Abstract

Polar interrogatives with preposed negation (e.g., Didn’t Cam help?) convey positive epistemic bias. Polar interrogatives with even-type expressions, including prosodically stressed NPIs and minimizer NPIs (e.g., Did Cam lift a finger to help?), convey negative epistemic bias and often have a rhetorical flavor. This paper examines hybrid PQ constructions with both preposed negations and even-type expressions (e.g., Didn’t Cam lift a finger to help?; henceforth even-PNQs). It first presents a series of experimental studies which reveal that even-PNQs are characterized by complex, dual dimensions of bias contributed compositionally by both the preposed negation on the one hand and the even-type expression on the other. It then explores the theoretical implications of these results. The emerging data are shown to impose certain constraints on and generate additional desiderata for both the analyses of preposed negation questions and the analyses of even-type questions. Building on this discussion, a compositional analysis of even-PNQs is proposed. The analysis supports the presence of inner vs. outer negation ambiguity in PNQs, and identifies even-PNQs as inner-negation PNQs. It also adopts an informativity-based approach to the meaning contribution of even, formulated around the settledness of alternative issues.

中文翻译：

---

推导偏差的双重维度：使用EVEN提出的否定问题

摘要

带有否定性的极地疑问句（例如，Cam帮不上忙吗？）传达了积极的认知偏见。具有偶数类型表达的极地疑问句，包括强调性的NPI和最小化的NPI（例如，Cam抬起手指来帮助吗？），传达负面的认知偏见，并且常常具有修辞风格。本文研究了既有否定词又有偶数类型表达式的混合PQ构造（例如，Cam难道没有伸出手指来帮助吗？从此以后，甚至是-PNQs）。它首先提出了一系列实验研究，揭示了即使-PNQs的特征是复杂的，双重的偏见维度，一方面是通过既定的否定表达，另一方面是偶数类型的表达，在成分上做出了贡献。然后探讨了这些结果的理论含义。新出现的数据显示出对既定否定问题的分析和偶数型问题的分析都施加了一定的约束，并产生了额外的需求。在此讨论的基础上，提出了偶数-PNQ的成分分析。该分析支持在PNQ中存在内部与外部否定性歧义，并且甚至将-PNQ标识为内部否定PNQ。它还采用了基于信息性的方法来的意思贡献甚至，围绕解决其他问题制定。