@article{carston_metalinguistic_1996,
	title = {Metalinguistic negation and echoic use},
	volume = {25},
	issn = {0378-2166},
	url = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/037821669400109X},
	doi = {10.1016/0378-2166(94)00109-X},
	abstract = {The metalinguistic use of ‘not’ has been brought to prominence by the work of Laurence Horn, who characterizes it as a marked, non-truth-functional use of negation, not reducible to the standard truth-functional operator. Discussion of the phenomenon so far has focused on those cases which tend to temporarily garden-path the hearer and achieve interesting rhetorical effects in the process. The notorious ‘presupposition’-cancelling negation cases have been included here. I argue that this emphasis has diverted attention from the essential property of these examples which is that (at least some of) the material falling within the scope of the negation is echoically used, in the sense of Sperber and Wilson (1986). Once this is recognized the picture opens up considerably and it becomes evident that none of the standardly cited properties, including garden-pathing, is essential. Furthermore, there seems to be no need to postulate any kind of ambiguity in the negation operator itself; rather, the two uses fall out from our perfectly general capacity to use language either to represent states of affairs or to represent other representations, including other utterances.},
	number = {3},
	urldate = {2025-03-15},
	journal = {Journal of Pragmatics},
	author = {Carston, Robyn},
	year = {1996},
	keywords = {Echoic Use, Metalinguistic negation},
	pages = {309--330},
}

{"_id":"d7CothYxxLxGk7Rm2","bibbaseid":"carston-metalinguisticnegationandechoicuse-1996","author_short":["Carston, R."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"article","type":"article","title":"Metalinguistic negation and echoic use","volume":"25","issn":"0378-2166","url":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/037821669400109X","doi":"10.1016/0378-2166(94)00109-X","abstract":"The metalinguistic use of ‘not’ has been brought to prominence by the work of Laurence Horn, who characterizes it as a marked, non-truth-functional use of negation, not reducible to the standard truth-functional operator. Discussion of the phenomenon so far has focused on those cases which tend to temporarily garden-path the hearer and achieve interesting rhetorical effects in the process. The notorious ‘presupposition’-cancelling negation cases have been included here. I argue that this emphasis has diverted attention from the essential property of these examples which is that (at least some of) the material falling within the scope of the negation is echoically used, in the sense of Sperber and Wilson (1986). Once this is recognized the picture opens up considerably and it becomes evident that none of the standardly cited properties, including garden-pathing, is essential. Furthermore, there seems to be no need to postulate any kind of ambiguity in the negation operator itself; rather, the two uses fall out from our perfectly general capacity to use language either to represent states of affairs or to represent other representations, including other utterances.","number":"3","urldate":"2025-03-15","journal":"Journal of Pragmatics","author":[{"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Carston"],"firstnames":["Robyn"],"suffixes":[]}],"year":"1996","keywords":"Echoic Use, Metalinguistic negation","pages":"309–330","bibtex":"@article{carston_metalinguistic_1996,\n\ttitle = {Metalinguistic negation and echoic use},\n\tvolume = {25},\n\tissn = {0378-2166},\n\turl = {https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/037821669400109X},\n\tdoi = {10.1016/0378-2166(94)00109-X},\n\tabstract = {The metalinguistic use of ‘not’ has been brought to prominence by the work of Laurence Horn, who characterizes it as a marked, non-truth-functional use of negation, not reducible to the standard truth-functional operator. Discussion of the phenomenon so far has focused on those cases which tend to temporarily garden-path the hearer and achieve interesting rhetorical effects in the process. The notorious ‘presupposition’-cancelling negation cases have been included here. I argue that this emphasis has diverted attention from the essential property of these examples which is that (at least some of) the material falling within the scope of the negation is echoically used, in the sense of Sperber and Wilson (1986). Once this is recognized the picture opens up considerably and it becomes evident that none of the standardly cited properties, including garden-pathing, is essential. Furthermore, there seems to be no need to postulate any kind of ambiguity in the negation operator itself; rather, the two uses fall out from our perfectly general capacity to use language either to represent states of affairs or to represent other representations, including other utterances.},\n\tnumber = {3},\n\turldate = {2025-03-15},\n\tjournal = {Journal of Pragmatics},\n\tauthor = {Carston, Robyn},\n\tyear = {1996},\n\tkeywords = {Echoic Use, Metalinguistic negation},\n\tpages = {309--330},\n}\n\n\n\n","author_short":["Carston, R."],"key":"carston_metalinguistic_1996","id":"carston_metalinguistic_1996","bibbaseid":"carston-metalinguisticnegationandechoicuse-1996","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/037821669400109X"},"keyword":["Echoic Use","Metalinguistic negation"],"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}}},"bibtype":"article","biburl":"https://bibbase.org/zotero/spistoiareda","dataSources":["bommY2NHyR8XfBCJf","N5KtS7cqCLGAjBLSh"],"keywords":["echoic use","metalinguistic negation"],"search_terms":["metalinguistic","negation","echoic","use","carston"],"title":"Metalinguistic negation and echoic use","year":1996}