Resumen de Some People Think There Is Neg Raising, and Some Don’t: Neg Raising Meets Ellipsis
The interaction of Neg raising (NR) with VP-ellipsis (VPE) shows that if NR is a rule of grammar, then the conditions on VPE must be exact syntactic identity and must be insensitive to major semantic differences between the so-called antecedent and the meaning understood at the ellipsis site. In particular, the conditions on ellipsis must be so blind to the semantics that they allow a polarity reversal between the antecedent and the understanding at the ellipsis site. But the behavior of indexicals shows quite clearly that meaning is what counts for the understanding of VPE, not form. This in turn provides new evidence against a syntactic process of NR.
This remark makes two (related) points. Section 1 shows that if Neg raising is a rule of grammar (in any of its versions), then the conditions on VP-ellipsis must be impervious to any kind of identity of meaning between the so-called antecedent and the material that is silenced—or understood— at the ellipsis site. (The remarks extend to focus-based accounts.) Section 2 argues that it is highly unlikely that the conditions on ellipsis so completely disregard meaning. Hence, if it is true that VP-ellipsis does not ignore the relationship between the meaning of the silenced/understood material and the antecedent material that licenses/supplies this meaning, then the interactions discussed in section 1.3 provide new evidence against Neg raising.
