the presence of other items, called
negative polarity items
(7) He hasn’t ever seen her vs. *He has ever seen her
(8) I don’t love you anymore vs. * I don’t love you no more

B. Types of Negation
Negation may attach at various syntactic levels:
a) at word-level = a negative affix (dislike, unhappy, impossible, a non-resident,
careless)
b) at phrase-level = negation is attached to a phrase XP:
XP
2
not XP

(9) He came here [not long ago]/ Not far away, there was a cosy little house./ He
arrived in no time. / He may [not know about it] (internal negation, not modifies the
modal, not the main verb, so the sentence’s polarity is affirmative)

c) at sentence-level = negation refers to/affects the whole sentence, so the sentence

has a negative meaning/polarity.

The polarity of a sentence – whether a sentence is negative or affirmative

 2

→ Hence, we are dealing with an important distinction between:

a) word/affixal negation (negation marked on individual words, see above)
b) phrasal/local/constituent negation (negation affects a single phrase inside a
sentence, usually an adverbial constituent, not the verb, so the polarity of the
sentence is not affected (i.e., the sentence remains affirmative, in spite of the
presence of a negative element): (10) Not long ago, I saw John dancing samba
c) Sentence/full negation (negation which is present in the inflectional layer
(i.e., on the auxiliary verb) and thus yields the whole sentence negative)

C. Negative sentences have specific distributional properties which

distinguish between negative sentences and sentences with negative constituents.
There are four diagnostic tests for negativity (Klima 1964)
a) the tag-question test – negative Ss take affirmative reversed polarity tag-
questions with a falling intonation (intrebari disjunctive)
(11) a. John is not happy, is he? (>> negative sentence)
b. John is unhappy, isn’t he? (>> affirmative sentence, in spite of the presence
of affixal negation)

[Tag questions – 2 types:

a. Reversed polarity tags – the tag has the opposite polarity as compared
to the host
(11c.) – She hasn’t passed the exam yet, has she?
- Falling intonation – “the speaker is sure about what he says and he
doesn’t really expect an answer.” (Visan 2001:32)
- Rising intonation – “the speaker is not sure about what he says and he
expects an answer.” (Visan 2001:32)
b. Constant polarity tags: - the tag has the same polarity as the host
(11) d. She hasn’t passed the exam yet, hasn’t she?
- “The speaker disagrees with what the main sentence states” – irony, sarcasm]
(Visan 2001:31)
b) the not-even tags test – negative Ss take not-even tags; affirmative Ss take ‘even’
tags
(12) a. George doesn’t like smart girls, not even pretty ones. (> neg. sentence)
b. George dislikes smart girls, even pretty ones. (>> affirmative sentence, in
spite of the presence of affixal negation)
c) the either-coordination test – [S1 and S2, either] = S2 negative

Two coordinated sentences can be followed by either only if the second is

negative (Cornilescu 2003:38).

(12) c. John stayed at home all day and Mary didn’t go any place either.
d. *John didn’t go anywhere all day and Mary stayed at home either.

“A sentence is syntactically negative if it can be followed by another negative

sentence and the adverb either.” (Visan 2001:13)

(13) [John doesn’t like Mary] and [Mary doesn’t like him either].
John dislikes Mary and Mary dislikes him, too/as well // and so does Mary.
d) the neither-tags test – neither-tags require negative hosts. Affirmative sentences
are followed by so tags
 3

(14) a. John couldn’t go anyplace and neither could Mary (notice that neither
triggers inversion!)
b. John went home and so did Mary.

D. Types of Negative Sentences

1. → the negative marker is attached to an auxiliary or a modal verb >>
Negation is part of the functional domain of the verb (the IP domain)
(15) They have not studied for their exam. / He can’t dance. / Ray is not/isn’t reading
in his room / John does not/doesn’t love Susan.

2. →Ss in which negation incorporated into a quantifier (= a type of determiner

which denotes quantity) >> Negative clauses with negative quantifiers or with
lexical negators. Syntactically these negative quantifiers are determiners (no),
pronouns (nobody, nothing), and adverbs (nowhere, never).

2.a. complete/absolute negators: those which are overtly negative

(16) Nobody likes John. / John bought nothing interesting. / I never drink milk with
coffee.
2.b. incomplete negators: quantifiers with negative meaning
(17) Few students had showed up. / I rarely/seldom visit my parents. / I had barely
noticed him./ He hardly ever smokes.

3. → Emphatic negative sentences: Ss in which the absolute or incomplete

negator appears in S-initial position, triggering Su-Aux Inversion (SAI))
(18) Never have I seen a more interesting movie! Hardly had he entered the house
when the storm started.

D. 1. Negation in the Inflectional Domain

(19) Jana has not / hasn’t spoken a word since she came. / Jana cannot/can’t speak
English.
- in Ss which have aspectual have or be or a modal as auxiliary, negation attaches/is
marked on these.
Q: What happens when there is no auxiliary available (i.e., Ss in the Past Simple or
Present Simple)?
(20) They speak perfect English / *They speak not/speakn’t....
Jana speaks perfect English / *Jana speaks not/speaksn’t....
→ Do – Insertion >> They do not/don’t speak.../ Jana does not/doesn’t speak....
→Negation attaches only to auxiliaries/modals in English, never to lexical Vs.
(21) They have not/haven’t been learning lately. / They can’t have been swimming in
this dirty pool!
→ in a string of auxiliaries, negation is always placed after the first auxiliary
NOT = a negative marker which heads its own projection NegP
Q: Where is NegP generated in the structure?
has not come
can not arrive
can not be reading
↓ ↓ ↓ ↓
Infl Neg Asp V >> Neg occurs after the first aux., i.e., below IP and above
VP
>> IP > NegP > VP
 4

This has important consequences for word-order:

(22) *She teaches / taught not
Lexical verbs cannot be directly negated: they cannot directly precede nor follow
Negation
(23) She does not teach morphology.
She did not leave. >> Do-Insertion or Do-Support

Q: why is Do-Insertion required in the derivation?

(24) Bill -s not like syntax
Infl Neg V….
- two options available:
1. Affix Lowering - the affix (-s) cannot lower to V because negation (not) is in
the way >>*Bill not likes syntax 
2. Verb movement - the lexical verb cannot move up to ‘host’ the affix (–s)
(remember!! Lexical Vs do not move in English) >> * Bill likes not syntax 

>> neither of the two options yields grammatical results + the Stranded Affix Filter
says that bound morphemes cannot remain stranded; they need a host >> Do is
inserted as a last resort, providing a verbal support for the affix.   

- in sentences which have auxiliaries (have, be) or modal Vs, these are hosted by the
Inflection node (Remember! modals are directly generated under the Inflection and
the other auxiliaries reach Infl via V-to I movement), hence they can function as
appropriate ‘hosts’ for the affix (-s or –ed) >> no Do-insertion needed 

A word on NOT vs. N’T

- both convey the sentence where they appear syntactically negative
- historically, n’t is the reduced & unstressed form of not but they are not freely
interchangeable >>
- they behave differently:
1) in SAI structures:
(25) Susan has not passed the exam > Has Susan t not passed the exam?
Susan hasn’t passed her exam. > * Has Susan n’t passed the exam?
Hasn’t Susan passed……?
>> not, as a free morpheme, can be stranded vs. n’t - n’t behaves like an
(inflectional/verbal) affix which is ‘dragged along’ by the verb when it moves;

2) n’t can only attach to finite auxiliaries, vs. not, which can also modify infinitive
(non-finite) complements or phrases
(26) Not long ago, he met Susan vs. *N’t long ago, he…….
He may [not have arrived] vs. *He may [n’t have arrived]

3) n’t attaches to the highest auxiliary, whereas ‘not’ can appear lower in the verbal
constituent
(27) He couldn’t have been fired. / *He could haven’t been fired.
He could not have been fired. / He could have not been fired.
→ not can adjoin to non-verbal projections as well >> not necessarily associated to
Sentence negation.
 5

In other words, a sentence which contains the affix ‘n’t’ (always attached to an
auxiliary or a modal) will always be syntactically negative; a sentence which
contains the formative ‘not’ need not be negative, but it may well be (if ‘not’ is
marked on the main predicate (in the inflectional layer))

1), 2) & 3) above also account for a fourth difference

4) while there can only be one instance of ‘n’t’ in a S, ‘not’ can appear twice and ‘not’
can co-occur with ‘n’t’ (the case of double negatives)
(28) * He can’t haven’t gone there vs. He can’t [not have gone there] [= He must
have gone]
You cannot [not go] [ = You must/should go]

In cases such as the example above (with two instances of ‘not’), we are dealing with
two different types of ‘not’, of which only the first one (the highest) is
interchangeable with ‘n’t’, being the head of NegP. The second one marks constituent
negation and it affects the infinitive complement of the modal verb.
(29) You cannot [not go] > You can’t [not go] / *You can’t [n’t go]

The two instances are known under the labels of ‘functional not’ and ‘adverbial not’
(30) You must not [not speak] = You mustn’t [not speak] ( = You must speak)
↓ ↓
functional adverbial

the functional head not vs. the adverbial not

 
the whole sentence negative adjoined to any maximal
projection
a. She couldn’t not have noticed it.
b. They talked to me not to you.
c. They met each other not long ago.

 the functional negator not negates finite clauses vs. adverbial not is used in
non-finite constructions:
(31) To be or NOT to be, that is the question…

 adverbial not = a lexical element which affects only the maximal projection to
which it adjoins, the result is ‘local’ negation and hence it does not interfere
with finite sentence negation.
Evidence that the adverbial not negates non-finite constructions whereas the
functional negator not/n’t only finite clauses comes from the domain of modal verbs.
(32) a. They might [not know about it].
b. She may [not have understood what I taught her]
(33) a.They cannot [speak Chinese].

>> in sentences containing a modal verb negation can affect a) the complement of the
modal, in which case it is analysed as being within the scope of the modal (internal
negation) (example 32, with both sentences syntactically affirmative) , or it can b)
affect the modal, in which case it is outside the scope of the modal (external negation)
(example 33, where negation affects the main predication, hence the sentence is
syntactically negative)
 6

(33) b. John should not eat meat.

IP
2
NP I'
Johni 3
I NegP
should 2
Neg'
2
Neg0 VP
not 2
ti V’
2
V NP
Eat meat

D.2. Sentences with Negative Quantifiers / Sentences with non-verbal

Negation
(34) a. There’s no need for me to attend this class.
b. They had done nothing about it.
c. Neither of them could understand the lecture.
d. She had never felt happier. >> complete/ absolute negators
e. She hardly ever says anything.
f. I have few objections
g. They seldom socialize. >>incomplete negators

[‘incomplete negators signal an imprecise quantification which is close to or

approximates zero’ (CGEL:816); e.g. few = not many (if any); little = not much;
hardly ever = almost never, etc.]
- (!in spite of the absence of ‘not’ or ‘n’t’) all the above sentences are syntactically
negative, since they pass the negativity tests (see section C above):
(35) a. There’s no need for me to attend this class, is it?
b. They had done nothing about it, and neither had you/ nor had you.
c. Neither of them could understand the lecture, not even the smart ones.
d. She had never felt happier and I hadn’t either.
e. She hardly ever says anything, not even when she’s happy/ and she doesn’t
smile either.
f. Few students showed up today, not even the most diligent ones.
g. They seldom socialize, do they? / not even on Sundays.

 the negative marker is the overt element which yields the whole clause negative
 in English, negation can be marked either in the inflectional field (via ‘not’ &
‘n’t’ - see section D.1. above) or by means of negative quantifiers (the present
section), but not both, i.e., negative quantifiers cannot co-occur with negation in
the functional domain:
(36) a. *There isn’t no need for me to look right into your face.
b. * They hadn’t done nothing about it.
 7

 In case there are several elements which can mark negation, negation will be
carried by the one which can c-command all the other positions where it can be
expressed:
(37) a. Nobody knew who she was.
b. *Anybody didn’t know who she was.
(38) a. They sent no invitation to anyone.
b. *They sent any invitation to no one

 in English negation can be overtly expressed only once

 in case several elements can incorporate negation it will always be
incorporated by the first element which c-commands all the other elements

!! vs. Romanian > in Romanian, negation is marked in all positions available to it

(i.e., on the verb as well as on negative quantifiers):
(39) a. Nu a ajutat pe nimeni niciodată.
b. *A ajutat pe nimeni niciodată.

Thus, we distinguish between:

 (i) Negative concord languages, where negation is overtly expressed in all
the positions where it can occur. (e.g., Romanian)
 (ii) Non-negative concord languages, where negation is expressed in one
single position. (e.g., English).
Mind you!
- In standard English, double negatives (instances where negation is marked twice)
are actually affirmative Ss:
(40) a. Don’t just say nothing. (= say something!)
b. No one didn’t consider it a bad idea (= everyone considered it bad)
- substandard English behaves like Romanian, i.e. substandard English is a negative
concord language, since is allows negation to be marked on both the verb and on
quantifiers, whitout yielding an affirmative meaning:
(41) a. I didn’t do nothin’. (= ‘I didn’t do anything’ in standard En.)
≠ I did something
b. Nobody here didn’t point no gun at nobody.
c. I can’t get no satisfaction. = I can’t get any.../ ≠ I can get some
d.Wasn’t nothing wrong with that.

D.3. Emphatic Negative Sentences

(42) a. Never in his life had he heard such nonsense.
b. Nowhere had he seen prettier women.
c. Seldom have I seen such students.
d. Hardly did they notice anyone around.
e. Scarcely anyone learns anything these days.

To be compared to: Have you ever seen such a nasty person?

The syntax of such emphatic negative Ss: they are compared to questions: the
negative quantifier/incomplete negator is assumed to move to [Spec CP], i.e. outside
the IP domain, triggering the movement of the auxiliary from I to C:
 8

D.4. Negative sentences: Conclusions

 Pass the negative S tests (see Section C)
 Types:
(i) NOT/N’T in the functional layer (D.1)
(ii) in non-verbal constituents (licensed by neg features in Neg) (D.2.)
(iii) Emphatic negative sentences (D.3)

E. Polarity Items
Sometimes a negative sentence is characterized not only by the existence of a
negative word (such as not or hardly, barely, etc.) but also by the existence of certain
elements that, although not negative in meaning, cannot appear in an affirmative
context. For example, we can very well say something like:
(43) a. She didn’t lift a finger to help me.
b. She doesn’t like our chairman at all.
But we couldn’t say:
(44) a. *She lifted a finger to help me.
b. *She likes our chairman at all.

These elements that can appear only in non-assertive contexts are called negative
polarity items(NPIs). They are lexical items (that is words and (sometimes idiomatic)
phrases) and are sensitive to the polarity of the sentence, namely to the assertive or
non-assertive nature of the respective sentence.

Negative polarity items are sometimes paralleled by Affirmative/Positive Polarity

Items, that is by items that can appear only in assertive contexts. That is exactly why
we can speak of pairs of Negative and Affirmative Polarity items
Any vs. some (I haven’t any money. / I have some money.)
At all vs. somehow/ somewhat (I don’t like him at all. / I somehow like him.)
Yet vs. already (I haven’t seen him yet. / I have already seen him.)
Any more vs. still (I don’t love you any more. / I still love you)
Either vs. too (I don’t like it, either. / I like it , too.)
Hardly ever vs. most of the times ( I hardly ever eat caviar. / I eat caviar most of the
times.
Until vs. before (He didn’t arrive until 5. / He arrived before 5.)
Much vs. a lot (I don’t like you much. / I like you a lot.), etc.

E.1 The class of NPIs

 ANY and its compounds (anybody, any longer, anymore, anyone, anything,
anywhere)
 lexical verbs: bother (+infinitive); budge; faze
(45) I never bother to iron shirts. vs. *I always bother to iron shirts./ Nothing seemed
to faze her/ She could not budge the wheel
 At all, either, ever, long, much, till/until, what(so)ever, yet
 LONG
(46) She hasn’t known him long. vs. *She has known him long.
 MUCH
(47) Hurry up, we don’t have much time. vs. * We have much time.
I don’t like cooking much. vs. * I like cooking much.
 UNTIL/TILL
 9

(48) We won’t see them until December vs.* We won’t see them before December.
 idioms which are inherently NPIs: amount to a row of pins, ask a soul, bat
an eye, can abide, can bear, can stand, (can) be bothered tell a soul, touch a
drop, worth a row of pins, stop at nothing, take a bit of notice. care a pin, cost
a bean, (could) care less, do a (single) thing (about), drink a drop, earn a
nickel, eat a bite, eat a thing, get a wink of sleep, give a damn, give a fig, have
a clue, have a penny (to one’s name), have a red cent, hear a word, hear a
sound, hold a candle to, hurt a flea, in ages, in donkeys years, leave no stone
unturned, lift a finger, mind a bit, move a muscle, say a word, say a thing, see
a (living) soul, sleep a wink, so much as
(49) I couldn’t sleep a wink last night vs. * I could sleep a wink last night.
This car can’t hold a candle to yours vs. *This car can hold a candle to yours.
They didn’t wait so much as a week vs. *They waited so much as a week.

E.2. The Class of APIs

 SOME and its compounds: someone, somebody, somewhere, somehow
somewhat
 Determinatives: a few, a little, several, various
!! A FEW vs. FEW
(50) A few of them had left. (= API)
Few of them, if any, had left. (=incomplete negator)
!! LITTLE vs. A LITTLE
(51) A little liquid spilled. (API)
Little of the liquid spilled, not even when the bottle fell over. (incomplete
negator)
 degree adverbs: pretty, fairly, quite, far
 Connectives: so, too, as well
 modal idioms: would rather, would sooner, would as soon

E.3. Some systematic relationships

(52) They are still good friends / They aren’t good friends anymore.
They have already got married. / They haven’t got married yet.
I somewhat regret it. / I don’t regret it at all .
SOME – ANY
(53) There is some coffee in the jar. / There isn’t any coffee in the jar.
I met somebody nice at the party. / I didn’t meet anybody nice at the party.
BUT
(54) I met some neighbours.
(i) some = [+specific] >> 2 ways to negate it
a) I didn’t meet some neighbours (but I met others).
(ii) some = [-specific]
b) I didn’t meet any neighbours (= it is not the case that there is any neighbour
that I met).
ANY
(i) Free choice ANY
(55) Anyone can do it.
(ii) NPI (in the scope of/licensed by negation)
(56) I didn’t buy any book.
 10

E.4. NPIs and non-assertive contexts

(57) Have you ever been to Paris? / Have you met anyone nice there?
 NPIs are licensed in interrogative sentences
(58) If you receive any letter from him let me know. / If anyone knew about it you
might be in trouble.
 NPIs are licensed in conditionals
(59) You are better than any students I have ever had. / She was nicer than he had
ever hoped.
 NPIs are licensed in comparative clauses
(60) She was the nicest girl [he had ever met]. These are the best students [anyone
could wish for].
NPIs are licensed in relative clauses which modify a superlative in the matrix
>> therefore:
 NPIs are not restricted to negative clauses, but are allowed in a variety of
non-assertive contexts, such as:
 interrogative sentences
 conditionals
 comparative clauses
 relative clauses which modify a superlative in the matrix
!! There are also LEXICAL ITEMS (V, Adj, Adv, P) which create a non-assertive
context:
 DOUBT (doubt, doubtful, doubted, dubious, sceptical, scepticism)
(61) They expressed scepticism about there being any point in talking to her. / It is to
be doubted that they will ever make it.
 DENIAL (deny, reject )
(62) They denied they had ever been there.
 COUNTER-EXPECTATION (amaze, astound, surprise, shock, flabbergast,
take aback)
(63) I was shocked anyone could behave like that./ I was very surprised that anyone
should have behaved like that.
 FAILURE (fail, forget, refrain, avoid, neglect, omit)
(64) Please forget that I have ever taught you any syntax.
 NEGATIVE EVALUATION (absurd, annoyed, ashamed, excessive, foolish,
monstruous, ridiculous, silly)
(65) How stupid of me to ever talk to him! / It’s monstruous for anyone to have ever
borne such shame!
 PREVENTION and PROHIBITION (ban, hinder, keep, prevent, prohibit,
stop)
(66) They kept us from getting in touch with any of our friends.
 prepositions (without, before, against)
(67) They fought against any changes. / They disappeared before anyone could get a
hold on them.