 So, let us begin with what we have to do today. You see, we have been discussing several theoretical aspects for the study of language, okay. We started with principles and sets of parameters and we saw how they work. Then we started looking at the aspects of principles and parameters. That is, this whole theoretical approach is a collection of several modules, okay, several modules. And then we looked at some of those modules separately like X bar theory, theta theory, case theory, binding theory that is called anaphoric relations and several other things in total. You see, as a note here, I must tell you, the whole approach of principles and parameters is also known as modular approach, okay. It was coming up, developing simultaneously with computers revolution in the world. Not only revolutions in cognitive science, but computer revolutions in the world. I am sure I do not need to go into details to tell you the comparison or anything else about computers that the kind of small machines we have 20 years ago or maybe 30 years or definitely 40 years ago, big size machines did not have that much capacity to perform several tasks, several actions, right. So, and that is an accepted fact, that is a historical thing as we know. And as you also know, now machines are also very much modular. We can take what I mean by modular is very simple and then I will come back to language. We can take one part of machine, fix it and put it together and then the machine works, right. So, for a machine to work, we do not need to disrupt everything else. Am I right when I say this is a modular approach? Similar things were experimented with language that if we are only looking at case, we need to look at just case and several other theoretical apparatus to explain how it works. And while discussing case, we do not need to bring in anaphorical relations and then we do not need to bring in movement and everything. Something that the modular approach just like the multi-tasking of machines developed through cognitive revolution and looking at the capacity of human mind to perform several tasks at a time. Machines were designed to perform several tasks at a time. It has been claimed not very emphatically. These are inferences to great extent and some mild claims that looking at the such developing and building upon such capacities, modularity in machines were also developed. We do not have to be religious or fanatic about these things. Some people claim the other way around because modularity of machines were developing at the same time, people looked at modularity of several theoretical aspects explaining language. We still do not know whether language really works in a modular way in human mind. We know how it works to a great extent. We know how to explain several aspects of language but we do not really know whether it really works in a modular fashion or in some other way. That would be too tall a claim. So that was just a side note which is a cross reference to cognitive revolutions and then applications to machines. Now coming back as you can see the title of what I am going to discuss with you. The idea is to talk to you about a particular aspect of linguistic theory and see how it helps us explain an aspect of South Asian language. How does that work? And that will give us an idea of how to look at our own languages. I know in a very short class we have been able to look at the theoretical modules and several theoretical aspects but we did not get enough time to look at Hindi data or Tamil data or Telugu data or Malayalam data to see how they work besides SOV and VSO and some genetic things. So this is what I want to do at least for today and probably it will need to give a conclusive shape. It will need one more hour. So see how this works. So do you get the idea what we want to do? And for that I have chosen negation and there are two reasons for negation. A I have personally worked on negation and I understand how it works at least in one language. My idea is to work on the negative aspects of not the negative aspects in terms of negative negation of other languages. How negation functions in other South Asian languages that is my idea but that is a different story. So I want to take some examples from negatives or negation sentences from Hindi and show you how it works and see if it helps us apply the theoretical concepts that we have learnt at least to some extent. So see very simple. So far we should not have any difficulty. There are three negative markers in Hindi. They are words like nahi, math and na. Out of the three two of them are most frequently used that is nahi and math. I am not saying na is not an important one but sometimes it goes with nahi. Sometimes it is close to math. Basically it is a short form of nahi. So these are the three words. That is not very interesting. That is interesting only for the purpose of recognizing a negation word. Most of the not most availability of negation is a universal phenomena of language. There is no language in the world which does not have a device to indicate negation. It is a universal phenomena. Now how a language expresses its negation becomes parametric. For example in some languages negation may be a word like nahi or math. In some languages it may be a marker on the verb or some other word. In some languages it may surface in some other way. We do not have data available for classification of negation words across languages. But before I move I again want to underline two points. Negation as a phenomena is universal feature of human languages. That is one. Number two how they get represented in a language is parametric. Now let us begin from once we agree or we can claim or we are in a position to claim about a phenomena being universal then it does not remain theoretically challenging for linguists. It fits in a particular pattern and then works nicely. What becomes more challenging is the moment we see some parametric things coming in. Only then you will need to look at them in order to classify them further or explain them further. So let us start with the parametric approach. When I said there are two at least two broad ways of negations are facing in languages. One is in a word as a word. The other is as a marker on some other word. Now let me draw your attention to two things with these two broad categorization. When they are a word they are a lexical item and when they are a marker on some other word then it is a morphological item. It is a morphological item. You understand what I mean by morphological item? The moment it becomes morphological it becomes semi-syntactic that is morphosyntactic. These are just the terms and I want you to understand these terms very coolly, calmly. They are not complicated terms. The moment and when it is a word it becomes a lexical item. So what is the issue? What is the main issue here? The main issue is is negation a lexical thing or is it a syntactic thing? In other words is it a functional thing? That is the broader question. That is the broader question when we get into abstraction of negation. When people saw negation as a word it is very easy to get tempted to make a generalization that it is a lexical item. What is the problem with this? But when you get in touch with other languages and see it is not that simple. Sometimes it is as a marker on something else. Sometimes it is in fixed with verbs. It must not be only a lexical unit. And even though it is a lexical unit what is it abstract representation? Do they belong to the lexical layer of a sentence or to the functional layer? That becomes a broad question at the abstract level where we need to explain this theoretically. Now you can see I can remind you since while I am discussing negation in Hindi you can keep looking at negation of English which I will cross refer time to time and then I invite you to keep in mind and see how negation works in Tamil, Telugu and other languages that you speak. See how it works. At least for Tamil I understand that sometimes it appears as a marker on the verb also. It is not always the word what is the negation word in Tamil? Illa. It is spoken differently in different parts but Illa not every time this remains a negation word. For example when someone says I do not want tea how do we say that? Where is Illa? So do you see what I am trying to say? It is on the verb and there is no negation word. That is I am sorry I am not saying no negation word. It appears in a different form. Sometimes okay hold on so that is all was my point. The other point that I am trying to make is negation most of the time stays around verb and again at this stage it should not be a surprising thing for you and it should not be a surprising thing for you that it stays around the verb okay and here are the conclusions that we can draw from its location around the verb. If you are asked to talk about the most significant part of a sentence what is it? I mean every part is important in its own way but what is the most important part? Why verb? Why not subject as Sandeep is saying? Why verb? That is okay but why verb is more important than subject? It is the one that is agreeing with the subject. Not just because of that. See now your questions should now your answers should be more precise because it hosts all other information. It hosts abstract information. It can keep tense. It can keep aspect. It can retain agreement features in terms of masculine, feminine, singular, plural. So it is like a powerhouse therefore it is the most important part of a sentence and if the negation stays around the verb it should not be a surprising thing. The fact that negation stays around the verb makes us investigate it even more carefully. Is it part of lexical layer or functional layer? Get the thing? That is one and the fact that sometimes it appears on the verb as a marker in some language that even if it appears as a marker on the verb in one language of the world it gives us more than enough evidence to investigate it further whether or not it is a functional category. Get it? That is what we were basically getting at. Number one and before I come one more particular aspect about negation. The fact that it stays around the verb most of the time in many languages or in most of the languages it precedes the verb. However in some languages it may follow the verb too. Sometimes it follows the verb in Tamil. I am sure it will follow verbs in Telugu, Malayalam and other languages too. In Indo-Aryan languages as well, Bangla is one such example where it follows the verb whereas in most of the Indo-Aryan languages it precedes the verb. Get the point? And the effect of a negation on a sentence is such that the moment it negates the verb it negates the entire sentence which also underlines significance of a verb that in order to negate the entire sentence you only need to negate the verb. So when you say something like what was the Tamil sentence with vendor? I do not want t. In this sentence we have three aspects subject, object and verb. Negation has very little to do with subject. It is not negating subject. It has very little to do with the object. It is not negating the object. It is only negating the verb and then the sentence becomes negative which underlines the significance of both negation and the verb and the relationship between negation and verb. So having said that can I without getting into too much of details I want you to pay attention to the conclusion part of this that unlike other functional elements negation appears to be a lexical unit. What do we mean when I say unlike other elements other functional elements for example tense for example aspect agreement markers these are clearly morphosyntactic features of verb on the verb of a of a sentence and they hardly appear as a full word. However negation most of the time in many Indo-Aryan languages and in lot of Dravidian languages and other languages of the world seem to appear as a lexical unit. Therefore it seems very easy for us to believe that it might be a lexical item. However it is located in the functional layer even though it is a word in many languages it still is part of functional layer and it heads its own phrase which we are going to see in a minute. For the time being let me just let me quickly show you a sentence. These are two Hindi sentences I just need to make two points but I need you to look at these two sentences very carefully. If you are if you are writing a sentence of your language or any language other than English then this is how you need to write a sentence first with the transcription that there is an error that the R in Raju should have been smaller one in the first sentence and so D in Delhi in the second sentence that that is an error. So that is a phonetic transcription then word by word glossing what these words mean to the possible extent and then finally meaning of the sentence in English. This is the convention to write a sentence so that anyone who does not even know the language can find out what the sentence is how does it read and what is it that you are trying to highlight in that in in that sentence. So just two points that I want to make here the word nahi in the first sentence look at the word nahi in the first sentence it is right before the verb negating the entire sentence. However in the first sentence the use of the negation marker mat is not allowed in the second sentence it is all right. So which one is more generic negation marker clearly nahi mat has a restrictive environment to appear which is it appears only in imperative sentences and now for imperative sentences you can say two more sentences that these are non-finite sentences right the tenseless sentences and only in those sentences mat appears as a negation marker whereas nahi is a more generic negation marker in a language like Hindi and and this this categorical this this distinction between two negative markers is feature of most of the South Asian languages at least okay. So some some sort of this categorization will be available in all the languages that we speak I I just leave you to check that all right I need to move to a different point is that clear and then we have already talked about how it works let me show you what we what I mean by functional layer and if I had more time to get into more details to show you okay why I am asking if I had more time I will talk to you about that in a moment. Do you see this structure looks familiar right whether we start a note here whether we start the structure with an IP okay or a TP or an AGRP either way and I I hope you understand what I mean when I say AGRP TP or IP in different different frameworks here are the conclusions negation is always part of flexible I am sorry always part of functional layer if we go into the details of that what we find is it is located below TP and above aspect phrase that's that's the point which I want to make in a very strong way and there is evidence available for this in natural language this is why I was saying if I had more time to show you how actually this evidence comes okay the and here let me let me try briefly and see if it if it works is it clear to you that it heads its own phrase which is neg P and you understand the structure of a phrase very well it will have a spec it will have a head and then it will have a compliment and then what follows is aspect phrase okay this this becomes clearer only when you get into the details of the functional layer as long as you are staying with IP okay still you know that 10 negation phrase appears before VP all right so VP is the point from where we start lexical layer right is this is this making sense to people in general that's okay all right now let me let me try very briefly to talk about the evidence which supports this okay for for the purpose of this class I can simply make this inform you about this and move but I do want to to talk about that so that you you see it in a convincing way okay you see I talked to you about the position of negation in a sentence what's the position of negation in a sentence around the word mostly preceding the word right and then it negates the word all right negation may occur elsewhere also in the sentence okay else it may occur elsewhere in the sentence too for example I can give you one Hindi example I don't don't have it on the screen but I can say and you you can understand I can say do you hear this sentence clearly where is the place of negation in this sentence is it around the word no right where is it and I am not asking in terms of the structure I am asking only it only in terms that it's not around the the word right what's the meaning of that sentence if you if some of you understand Hindi what's the meaning of that sentence what do we what does one want to say with that sentence I won't go to Delhi someone else will go right now where is this someone else will go coming from we are not saying that where is this coming from first first of all do you see the do you see that sentence clearly and what he is saying is right that the sentence actually gives you the reading more importantly that I will not go I mean someone else will go is the message where is this message someone else coming from that is true but then what's the effect of that the effect is when it is not around the verb it's a different kind of negation see when it is around the verb it is called sentential negation which means it negates the entire sentence when it is not near the verb please see that sentence carefully the verb is not negated the sentence is not about not going the sentence is about not me someone else will go someone else will go to Delhi not me okay that is to say if it is not around the verb then it negates only the part that it follows listen to this carefully in a in a in the example that I have given you the example comes from Hindi and in Hindi and in many other Indo-Aryan languages and Dravidian languages too when negation is not around the verb it does not negate the verb therefore it does not negate the whole sentence and in such a case it negates only the part that it follows such a negation is called constituent negation that is it negates only that constituent man he Delhi jungle meaning someone else not me will go to Delhi so will go to Delhi is not negated clear therefore this meaning is coming from someone else will go got this all right so with this I introduce to you the phenomena called constituent negation and its contrast with sentential negation let me let me exploit this phenomena to give you to bring an evidence in support of what I am saying look at the verb look at the sentence following the the following sentence how do we say in Hindi I am not eating pizza I am not eating pizza me pizza me hi haa rahaa see these things see this thing let me use the board for a moment here is the point that I am trying to make me I will I will write the glosses only for the parts that I need okay what's the word is the negation right before the word in the sentence yes right this is the word that we have that is the whole verbal complex and the negation word precedes this thing right and this is what I was trying to tell you if this negation was here right then the sentence has a different meaning the sentence has a different meaning understand this I am only talking about the parts that that is relevant for us I leave it for you to apply these things how how these ambiguities are resolved by human mind without us being confused about anything at all okay if this is the if this is the case now look at the sentence as it is this sentence usually means I am not eating pizza which means in the primary reading number one it negates the whole word right it negates the whole word therefore it gives us that reading will you believe it if I tell you the sentence is ambiguous in Hindi in its secondary reading this negation may also negate pizza listen to this carefully may also negate pizza just like if it was available here it would have negated this one so by the virtue of being here which is not only before the verb but around the object too okay it might negate the object as well when it is negating the object then the meaning is different meaning is not sentential negation the meaning is and you can hear this thing in this spoken language as well in this sentence which is not a clear declarative sentence you can hear that I am talking about I am not pizza eating something else just like not me someone else eat not eating not pizza eating something else is the reading in the secondary part do you agree with this therefore one can say this sentence could be ambiguous and again please underline the part that you may be surprised today but you know this that this sentence was ambiguous and our minds do not have any confusion at all whenever we say these things all right now this was the fun part for you to see let us see the syntactically significant part now okay so I wanted you to see this fun part because when negation is not a verbal negation okay when the negation is not a sentential negation rather it is a constituent negation in that case whether it is a functional category or a lexical category is a different matter for discussing negation is a functional category it belongs to the functional layer only when we are talking about sentential negation that is syntactic aspect of negation when it negates the entire verb therefore it negates the entire sentence clear look at this in Hindi in a language like Hindi this part of the verb is the only marker of aspect which roughly translates at as ing right eating agree roughly translates at ing which is also called progressive aspect marker or continuous aspect marker these are the terms for this this is an aspect it's a continuous aspect marker or progressive aspect marker which means that some something is in progress that is the process of eat is in continuity all right this is the only verb only aspect marker in Hindi which comes as a full word do you understand what I mean by full word that is as a lexical unit in other cases aspect markers on Hindi in Hindi become a marker on the verb right how do I say I eat pizza here is what I mean in that case we have to say kha this part right and this is an aspect marker and when we say this is an aspect marker this is the verb root an aspect marker this does not come as a independent word right how do I say I ate a pizza kaya in that case we have kha and something of that these are not independent words do you see this this is this point these are not independent words the only thing that comes as independent word is ing get this thing now look at the negation now so if if you understand this part that the the point that I am trying to make now take the negation I can delete some parts of it to reduce problems so now we are done with its interpretations now now we are talking about sentential negation only okay reading number one my pizza not eating where not is negating eating it's it's possible so here it's preceding the whole word it's possible to scramble negative word there is it possible when I say when I ask you this question is it possible what I mean is is the sentence is still grammatical if we scramble the word there is it okay understand this still it is ambiguous keep in mind it's still ambiguous when we say it can negate the whole complex whole verb and it can also negate just this part not the rest of it see this thing now when what's the what's the ambiguity there when someone says my pizza can he round I am I am not I might be doing something else with it I'm just buying it carrying it making it doing anything not eat that's the ambiguity part alright alright so keeping that in mind it's possible to bring the negation word here and in this in the second reading it's a negates it's a sentential negation marker get it now listen this is the point that I am trying to relate to what the to the structure that you have here it's possible to bring the negation word here but it's not possible to bring the negation word here it's not possible and it's definitely not possible to bring it any further my pizza kaha hoon hi see the point this is I'm giving you a very rough sort of example to make the point that I have on the screen it's this is the tense marker this is the aspect marker right it's above the aspect marker below the tense marker if if we try to put our finger on the fishy nature of a functional category for its exact location in the functional layer it appears from such an example coming from Hindi that it's located below TP an above aspect phrase some people can can claim what difference does it make obviously it doesn't make any difference as long as we are not talking about the expansion of functional layer it makes a hell lot of a difference about the location of a functional element the moment we talk about the expansion of it we need to know the hierarchical nature of the availability or the appearance of a particular functional element in the functional layer all right and even one example from any language of this sort is good enough to establish what we are trying to do theoretically as long as we do not have a counter example to show to to we don't have a counter example to dismiss this claim this one example is good enough to establish a theoretical point okay get get this thing is this is this point clear to to some of you I don't want to get into too many details of the sentence about its tense aspect however I did it in a way go ahead if you have a question only for languages like Hindi no when we talk about this we we got this thing we got the evidence from Hindi once we made the claim this applies to all the languages no that that's that's not the problem for for English if that's a predicate predicative objective okay in English first the second thing is it's possible see English is SOV SVO SVO language okay the see when you have a I had given one example of English tense there was a when we were discussing give me give me two more minutes and then we will talk when we were discussing tense in English in order to show that tense can really be separated from the verb right there are two two structures to look at one is questions where we know that only tense has to be extracted and fronted right do do I did you buy a phone right if we are not looking at the question structure then if you put a negation when you negate a sentence then you need to extract the tense so if I say I eat pizza how do I negate it I I do not eat pizza why are we bringing where is this do coming from and what is this do why do we not say I not eat pizza what's wrong with that sentence that's the now you can see that's the marker of tense so for occurrence of negation in English it needs to extract tense out of verb tense precedes negation and then negation occurs right before the word so in a in a sentence like is not not good it's not violating anything it's tense is preceding it's a it's a it's a it's a matter of coincidence that in such a sentence because of predicative adjective tense marker and the verb both are the same that is an auxiliary marker but it's a it's a regular phenomena of a language like English that tense has to be extracted in order to negate a sentence okay it applies in all tenses the example that you gave was example of a future tense in that we have a clear auxiliary will will not eat but try negating a past tense sentence I ate a pizza how do we say that I did not didn't is the contracted form of did not so I did not eat a pizza we need to extract tense out and then negation comes in so when see this is also an argument why some people use this as a as an example for functional layer I am sorry we need to we need to stop functional layer sorry lexical layer remind me about this I will I will talk to you this this is very interesting phenomena the more you get into abstraction the more you try to see them separately we we stop and we discuss this some other time that is later