Ellipsis in short answers to polar questions

This paper investigates ellipsis in short answers to polar questions (PQs), with a focus on the interpretive challenges posed by negative polar questions (NPQs). While short yes/no answers to positive questions are typically unambiguous, responses to NPQs often display semantic ambiguity or unacceptability. Building on and critiquing existing ellipsis-based accounts (Holmberg, 2013, 2016; Kramer & Rawlins, 2010; Merchant, 2004), this study argues that these interpretive issues arise not from negative concord or selective interpretability, but from structural ambiguity in the placement of negation and competition in polarity feature valuation. The analysis distinguishes between high, low, and structurally ambiguous (“middle”) negation in NPQs and demonstrates that ellipsis interacts differently with each. Drawing on data from English NPQs, the paper proposes a unified model of polarity valuation that explains when short answers are interpretable. This account offers a cross-linguistically consistent and theoretically principled refinement of ellipsis phenomena in polar question-answer pairs.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
The Journal of Linguistics Science
Published
2025-09-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.21296/jls.2025.09.114.265
Primary Topic
Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Ellipsis in short answers to polar questions

Keunhyung Park
The Journal of Linguistics Science
Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
article

Ellipsis in short answers to polar questions

Keunhyung Park
article en

Abstract

This paper investigates ellipsis in short answers to polar questions (PQs), with a focus on the interpretive challenges posed by negative polar questions (NPQs). While short yes/no answers to positive questions are typically unambiguous, responses to NPQs often display semantic ambiguity or unacceptability. Building on and critiquing existing ellipsis-based accounts (Holmberg, 2013, 2016; Kramer & Rawlins, 2010; Merchant, 2004), this study argues that these interpretive issues arise not from negative concord or selective interpretability, but from structural ambiguity in the placement of negation and competition in polarity feature valuation. The analysis distinguishes between high, low, and structurally ambiguous (“middle”) negation in NPQs and demonstrates that ellipsis interacts differently with each. Drawing on data from English NPQs, the paper proposes a unified model of polarity valuation that explains when short answers are interpretable. This account offers a cross-linguistically consistent and theoretically principled refinement of ellipsis phenomena in polar question-answer pairs.

The Journal of Linguistics ScienceVol. 114
Openalex Percentile: Top 61%
Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Ellipsis in short answers to polar questions — Keunhyung Park · The Journal of Linguistics Science (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS