• Language and Information
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.127-153
• /
• 2015

Negative expressions have their semantic function of classical negation as a pure reverser of truth-values. They also have various kin and foes of their pragmatic functions such as association of bad feelings (Russell 1948), emphasis/attenuation by negative polarity items, sarcasm, and metalinguistic negation (MN). This paper explores how MN and descriptive negation (DN) differ and whether the difference creates pragmatic ambiguity (Horn 1987) or reflects merely contextual variations of one logical negation (Carston 1996). To test the debate, this paper treats certain degree modifiers licensed exclusively by MN as in Mia-ka POTHONG/Yekan yeppu-n key an-i-a [external neg] (vs. modifier NPIs like cenhye 'at all', licensed only by DN) and contrasts them with bad utterances of the MN modifiers in [short form neg] sentences (not for MN) such as Mia-ka POTHONG an yeppu-e. The ERP results of the well-formed vs. ill-formed conditions evoked the N400 at Cz in written stimuli and the N400 near the center on both hemispheres in spoken stimuli. The results suggest that the anomalies are meaning-related and tend to support the pragmatic ambiguity.

• Language and Information
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.1-20
• /
• 2006

This paper is concerned with the distribution and interpretation of yekan and its cognates. Syntactically they require negation, but semantically the sentences in which they occur are positive ones that make monotone increasing inferences possible. This syntax-semantics discrepancy can be best accounted for by showing that yekan and its cousins must be strictly c-commanded by metalinguistic negation at the surface structure and that the positive meaning of the sentences they are part of is derived from the cancellation of the pragmatic upper-bounding implicatum associated with them. These also enable us to explain why they do not occur in the environments where typical NPIs do and why only certain forms of negation license them.

• Proceedings of the Korean Society for Language and Information Conference
• /
• 2006.06a
• /
• pp.139-148
• /
• 2006

• Proceedings of the Korean Society for Cognitive Science Conference
• /
• 2005.05a
• /
• pp.186-191
• /
• 2005

본고에서는 한국어의 부정접속사 ‘-지만(PA)’ 과 ‘아니라(SN)’ 의 화용적 성격을 통해서 초언어적 부정의 특성을 설명하려 한다. Horn(2002)에서 제시된 ‘단언된 것(what is asserted)’ 과 부정접속사 관계를 살펴보고, 이를 통해서 PA는 초언어적 부정에 의해서 대조될 수 없음을 보인다. 그리고 한국어의 대조화제의 부정이 PA접속사와 연결되는 특성을 통해서 대조화제는 외연적 부정만이 가능하다는 것을 밝힌다.