Elamur Research⌕
☰
home / papers / 2026 / Metalinguistic negation in Jordanian Arabic: Clause-initial <em>miš/mū </em>as a high objection operator

Metalinguistic negation in Jordanian Arabic: Clause-initial <em>miš/mū </em>as a high objection operator

Paper · 2026 · Al Khalaf, Eman M.

Summary

The paper addresses whether metalinguistic negation (MN) is just ordinary negation used in a special way, or a separate grammatical operator. It examines Jordanian Arabic (JA), where clause-initial miš/mū can object to a prior utterance, in contrast with truth-functional ma…-š. The study is theoretical and diagnostic rather than corpus-based. Using Horn's tests and later work on clause-edge negation, it shows that objectional miš/mū:

  • pairs with a rectifying continuation ("not X, Y");
  • strengthens scalar predicates and can cancel presuppositions;
  • occurs only in root clauses;
  • does not license negative concord or NPIs;
  • can sit above a lower ma…-š.

The author's cartographic account places an Objection head (Obj) above ForceP, separate from a low Neg inside TP. Under this view, the surface identity of miš/mū is height-sensitive spell-out: the high form is objection, and the low form is descriptive negation in nonverbal clauses. The work adds JA evidence alongside earlier Egyptian Arabic facts. It also supports the claim that negative concord is computed only in low clause structure.

Key points

  • JA has two negation systems:
    • Descriptive negation: ma…-š in verbal clauses and miš/mū in nonverbal predication.
    • Objection/MN: clause-initial miš/mū.
  • Example diagnostics are a corrective "not me, him" and a scalar "not warm, it's hot." The polarity baselines are wala ('not even one') and ʕumr- ('ever'), which objectional miš/mū fails to license even when it c-commands them.
  • Further clues that the operator sits at the clause edge:
    • It is tightly tied to contrastive focus.
    • It degrades with oath particles such as wallāhi in corrective uses.
    • It is compatible with fragment ellipsis.
  • MN proper (repair required, analysed with an active [uFoc] plus paratactic ForceP sequencing) and denial (repair may stay implicit) are interpretive subtypes under the same Obj head.
  • Open questions remain:
    • the lexical-semantic link between high and low miš/mū;
    • cross-dialect variation (Levantine vs. Egyptian, connectives like bass, bal);
    • how Obj interacts with question types.

Interesting ideas

  • I1. The paper identifies MN by a convergent cluster of independent tests (rectifier, scalar strengthening, root-only, no NPI licensing) rather than by a "corrective feel," which makes classification checkable.
  • I2. One surface word can realise two operators at different structural heights, so its function is read off attachment height rather than the lexeme itself.
  • I3. A high objection operator can stack on top of a low negation, and the two must stay distinct even if the final truth value cancels out.
  • I4. NPI and negative-concord licensing works as a probe that reveals which negation is present, because only the low one licenses them.
  • I5. MN proper and denial are kept apart by whether an explicit repair alternative is required, while sharing one structure.

For Mova

How these ideas could serve Mova, our small open language model — its files, stages and tests:

  • I1 (frames): prag could flag English "not X, Y" negations with such a test battery and treat them as cancelling an implicature or a word choice, instead of negating the proposition.
  • I2 (tree): the parser could mark whether "not" attaches at the clause edge or to the predicate, giving later stages a usable split that UD labels alone do not encode.
  • I3 (world): store objection to a prior claim as a commitment-level operation separate from state negation, so "it's not that he didn't come" does not silently flip world states twice.
  • I4 (learn): NPI presence ("ever", "any") could serve as a cheap silver signal or negative control when checking whether a teacher's or parser's negation-type labels are consistent.
  • I5 (back): when generating corrections, the system could choose between "not X but Y" with an overt rectifier and a bare denial depending on whether a replacement value exists in the meaning graph.

Our summary of the paper, in our own words — not its text. The work belongs to its authors; read it at the links above.

 Institutions

🎓University of JordanAmman · Jordan7 works · 86 citations

📚 Shelves 2The field of science this work belongs to (OpenAlex fields).Arts and Humanities · 9,296 worksLanguage and Linguistics · 9,206 works

🧭 Topics 1Research subjects and languages the work is about.Semitic languages · 1,484 works

Cite

Cite as Al Khalaf, Eman M. 2026. Metalinguistic negation in Jordanian Arabic: Clause-initial <em>miš/mū </em>as a high objection operator. Glossa: a journal of general linguistics.

The paper itself, not this page. BibTeX from the library's record of the work. DOI 10.16995/glossa.25642

@article{m2026metalinguistic,
  title = {{Metalinguistic negation in Jordanian Arabic: Clause-initial <em>miš/mū </em>as a high objection operator}},
  author = {Al Khalaf, Eman M.},
  journal = {Glossa: a journal of general linguistics},
  year = {2026},
  doi = {10.16995/glossa.25642},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.25642}
}

References

47 references, 0 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

  1. Al Khalaf, Eman. 2017. NPI licensing in Jordanian Arabic: An argument for downward entailment and syntax-semantics interface. Topics in Linguistics 18(2). 24–35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ topling-2017-0008 ↗
  2. Al Khalaf, Eman. 2026. Against PF-repair: Preposition stranding under sluicing in Jordanian Arabic. Open Linguistics. 20250093. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/opli-2025-0093 ↗
  3. Al Khalaf, Eman & Ayman Yasin. 2026. Negation height and NPI licensing in Jordanian Arabic: Experimental support for an Agree-based account. Social Sciences & Humanities Open 13. 102666. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssaho.2026.102666 ↗
  4. Alqassas, Ahmad. 2015. Negation, tense and NPIs in Jordanian Arabic. Lingua 156. 101–128. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2014.12.010 ↗
  5. Alsarayreh, Atef A. 2012. The licensing of negative sensitive items in Jordanian Arabic. Lawrence, KS: University of Kansas dissertation. https://hdl.handle.net/1808/9841 ↗
  6. Bar-Asher Siegal, Elitzur A. 2015. The case for external sentential negation: Evidence from Jewish Babylonian Aramaic. Linguistics 53. 1031–1078. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2015-0025 ↗
  7. Bar-Asher Siegal, Elitzur A. 2026. Two types of negation: Semantics, distribution and history. In Bar-Asher Siegal, Elitzur A. & Boneh, Nora & Grossman, Eitan & Rubinstein, Aynat (eds.), Language change: Theoretical and empirical perspectives, 43–80. Cham: Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-85292-3_3 ↗
  8. Bar-Asher Siegal, Elitzur A. & Karen De Clercq. 2019. From negative cleft to external negator. In Miriam Bouzouita, Anne Breitbarth, Lieven Danckaert & Elisabeth Witzenhausen (eds.), Cycles in language change, 228–248. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ oso/9780198824961.003.0012 ↗
  9. Benmamoun, Elabbas. 1997. Licensing of negative polarity items in Moroccan Arabic. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 15(2). 263–287. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005727101758 ↗
  10. Chung, Inkie. 2007. Suppletive negation in Korean and Distributed Morphology. Lingua 117. 95–148. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2005.10.002 ↗
  11. Collins, Chris. 2018. NEG NEG. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 3(1). 64. 1–8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.611 ↗
  12. D’Antuono, Nicola. 2024. The syntax of emphatic negation in Modern Irish. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 9(1). 10369. DOI: https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.10369 ↗
  13. De Clercq, Karen. 2020. The morphosyntax of negative markers: A nanosyntactic account [Studies in Generative Grammar 144]. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781501513756 ↗
  14. De Clercq, Karen & Guido Vanden Wyngaerd. 2019. Negation and the functional sequence. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 37. 425–460. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11049-018-9415-2 ↗
  15. Espinal, M. Teresa. 2000. On the semantic status of n-words in Catalan and Spanish. Lingua 110(7). 557–580. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-3841(00)00002-4 ↗
  16. Fox, Danny. 1999. Economy and semantic interpretation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. find
  17. Geurts, Bart. 1998. The mechanisms of denial. Language 74. 274–307. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/417868 ↗
  18. Giannakidou, Anastasia. 2006. N-words and negative concord. In Martin Everaert & Henk van Riemsdijk (eds.), The Blackwell companion to syntax 3. 327–391. Oxford: Blackwell. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470996591.ch45 ↗
  19. Haegeman, Liliane & Virginia Hill. 2013. The syntacticization of discourse. In Raffaella Folli, Christina Sevdali & Robert Truswell (eds.), Syntax and its limits, 370–390. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199683239.003.0018 ↗
  20. Hill, Virginia. 2007. Vocatives and the pragmatics–syntax interface. Lingua 117(12). 2077–2105. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2007.01.002 ↗
  21. Horn, Laurence R. 1985. Metalinguistic negation and pragmatic ambiguity. Language 61(1). 121– 174. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/413423 ↗
  22. Iwata, Seizi. 1998. Some extensions of the echoic analysis of metalinguistic negation. Lingua 105. 49–65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-3841(98)00002-3 ↗
  23. Kroeger, Paul. 2014. External negation in Malay/Indonesian. Language 90(1). 137–184. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2014.0000 ↗
  24. Laka, Itziar. 1990. Negation in syntax: On the nature of functional categories and projections. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation. ↗
  25. Larrivée, Pierre. 2012. Positive polarity items, negation, activated propositions. Linguistics 50. 869–900. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2012-0027 ↗
  26. Larrivée, Pierre. 2018. Metalinguistic negation from an informational perspective. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 3(1). 56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.403 ↗
  27. Larrivée, Pierre. 2021. Turning negative: Micro-steps from negative polarity item to negative-word. Language Sciences 85. 101382. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2021.101382 ↗
  28. Lee, Chungmin. 2015. How metalinguistic negation differs from descriptive negation: ERP evidence. Proceedings of EAPCogSCI 2015, 698–703. find
  29. Lee, Chungmin. 2016. Metalinguistically negated versus descriptively negated adverbials: ERP and other evidence. In Pierre Larrivée & Chungmin Lee (eds.), Negation and polarity: Experimental perspectives, 229–255. Cham: Springer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17464-8_10 ↗
  30. Lucas, Christopher. 2007. Jespersen’s cycle in Arabic and Berber. Transactions of the Philological Society 105(3). 398–431. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-968X.2007.00189.x ↗
  31. Martins, Ana Maria. 2020. Metalinguistic negation. In Viviane Déprez & M. Teresa Espinal (eds.), The Oxford handbook of negation, 349–368. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198830528.013.20 ↗
  32. Martins, Ana Maria. 2021. Syntactic aspects of metalinguistic negation. Revue Roumaine de Linguistique 66(2–3). 175–197. find
  33. Merchant, Jason. 2001. The syntax of silence: Sluicing, islands, and the theory of ellipsis. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780199243730.001.0001 ↗
  34. Merchant, Jason. 2005. Fragments and ellipsis. Linguistics and Philosophy 27(6). 661–738. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-005-7378-3 ↗
  35. Moeschler, Jacques. 2018. A set of semantic and pragmatic criteria for descriptive vs. metalinguistic negation. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 3(1). 58. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.439 ↗
  36. Mughazy, Mustafa. 2003. Metalinguistic negation and truth functions: The case of Egyptian Arabic. Journal of Pragmatics 35(8). 1143–1160. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00177-7 ↗
  37. Mughazy, Mustafa A. 2008. The pragmatics of denial: An information structure analysis of so-called “emphatic negation” in Egyptian Arabic. In Dilworth B. Parkinson (ed.), Perspectives on Arabic linguistics XXI, 69–81. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ cilt.301.06mug Nedwick, Kelly M. 2014. Metalinguistic negation in English and Arabic. New Haven, CT: Yale University dissertation. ↗
  38. Pitts, Alyson. 2011. Exploring a “pragmatic ambiguity” of negation. Language 87(2). 346–368. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2011.0035 ↗
  39. Repp, Sophie. 2009. Negation in gapping [Oxford Studies in Theoretical Linguistics 22]. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199543601.001.0001 ↗
  40. Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The fine structure of the left periphery. In Liliane Haegeman (ed.), Elements of grammar, 281–337. Dordrecht: Kluwer. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5420-8_7 ↗
  41. Rooth, Mats. 1992. A theory of focus interpretation. Natural Language Semantics 1(1). 75–116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02342617 ↗
  42. Speas, Peggy & Carol Tenny. 2003. Configurational properties of point of view roles. In Anna Maria Di Sciullo (ed.), Asymmetry in grammar, 315–344. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/la.57.15spe ↗
  43. Tsiakmakis, Evripidis & M. Teresa Espinal. 2022. Expletiveness in grammar and beyond. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 7(1). 1–36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.16995/glossa.5807 ↗
  44. van der Sandt, Rob A. 1991. Denial. In Papers from the 27th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society 2. 331–344. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. find
  45. Yoon, Suwon. 2026. Metalinguistic negation: Evidence from Korean and beyond. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 35(1). 2. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10831-025-09313-4 ↗
  46. Yoshimura, Akiko. 2013. Descriptive/metalinguistic dichotomy? Toward a new taxonomy of negation. Journal of Pragmatics 57. 39–56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.07.002 ↗
  47. Zeijlstra, Hedde H. 2004. Sentential negation and negative concord. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam dissertation. find

Updated

↑ back to top

This page in Markdown → https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/khalaf-2026-metalinguistic-negation-jordanian-arabic-clause/