[Lingtyp] Expletive derivational negation
Jeremy Bradley
jeremy.moss.bradley at univie.ac.at
Mon Aug 19 16:18:42 UTC 2024
Analogy to "irrespective" is probably an etymological factor in that
one, but I would assume that expletive reading is why the school
grammarian argument against it - that it's a double negative and thus
shouldn't have a negative reading in the end - doesn't hold in practice
and people don't actually have problems parsing the intended meaning there.
Best,
Jeremy
On 19/08/2024 18:07, Peter Arkadiev wrote:
> What about the (in)famous "irregardless" then?
> Best wishes,
> Peter
> 19.08.2024, 17:04, "Jeremy Bradley via Lingtyp"
> <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>:
>
> Mari (Uralic) has an interesting pair of adjectives using the
> fully productive privative derivational suffix /-dəme/ '-less' here:
>
> /mučas-dəme/
> end-PRIV
> 'endless'
>
> /ńi-mučas-dəme/
> NEG-end-PRIV
> 'endless'
>
> ... with /ńi/- being a prefix most likely borrowed from Russian
> used to create negative indefinites (/molan /'why' > /ńimonal
> /'for no reason') and otherwise only attaching to pronominal stems.
>
> Best,
> Jeremy
>
> On 18/08/2024 22:11, Hartmut Haberland via Lingtyp wrote:
>
> I do not know if anybody has remarked on German /Untiefe/
> which actually has two opposite meanings:
>
> 1. a shallow part of a river or the sea, where the water is
> /not/ deep, hence a danger for ships that might get stuck
>
> 2. an unfathomably deep part of a river (rarely) or the sea
>
> This is what the dictionaries say. For me, /Untiefe/ has
> mostly the first meaning, although some people might claim it
> is old-fashioned or even obsolete.
>
> Hartmut Haberland
>
> *Fra:*Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> <mailto:lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> *På vegne
> af *Volker Gast via Lingtyp
> *Sendt:* 18. august 2024 21:25
> *Til:* lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> *Emne:* Re: [Lingtyp] Expletive derivational negation
>
> There are some further interesting examples of the German
> un-prefix on nouns:
>
> Un-mensch 'inhuman person'
>
> Un-person 'persona non grata'
>
> Un-ding 'something unheard of'
>
> Un-zahl 'huge number' (cf. Un-menge)
>
> I had a look at Grimm's Wörterbuch, where I found some further
> examples that I was unaware of, e.g. Un-haufe 'un-heap',
> Un-masse 'un-mass'. Some of these words seem to be relatively
> old (16th cent.), others quite recent (and Unperson may have
> been influenced by G. Orwell's English coinage? It seems to
> have emerged in the middle of the 20th century in German,
> according to the DWDS).
>
> There's clearly an emotive component to all of these, and I
> think they all have a negative connotation. Some of the nouns
> seem to be formed on the model of the pattern
>
> 'Some x that you cannot V (measure, count)' (cf. Stephane's
> comment)
>
> "Un-mensch" is perhaps the example that's closest to literal
> negation, 'someone who is not a human being'. Unding is mostly
> used for abstract entities, in my German, and more or less
> means 'scandal'.
>
> I think I would see these examples as instances of
> subjectification and specialization, as others have written or
> implied. The core meaning of 'un-' still survives in the
> negative evaluation (cf. Bastian). Btw I think that 'Un-menge'
> also has a negative evaluation. It's not just a large quantity
> -- it's a quantity that's TOO large, according to some standard.
>
> Best,
> Volker
>
> Am 16.08.2024 um 14:18 schrieb ROBERT Stephane via Lingtyp:
>
> I fully agree with Bastian which perhaps expresses more
> clearly what I meant by “high degree”: subjective
> evaluation pointing to an extreme degree (indescribable,
> inexpressible), positive or negative depending on the
> notion involved.
>
> To take on this meaning, lexical negation must be combined
> with a gradable (or scalar) notion. In the case of nouns,
> this typically involves mass nouns, such as Menge (crowd),
> Tiefe (depth) vs. Freiheit (freedom).
>
> Stéphane
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *De :*Lingtyp <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> <mailto:lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> de la
> part de Zingler, Tim via Lingtyp
> <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> <mailto:lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> *Envoyé :* vendredi 16 août 2024 14:15
> *À :* Bastian Persohn
> *Cc :* lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> <mailto:lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> *Objet :* Re: [Lingtyp] Expletive derivational negation
>
> Well, the point is that these words contain what
> synchronically looks like a negator affix even though that
> affix does not negate the stem. So, they seem to qualify
> for the phenomenon the original post was about.
>
> But I like the idea that the function has shifted as part
> of a subjectification (?) process. Does that happen with
> negators cross-linguistically?
>
>
> Best,
>
> Tim
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *Von:*Bastian Persohn <persohn.linguistics at gmail.com>
> <mailto:persohn.linguistics at gmail.com>
> *Gesendet:* Freitag, 16. August 2024 13:55
> *An:* Zingler, Tim
> *Cc:* lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> <mailto:lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> *Betreff:* Re: [Lingtyp] Expletive derivational negation
>
> I’m not sure that /Untiefe/ is synonymous with /Tiefe/, or
> /Unmenge/ with /Menge/. In my intuition /Un-menge/ has an
> evaluative ring to it (‚an undesirably large or
> over-the-top amount‘), and DWDS translates it as ’sehr
> große, übergroße Menge’ [very big, unnecessary big
> amount]’. Similarly, /Un-tiefe/ usually refers to an
> extreme depth (cf. DWDS: ‚abgrundartige, sehr große Tiefe
> in einem Gewässer [abysm-like, very large depth in a body
> of water]‘.
>
> Their closest relatives are probably found in instances
> like /Un-fall/ ‚accident‘ < /Fall/ ‚case‘, i.e. ‚the
> undesirable case‘ or /Un-tier/ ‚monster‘, lit ‚un-animal‘.
> What all these have in common is a negative element,
> albeit in the subjective rather than the material domain.
>
> Best,
>
> Bastian
>
>
>
> Am 16.08.2024 um 13:10 schrieb Zingler, Tim via
> Lingtyp <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> <mailto:lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>:
>
> German has /Un-tiefe/, which essentially means the
> same as/Tiefe/ 'depth'. Or/Un-menge/, largely
> synonymous with/Menge/ 'mass, crowd, great amount.'
> These seem perfectly analogous to/valuable-invaluable/.
>
> I'm sure there's more, but I don't know if that prefix
> is cognate with the negator found in, for
> instance,/Un-freiheit/ 'unfreedom.' So, there are
> probably complications involved if one were to analyze
> that more seriously.
>
>
> Best,
>
> Tim
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *Von:*Lingtyp
> <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> <mailto:lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> im
> Auftrag von ROBERT Stephane via Lingtyp
> <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> <mailto:lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> *Gesendet:*Freitag, 16. August 2024 11:48
> *An:*lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> <mailto:lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> *Betreff:*Re: [Lingtyp] Expletive derivational negation
>
> Dear Joe,
>
> Personally, I do not regard these uses of lexical
> negation as expletive but rather as contributing a
> construction with a high-degree value that can be
> paraphrased as follows: 'this object is (valuable) to
> a degree that I (speaker) cannot (even) express', or
> '*no*matter how hard I try to estimate how much X is
> P, I***can't*express it'(P for predicate).
>
>
> Note that in the examples I can analyse (Germanic,
> English and also French '/in-estim-able/'), this
> lexical negation is combined with a suffix (cf. Germ.
> -/bar/, Eng. < Fr. -/able/) which contributes to the
> meaning of the construction because it expresses
> evaluation about capacity ‘which can be P’ .
>
> Best
>
> Stéphane ROBERT
>
> https://llacan.cnrs.fr <https://llacan.cnrs.fr/>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *De :*Lingtyp
> <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> <mailto:lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org> de
> la part de Hannu Tommola via Lingtyp
> <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> <mailto:lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> *Envoyé :*vendredi 16 août 2024 11:03
> *À :*<LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG>
> <mailto:LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG>; Pun Ho Lui
> *Objet :*Re: [Lingtyp] Expletive derivational negation
>
> Hi,
>
> there seems to be a tendency to lexicalize
> 'invaluable' in an intensifying non-negative meaning
> (cf. Russian/bes-cennyj/ 'invaluable, priceless',
> which has an obsolete meaning 'valueless'
> =/ne-cennyj/). This tendency goes back to the verb
> 'value' that has, in various languages, both the
> meanings 1) 'estimate', 2) 'regard/estimate highly'.
> Cf. also German/un-schätzbar/ 'invaluable'
> </schätzen/ 1. 'to regard highly, respect', 2. 'value,
> estimate'; the same applies to
> Swedish/o-skattbar/ </(upp)skatta/.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Hannu Tommola
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> *Lähettäjä:*Lingtyp
> <lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> <mailto:lingtyp-bounces at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> käyttäjän Pun Ho Lui via Lingtyp
> <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> <mailto:lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org> puolesta
> *Lähetetty:*perjantai 16. elokuuta 2024 3.22
> *Vastaanottaja:*<LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG>
> <mailto:LINGTYP at LISTSERV.LINGUISTLIST.ORG>
> <lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> <mailto:lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> *Aihe:*[Lingtyp] Expletive derivational negation
>
> Dear linguists,
>
> I am recently interested in lexical items that consist
> of a derivational negative affix which may not
> contribute a negative meaning (i.e. being expletive).
>
> For instance,/in-valuable/~/valuable/. Other possible
> examples would be 無價‘invaluable [lit. NEG value’ in
> Mandarin, and/sewashi-nai/‘restless’ ~/sewashii/‘busy’
> in Japanese.
>
> I have looked into a number of (decent) grammar
> descriptions but have no luck.
>
> I am wondering if you know of any language with
> similar items.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Warmest,
>
> Pun Ho Lui Joe
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> <mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
> https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
> <https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Lingtyp mailing list
>
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org <mailto:Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org>
>
> https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp <https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>
> --
> Jeremy Bradley, Ph.D.
> University of Vienna
>
> http://www.mari-language.com
> jeremy.moss.bradley at univie.ac.at
>
> Office address:
> Institut EVSL
> Abteilung Finno-Ugristik
> Universität Wien
> Campus AAKH, Hof 7-2
> Spitalgasse 2-4
> 1090 Wien
> AUSTRIA
>
> Mobile: +43-664-99-31-788
> Skype: jeremy.moss.bradley
>
> ,
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lingtyp mailing list
> Lingtyp at listserv.linguistlist.org
> https://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp
>
> --
> Peter Arkadiev, PhD Habil.
> https://peterarkadiev.github.io/
--
Jeremy Bradley, Ph.D.
University of Vienna
http://www.mari-language.com
jeremy.moss.bradley at univie.ac.at
Office address:
Institut EVSL
Abteilung Finno-Ugristik
Universität Wien
Campus AAKH, Hof 7-2
Spitalgasse 2-4
1090 Wien
AUSTRIA
Mobile: +43-664-99-31-788
Skype: jeremy.moss.bradley
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lingtyp/attachments/20240819/9d4d61ce/attachment-0001.htm>
More information about the Lingtyp
mailing list