University of Huddersfield Repository Nahajec, Lisa Margaret Evoking the Possibility of Presence:Textual and Ideological Effects of Linguistic Negation in Written Discourse Original Citation Nahajec, Lisa Margaret (2012) Evoking the Possibility of Presence:Textual and Ideological Effects of Linguistic Negation in Written Discourse. Doctoral thesis, University of Huddersfield. This version is available at http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/17537/ The University Repository is a digital collection of the research output of the University, available on Open Access. Copyright and Moral Rights for the items on this site are retained by the individual author and/or other copyright owners. Users may access full items free of charge; copies of full text items generally can be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided: • The authors, title and full bibliographic details is credited in any copy; • A hyperlink and/or URL is included for the original metadata page; and • The content is not changed in any way. For more information, including our policy and submission procedure, please contact the Repository Team at: [email protected]. http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/ Evoking the Possibility of Presence: Textual and Ideological Effects of Linguistic Negation in Written Discourse Volume 1 of 2 Lisa Nahajec A thesis submitted to the University of Huddersfield in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy May 2012 The University of Huddersfield 1 Abstract This thesis explores the textual and ideological effects of linguistic negation in written texts. It argues that when language users process negation, understanding its use in context is as much about the possibility of presence as it is about the actuality of absence. This gives rise to a variety of effects in texts from contributing to the construction of fictional characters to potentially influencing readers’/hearers’ view of the world they inhabit. This thesis brings together research on the theoretical aspects of how negation works to present a new approach to linguistic negation in written discourse. It also demonstrates how this approach can be applied in the analysis of the conceptual practice of negating. The approach presented is made up of three main elements; negation is presuppositional, is realised through a wide variety of linguistic forms beyond the morphosyntactic core forms (not, no, never, none, un-, in-, and so on) and includes semantic and pragmatically implied forms. These two elements combine to give rise to implied meaning in context. Having outlined this approach to negation, it is then applied in the analysis of literary and non-literary texts to explain the textual and ideological effects that arise from its use. 2 Acknowledgments A comprehensive acknowledgement of all the help I have received in researching and writing this thesis would potentially be as long as the thesis itself. From numerous conversations with conference delegates to the unending patience of colleagues who have listened to the latest ‘breakthrough’, I have benefited from the help of those around me. I would particularly like to thank my fellow research student Beth, who has listened to my ramblings over far too many ‘bad habits’. Also to Ulrike, Laura and Dawn. I have been supported and encouraged by their goodwill. My sincere thanks and acknowledgement must, however, go to my supervisors, Prof. Lesley Jeffries and Dr. Dan McIntyre. Lesley’s apparently boundless patience, encouragement and belief have kept me going, whilst her formidable knowledge, confident guidance and interest have kept me going in the right direction. Dan’s pragmatic approach to completing the task at hand has kept me focussed in both research and writing, and will, one day, help me to put the whole thing into perspective. Above all, both Lesley and Dan continued to believe in this project and me, even when it was difficult to believe in myself. This all too brief acknowledgement can never do justice to what they have given me, not only through the years of my Ph.D, but also as an undergraduate and masters student. This project would not have been possible without the generous financial support given by the University of Huddersfield. I must also thank my family, not only for their support but their patience. My mum, Rene, has listened to and been an endless sounding board for me to work out my ideas. I am sure she is looking forward to forgetting everything she knows about negation. Finally, my love and thanks go to my son, Jack. He has grown from a boy to a man (well nearly) in the time it has taken for me to complete this thesis. He has had to contend with my short temper, long hours of work and a frequent lack of socks and pants! He has rubbed my shoulders and provided endless cups of tea, and I hope one day he will understand the joy he has brought me, even when it looked like I wasn’t listening. The road this thesis has taken has been far from smooth. Nor has it been as short as I would have liked and hoped. I have taken as a guiding light in writing a piece of advice given to me by Prof. Lesley Jeffries; any explanation should not exceed in complexity the phenomenon it hopes to capture. This advice has seen me through many a rewrite of impenetrable sentences, paragraphs and passages. Any remaining convoluted constructions, inaccuracies or failures to produce sound explanations are there despite this sound advice, and are entirely my own. 3 Evoking the Possibility of Presence: Textual and Ideological Effects of Linguistic Negation in Written Discourse Lisa Nahajec Copyright notice i. The author of this thesis (including any appendices and/or schedules to this thesis) owns any copyright in it (the “Copyright”) and s/he has given The University of Huddersfield the right to use such Copyright for any administrative, promotional, educational and/or teaching purposes. ii. Copies of this thesis, either in full or in extracts, may be made only in accordance with the regulations of the University Library. Details of these regulations may be obtained from the Librarian. This page must form part of any such copies made. iii. The ownership of any patents, designs, trade marks and any and all other intellectual property rights except for the Copyright (the “Intellectual Property Rights”) and any reproductions of copyright works, for example graphs and tables (“Reproductions”), which may be described in this thesis, may not be owned by the author and may be owned by third parties. Such Intellectual Property Rights and Reproductions cannot and must not be made available for use without the prior written permission of the owner(s) of the relevant Intellectual Property Rights and/or Reproductions. 4 Symbols, Typological conventions and acronyms X , Y X and Y are used as substitutes for a construction in which X represents an entity for which the attribute, event, entity, Y, does not apply, e.g. black (X) is not white(Y). * indicates an ungrammatical construction ? indicates a pragmatically questionable construction Bold italic indicates negators when they are mentioned as part of the discussion rather than used. Underline indicates the implicature that results from the application of Grice’s (1975) Co-operative Principle to an utterance containing negation. Bold underline indicates parts of examples which are the focus of analysis. ‘single quotes’ indicates quoted text or words/phrases/sentences that are being discussed. Italic indicates emphasis. LDN Logical double negation NPI Negative polarity item 5 Contents Abstract 2 Acknowledgments 3 Copyright statement 4 Symbols, Typological conventions and acronyms 5 Contents 6 List of Figures 11 List of Tables 12 Chapter 1 – Introduction 13 1.1 Linguistic negation in discourse 13 1.2 Defining negation 17 1.3 Aims of the thesis-analysing negation in written discourse 18 1.3.1 Negation in literary texts 21 1.3.2 Negation in non-literary text 29 1.4 An integrated approach to negation in discourse 33 1.5 Data 36 1.6 Format of thesis 37 Chapter 2 - Experimental and discourse based approaches to processing actual absences and possible presences in linguistic negation 42 2.1 Introduction 42 2.2 Experimental evidence 43 2.2.1 Processing times and plausible context 44 2.2.2 Retaining negated concepts 46 2.3 Grammatical evidence 49 2.3.1 Anaphoric reference 50 2.3.2 Ellipsis 51 2.4 Discourse Evidence 54 2.4.1 Giora’s (2006) resonance, comparison and accessibility of negated concepts 55 2.4.2 Processing negated metaphors 57 2.5 Conclusions 61 Chapter 3 - Negation and cognition 62 3.1 Introduction 62 3.2 A cautionary note on cognitive approaches to language analysis 63 3.3 Stasis and change/ground and figure 65 3.4 Negation and mental spaces 69 3.5 Negation and intersubjectivity 71 6 3.5.1 Verhagen’s intersubjectivity 72 3.5.2 Morphological negation and multiple mental spaces 75 3.6 Conclusions 77 Chapter 4 - Negation and Presupposition 79 4.1 Introductions 79 4.2 Pragmatic accounts of the expectations associated with linguistic negation 80 4.2.1 Conversational implicature 80 4.2.2 Conventional implicature 86 4.2.3 Pragmatic presupposition 89 4.2.4 Conceptual practice as a presupposition trigger 92 4.2.5 Negation, presupposition and ambiguity 94 4.3 What is presupposed and by whom? 97 4.3.1 Who expects? 97 4.3.1.1 Readers/hearers, ideal readers/hearers and expectations 98 4.3.1.2 Speakers/writers and expectations 100 4.3.1.3 Expectations or possibilities? 104 4.3.2 What is expected? 106 4.3.3 Sources of expectations.