This article attempts to give a uniform and coherent analysis of the semantics and syntax of negation, with special emphasis on negative concord (NC) constructions. It is argued that negation is semantically a tripartite quantifier binding the event variable in its restriction. In syntax, this logical form corresponds to a structure where a NegP is present with Neg ° (normally) hosting the negative particle and a specifier as a checking position in the Minimalist sense. As a consequence, negative indefinites are held to be weak indefinites with a formal feature NEG which has to be checked away (thus obtaining Neg absorption). Additionally, some new data are introduced showing that even English style negative indefinites are analysable as non-negated weak indefinites.

This paper focuses on the expression of sentential negation in West Flemish (WF), which it examines with respect to competing theories for deriving the West Germanic verb-final sentence pattern. The empirical adequacy of three hypotheses proposed to account for the verb-final order in the West Germanic languages is tested: (i) the ‘traditional’ OV analysis with head-final base structures; (ii) an antisymmetric approach with only head-complement order and without V-to-I movement; (iii) an antisymmetric approach with head-complement order, but with V-to-I movement and remnant movement of the projection containing the trace of V. Specifically, the question is asked to what extent these analyses capture the surface distribution of WF negation markers (niet, en and negative quantifiers). The paper shows that the traditional OV analysis is certainly adequate for the description of the data concerned. As far as antisymmetric approaches are concerned, a double movement analysis fares better than antisymmetric approaches without V-to-I movement. The paper also shows that, contrary to what has often been assumed, the WF morpheme en is not necessarily analysed as the head of NegP, the canonical projection to encode sentential negation, but that it could also plausibly be analysed as the head of PolP, a higher functional projection which encodes polarity.

The syntax of finite verbs with the negation suffix -a/-at in early Old Norse reveals an asymmetry regarding the position of the verb relative to the subject in main clauses. The subject is regularly preceded by the negated verb, but followed by the verb in affirmative clauses. The asymmetry suggests that the subject is canonically in SpecIP. In affirmative subject-initial main clauses the finite verb moves to I, but the negated verbs obligatorily move to C. The movement of negated verbs to C is triggered by a [+neg] feature in this position. This assumption is independently motivated by the existence of the overt and non-overt negative complementizers in a variety of languages. The analysis advanced here supports the hypothesis that cross-linguistically sentential negation can be structurally represented in C.

This paper investigates a surprising interpretational asymmetry in modal-negation sequences in Norwegian: When the negation word follows the subject, the sentence is ambiguous with respect to the relative scopes of the negation and the modal. When negation precedes the subject, however, the negation unambiguously takes scope over the modal. I argue that this asymmetry can be accounted for by assuming that verb raising has semantic implications; contrary to Chomsky (2001a). Modal-negation sequences in subordinate clauses do not display the same asymmetry, which supports the hypothesis that verb raising causes the observed patterns. Moreover, many speakers reject the sequence negation-subject in subordinate clauses. I propose that, for these speakers, main clauses employ two adjunction sites for negation, whereas subordinate clauses employ only one.