Specialization and finiteness (a)symmetry in imperative negation

With a comparison to standard negation

Bibliographic Data

ID21714372
AuthorsDaniel Van Olmen (0000-0001-9289-9196, Lancaster University , Lancaster , UK, corresponding author)
Year2024
Volume28
Issue2
Pages205-252
Publication date2024-07-26
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueLinguistic Typology (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1430-0532 • E-ISSN: 1613-415X
PublisherWalter de Gruyter GmbH (PUBLISHER • DE)
DOI10.1515/lingty-2022-0007
OpenAlexW4385546382
LanguageEN
References cited46

This article focuses primarily on the claim in previous research that finiteness asymmetry occurs less often in imperative negation, due to its illocutionary dynamicity, than in standard negation, due to its stativity. Its secondary aim is to identify the languages suitable to test this hypothesis, with specialized imperatives as well as negative imperatives. The findings of this identification process in a balanced 200-language sample confirm the imperative and its negative counterpart as near-universal sentence types while simultaneously providing evidence for specialization asymmetry and thus for a certain mutual independence between the two. The results about finiteness asymmetry challenge the earlier claim: not only is finiteness asymmetry equally frequent in the two domains of negation; an explicit expression of illocutionary dynamicity can even give rise to it in imperative negation. In general, imperative negation’s finiteness asymmetry is found to be relatively unrelated to standard negation’s and not to be attributable to one single principle. The article shows that a variety of processes, such as grammaticalization and insubordination, are at work. They are argued to be motivated by the diachronic instability of negative imperatives, itself likely due to competing factors like politeness and negative reinforcement

Asymmetry · Grammaticalization · Linguistics · Negation · Physics · Sentence · Language, Discourse, Communication Strategies · Linguistic Variation and Morphology · Mathematics · Philosophy · Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access