Negation in Catalan. Some Remarks with Regard to No Pas M
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
NEGATION IN CATALAN. SOME REMARKS WITH REGARD TO NO PAS M. Teresa Espinal Universitat Autbnoma de Barcelona In this paper I shail approach certain questions that can be posed in the study of Catalan negative constructions: (a) how many negative markers can be distinguished; (b) how the difference between no and no pas should be described in the core grammar of this language, and (c) what sort of syntactic representation should be assigned to negative sententiai constructions in Catalan. The structure of the paper is organized as follows. Section 1 is devoted to describing the syntactic disttibution of the various negative markers existing in Catalan. It is proposed that, apart from no, there are two more negative markers: no pas I, which is a negative head, and no pas 2, which is a negative specifier. Section 2 describes the semantic properties that characterize these negative markers. It is argued that the association with focus is not an inherent property of the logical semantics of no pas, and that what singles out this operator, in contrast with no, is that it has a quantificational domain over a set of conceptual entities of which a subdomain is selected as the negative contrasted item. Section 3 deals with the sort of syntactic structure that should be assigned to Catalan negative sentences and it iniroduces the proposal that the relevant structure has a NegP as the root node and an AgrP as iis complement. TP is the complement of the latter functional category. 1. Syntactic Distribution I shall approach the first question by briefly sketching out the basic syntactic distribution of the simple lexical item no and the compound lexical item no pas in Central Catalan.1 A close examination of the order in which negative structures are internalized in the process of first language acquisition and an inquiry into the frequency of appearance of the various existing Catalan Working Papers in Linguistics (CWPL), 1991: 33-63 Universitat Authnoma de Barcelona negative structures suggest that it is convenient to distinguish within the grammar of this language between marked and unmarked negative constructions, with the syntactic distribution shown in (1). UNMARKED MARKED no no V no X UNMARKED no pas no pas X MARKED I ElI no pas I: no pas 2: Nego SPEC [ + NEG] It is important to notice that V can be kFIN], and V* is either a V or a complex verb. On the other hand, X cannot be a finite verb form.2 Some examples which illustrate this syntactic distribution are given in (2). (2) a. La Maria no va aprovar the Maria not PAST pass 'Maria did not pass' b. *La Maria va no aprovar c. No tots els estudiants van aprovar not all the students PAST pass 'Not all the students passed' d. La Maria no va pas aprovar the Maria not PAST pas pass 'Maria did not pass' (cancelling or confirming the speaker's expectations)3 e. La Maria no va aprovar pas (2) f. *La Maria va pas aprovar g. *LaMariavaaprovarpas h. No pas LA MARIA no va aprovar not pas the Maria not PAST pass 'It was not Maria who passed' (cancelling or confinning the speaker's expectations on Maria) i. *No pensava que la Maria aprovaria pas not think-PAST that the Maria pass-COND pas 'I didn't think that Maria would pass' j. *No temia poder pas aprovar la Maria not fear-PAST be able pas pass the Maria 'I had no fear of being able to pass Maria' k. No crec que aprovi pas la Maria not think that pass-SUB pas the Maria 'I don't think that { Maria is going to pass, I'm going to pass Maria )' Exarnples (2a,b,c) show the distribution of the simple lexical item no, either preceding a verb forrn or a non-verbal item. However, in this paper I am more concerned with negative no pas constructions. Notice that in (2) no pas appears in two different syntactic environments (compare (2d,e) with (2h)). With regard to this fact two distinct negative markers will be postulated. No pas 1, as illustrated in (2d,e), is characterized by coappearing with a verb form (either simple or complex) and by being a discontinuous lexical item. Note also that in the dialect that I describe, pas cannot occur alone, without no (see examples (2f,g)), which suggests that -unlike French and Occitan- in current Central Catalanpas is not an independent lexical unit, but a morpheme which is lexically and syntactically inseparable from no. Furthermore, the ungrammatical sequences given in (2ij) reveal that the series of verbs that interrupt the compound lexical item no pas 1 cannot contain a sentential boundary. In this respect, the grammaticality of an exarnple such as (2k) seems to be related to the tense-mood of the subordinate clause. According to Picallo (1984), the Tense node of a subjunctive clause lacks the features necessary to be fully specified as [+ TNS], for it is bound to the Tense specification of the main clause. On the other hand, pas at S-structure must always be c-commanded by no (cf. May (1985)), which means that there cannot be any maximal projection between no and pas . Therefore, in the syntactic context illustrated in (2k) it seems as if the CP node of the subordinate clause in the subjunctive tense is not visible with regard to binding effects. One possible interpretation of these data is to assume that no pas 1 is -1ike no - the head of a ~e~p.4What differs between them is that no pas 1 requires an explicit complement at S- structure, and this complement must have the form of an inflected verb, as the answers in (3B) reveal. (3) A. VindriilaMaria? come-FüT the Maria 'Will Maria come?' B. a. No b. *Nopas c. No vindrh pas From a syntactic point of view it is important to point out that no pas can also occur at a different syntactic environment, exemplified so far in (2h). No pas 2 , as I shall refer to this negative marker, is in a similar syntactic distribution to other lexical items, such as nome's, solament 'only', encara 'still' and fins i tot 'even'. In fact, all these adverbials can occur at several syntactic positions, modifying either the verb or some other constituent of the sentence. Among them, no pas introduces a negative polarity effect. More exarnples which illustrate the location of these adverbials in syntactic positions other than at the left of the verb are given in (4), (5) and (6) (4) a. { Només, solament, fins i tot, encara ) VOSALTRES sereu sancionats [ only, only, even, still ] you be-FUT punished '{ Only, even, still ) you will be punished' b. No pas VOSALTRES no sereu sancionats not pas you not be-FUT punished 'It's not you who will be punished' (5) a. Només una mica de PA ens han donat only a little of bread us have given 'Only a Iittle bread has been given to us' b. No pas gens de PA no ens han donat not pas nothlng of bread not us have given 'No bread at all has been given to us' (6) a. La Maria compra pa només al forn the Maria buys bread only at the bakery 'Maria buys bread only at the bakery' b. La Maria compra pa no pas al forn, sinó a la pastisseria the Maria buys bread not pas at the bakery, but at the pastry shop 'Maria buys bread not at the bakery but at the pastry shop' In (2h), as in (4b), (5b) and (6b), there is no superficial discontinuity between no andpas. This property seems to suggest that no pas in these examples is -as before- a single lexical item which occupies a single syntactic position. Notice, furthermore, that it would be incorrect to claim that in this sort of structure no pas is the head of a NegP, for it would be quite anomalous for items of the adverbial category to have indistinctly nominal, quantified or prepositional complements: a specific property of no pas 2 is that it can precede any major lexical category, with the exception of finite verb forns. If adverbs which behave like quantifiers are not heads, the only position they can fill is the SPEC position of a major syntactic category: NP, QP, PP, etc. A further distributional property relates to the notions of scope and focus, due to the fact that those lexical items which in other languages behave like no pas, només, solament, etc. are known in the linguistic literature -arnong other tems- as "focus adverbs", "scopal adverbs", "scalar particles" and "focusing particles". Since the constituent associated with this type of adverbial has been sometimes named focus and other times scope, in the next section I shall describe the distribution of no pas with regard to focus and scope. 2. No pas As a Quantifier-like Operator No pas, just like only, is always semantically associated with some sentential constituent, but this semantic association does not have to be revealed in the syntax through precedence structural relations. Most often, the constituent associated with no pas is either identified with the focus of the sentence (see (4b) and (5b)) or with a constituent of a contrastive structure (no pas X, sinó Y 'not X, but Y'), as exemplified in (6b). In the first case, the constituent associated with no pas tends to be intonationally more prominent.5 However, it is not right to assume that no pas is automatically associated with the prosodic focus of the sentence, for it is possible to find examples where the focus of the sentence does not coincide with the constituent that no pas precedes.6 Let us consider the paradigm of sentences given in (7).