NEGATIVES AND PSEUDO-NEGATIVES

IN
BENGALI
– A Semantic and Pragmatic analysis
ARKO CHAKRABORTY
M.A. in Linguistics, Research Student.
The University of Calcutta, India.

LULU PUBLISHERS
NEGATIVES AND PSEUDO-NEGATIVES IN BENGALI : A Semantic and Pragmatic Analysis

First Published (paperback edition): 2011. Lulu Publishers, a workgroup of Lulu Enterprises
Headquarters – Raleigh, North Carolina (U.S.A).

COPYRIGHT © Arko Chakraborty, 2011. All rights reserved.

ISBN-13: 978-1-257-05484-8

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or

transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying,
recording or otherwise, without the prior permission in writing of the author.

The book is available in both print and eBook formats and is eligible for
being marketed in all territories all over the world.

Book Available at websites – www.lulu.com/en/index.php (paperback and e-book formats),

www.books.google.co.in (limited preview)
To my parents
and
teachers
v|

ABBREVIATIONS

1st = first person

nd
2 = second person
3rd = third person
ACC. = accusative case (oblique)
ADJ = adjective/adjectival
CAUS = causative
CL = classifier
cp. = compare
FUT = future tense
GB = government and binding
theory/framework
GEN = genitive case (oblique)
GER = gerund (non-finite)
IMP = imperative mood
INF = infinitive
IP = inflectional phrase
LOC = locative case (oblique)
N = noun
NP = noun phrase
OPT = optative mood or conditional
marker
PERF = perfective aspect
PP = prepositional phrase
PPT = present participle
PROG = progressive aspect
PRS = present tense
PST = past tense
SCB = Standard Colloquial Bengali
SLB = Standard Literary Bengali
Spr = Spread glottis = aspiration
V = verb
VP = verb phrase
vii |

PREFACE

Every language has one or more ways of making a factual assertion or a declaration or a factual description of
an idea/object/event. There is also an opposite dimension to this – negation of the truth, factuality, validity of
an idea/object/event. This negation might be done by means of inflectional affixes or derivational affixes or by
the use of clitics or particles and many a times by means of post-/pre-positions.

The scope of this work is not so vast enough to accommodate a cross-linguistic comparison of the use of
negatives. The present work focuses on the negative markers of Bengali (also called Bangla), an Indo-
European language spoken by millions all over the world, which had its origin in the eastern provinces of
India. The current work deals only with the Standard Colloquial variety of Bengali and neither the dialects nor
the Standard Literary variety.

The aim of this work is to show the various environments/contexts in which negatives are used in Bengali, the
scope of a negative element (i.e. what and how much is negated in a construction), to find out the use of
negatives in naturally occurring common utterances (and not some artificial constructions), to explore the
types of morphemes denoting negation (i.e. negation processes) and also to understand the various types of
negation by elements which apparently seem to be non-negatives but at a deeper structure they play the role of
negation. Hence this book has been divided into two main parts – part I deals with the most visible obvious
overt negations and part II which deals with covert negations.
The negation patterns of Bengali which have been dealt with in part I have correspondences to some other
parallel works in the same field and these have been cited off and on. There are even some arguments to be
found in part I which go against the established notions.

The second part deals with more interesting patterns of covert negation which, to the best of my knowledge
(albeit little, finite and fallible), have not been discussed in any previous work – at least not in the exact
fashion in which they have been described here. Beyond grammatical structure what social and pragmatic
implications are possible through negation have been dealt with in the second part.

The principal tool to analyze all these would be semantic and neither morphological nor syntactic. However,
since meaning (and therefore its study, i.e. Semantics) always depends on structure/form of words-phrases-
clauses etc., so we shall find even morphological and syntactic discussions auxiliary to a semantic analysis.
On the other hand, since Semantics is very much linked up with Pragmatics and Discourse Analysis and also
to a large extent with Sociolinguistics we shall find supplementary discussions along these lines too
(nevertheless Discourse Analysis has been discussed the least, that too in the form of Textual analysis,
especially relating to Cohesion). The semantic analysis in this work would not only include pure Linguistic
Semantics but would even draw upon the theories and notions of Logical Semantics in terms of Propositional
and Predicate Calculus and Modal Logic.

Since the aim of this work is to present before the reader a semantic account of the negation patterns in
Bengali, so excessive morphemic and phonetic details have not been shown (except where necessary).
Especially for the Bengali verbs there are controversies among scholars regarding the internal morphemic
divisions in the inflections attached to verbal bases in the various paradigms. Still then the reader is suggested
to go through the detailed morphemic divisions (but only given for 1st person) in table 2 and the entire list of
verbal inflections (with internal morpheme boundaries for all persons-moods-tenses) in table 4. An extremely
detailed morphemic or phonetic account is not required for our present purposes and hence the scope of this
work has been chiefly restricted to Semantics and higher linguistic levels.

Kolkata, Arko Chakraborty

4th March, 2011. Author.
ix |

A Few Guidelines and Conventions–

especially for the non-native speakers/readers of Bengali

The most usual word-order in Bengali is SOV although a few instances where SVO is followed will be shown
and distinguished.

Internal morpheme divisions have been shown, wherever necessary, with hyphens, e.g. /bol-e-ch-il-am/

If the case of a nominal or pronominal form is not otherwise mentioned, it should be considered to be in the
Nominative or Direct Case which, being the default one (without any overt affix), is not labeled every time in
each exemplary sentence. Other oblique cases have been labeled wherever pertinent. The genitive case marker
is /-er ~ -r/ while the objective case (including accusative and dative senses) is marked with /-ke/.

The meanings/translations have been enclosed within double inverted commas, while italics, bold fonts,
underlines and single inverted commas have been used to highlight any technical term or theory etc.

If the tense is not mentioned for a verbal form it is to be considered to be in present tense, if the mood is not
mentioned it is to be considered to be in indicative mood, and if the aspect is not mentioned then indefinite or
non-progressive aspect. All other tenses/moods/aspects have been distinctly labeled. It’s a very crucial point
to be borne in mind throughout all the exemplary sentences in this book.

In its morphological structure the future tense has two paradigms – a) future indicative non-progressive and b)
future imperative (see Table 4a). Progressive and perfective aspects are found for the present and the past
tenses but never for the future tense, while the imperative mood is found for the present and the future but not
for the past tense. Indicative mood and non-progressive (or indefinite) aspect are found for all the tenses.

Bengali verbal forms do not show variation with respect to number but show agreement with the subject as
regards to the grammatical category of person. Verbs do not show agreement with object.

Bengali does not show all the features and parametric variations of a Pro-drop language (like Italian) but since
the finite verbal forms in Bengali have explicit inflections (conjugational endings) which are sufficient to
mark the person of the subject of that particular verb, we often find that the Subject NP is dropped or elided.
Thus Bengali exhibits a partial Pro-drop nature where the elided NP remains implicit.

The phonemic (not phonetic) representations of the utterances or constructions in Bengali have been given in
slant brackets ‘/…/’ (except for interjections in §9.2 shown in square brackets pertaining to phonetic
representation) which correspond to the standard or received pronunciation. Dialectal or idiolectal variations
have not been discussed as such.
x| .
 CONTENTS
Abbreviation v
Preface vii
A Few Guidelines and Conventions ix
Introduction xiii

Part I: THE PROPER NEGATIVES

1. The Negative Verb (Negated Copula) 1

1.1 Introducing the Negated Copula 1
1.2 Usage or distribution of the negated copula 2
1.3 Existential Negation 3
1.4 Implicit Prohibition 6

2. The Negative Particle 7

2.1 Shape of the negative particle 7
2.2 Distribution of the negative particle 10
2.2.1 Copula verb and the negative particle 10
2.2.2 Negative particle used before finites! 14
2.2.2.1 Non-conditional complex sentences 14
2.2.2.2 Overt if-then conditional sentences (TYPE A) 17
2.2.2.3 Covert if-then conditional sentences (TYPE B) 18
2.2.2.4 Doubly Negated Overt if-then conditional sentences (TYPE C) 20
2.2.2.5 Doubly Negated Covert if-then conditional sentences (TYPE D) 23
2.2.2.6 Doubly Negated Overt Imperative conditional sentences (TYPE E) 27
2.2.2.7 Doubly Negated Overt & Covert Subjunctive (?) conditional sentences (TYPE F ) 32
2.2.2.8 Doubly Negated Perfective and Progressive conditional sentences (TYPE G ) 36
2.2.2.9 Neither-nor constructions (non-conditional) 38

2.3 Quantifiers and the Negative particle 39

2.3.1 Subject NP is quantified 39
2.3.2 Object NP is quantified 50

Part II: THE PSEUDO-NEGATIVES

3. The Disjunctive Particle 59

4. Implicit Tags And Politeness Strategy 63

4.1 Implicit tag questions 63
4.2 Implicit tags used as a politeness strategy 68

5. Temporal Clauses 71

5.1 Temporal clauses with Adverbs of time 71

5.2 Temporal clauses without Adverbs of time 72

6. The Negative And The Interrogative Particles combined – ‘naki’ & ‘kina’ 77

6.1 Introducing the interrogative particle 77

6.2 Combinations of /na/ and /ki1/ 79
6.2.1 /na/ + /ki1/ = /naki/ 79
6.2.2 /ki1/ + /na/ = /ki-na/ – a disjunctive particle 81
6.2.3 /ki1/ + /na/ = /ki-na/ – a conjunctive particle 84

7. Scalar Implicature and Epistemic Modality 87

8. Prohibitions, Denials And Refusals 91

8.1 Immediate Prohibition – Directive speech act 91
8.2 Remote Prohibition – Declarative/assertive speech act 94
8.3 Denials and Refusals – how much different from prohibitions? 98
8.4 Prohibition and Modality 103

9. Negation Without /na/ 105

9.1 Affixed negation – prefixes and suffixes 105
9.1.1 Historically Inherited negative affixes 105
9.1.2 Borrowed negative affixes – foreign origin 109
9.2 Propositional negation – Interjections 110
9.3 Propositional negation – Semi-idiomatic phrases 111

References and Further Reading 117

Index 123
List of Illustrations
Fig. 1 24
Fig. 2 24
Fig. 3 27
Fig. 4 30
Fig. 5 30
Fig. 6 34
Fig. 7 34
Fig. 8 35
Fig. 9 35
Fig. 10 36
Fig. 11 107

Table 1 1
Table 2 8
Table 3 90
Table 4 115
xiii |

INTRODUCTION

The book is divided into two main parts – Part I deals with the proper negatives and Part II deals with the
Pseudo-negatives. Proper Negatives are those negative markers which have no other linguistic function but to
negate a grammatical unit in a construction. Moreover, the negation by such markers is quite obvious and
regular and mostly the finite or non-finite verb is syntactically negated. This however does not necessarily
mean that only the negation extends only to the verbal form, which we shall discuss in detail. Pseudo-
negatives or covert negatives, on the other hand, have negation patterns which are not so explicit and obvious.
The resultant construction or utterance is not a negative statement or question when a pseudo-negative occurs.
Furthermore, as we shall see inside, a pseudo-negative performs many other linguistic functions rather than
that of an overt negation. However, at a deeper syntactic and semantic level it is because of the negation (of a
grammatical unit or of a proposition) brought about by such a pseudo-negative that it is able to perform the
other linguistic functions. Had it not been able to negate something at a deeper underlying level, it would not
have been able to perform its characteristic functions in the surface structure.

Part I has been divided into two broad chapters. Chapter 1 introduces the copula verb and puts it in contrast to
the negated copula verb or negative verb. The morpho-syntactic distributions as well as the allomorphic
variations of the negated copula (along with personal inflections) have been discussed. Different semantic
variations and scopes of negation have also been discussed.

Chapter 2 introduces the negative particle /na/, which is the most powerful and productive method of negation
of a grammatical unit. Debates over the shape and alleged allomorphic variations of the negative particle have
been discussed under § 2.1. In section § 2.2.1 the copula verb is revisited and this time a major morpho-
syntactic (and a parallel semantic) difference is shown between the use and the meanings of the negated
copula and the combinations of ‘copula+ negative particle’. In § 2.2.2 the prevalent notion of the regularity in
the distribution of the negative particle (after finite verbs and before non-finite verbal forms) is challenged and
it has been shown that interesting semantic variations occur when the negative particle occurs before finite
verbal forms. What follows this in the subsequent sections of the same chapter is the discussion of seven types
of conditional sentences in Bengali. The syntactic structures for each type have been illustrated duly and such
structures show some similarities to and some differences from one another. In one or two such structures the
negative particle resumes its usual regular pattern of occurrence after a finite verb and such subtle variations
have all been thoroughly discussed. The grammaticality and acceptability of conditional sentences based on
the observance and defiance of such structures have been shown. In addition to these, several agreements
between the verbs (finite and non-finite) with respect to tense-mood-person-aspect have been discussed in the
same sections that deal with the conditional sentences. These agreements work like constraints and some
constraints, when followed, make the resultant utterance more acceptable than another constraint. Hence these
constraints or agreements have been illustrated (through successive revisions based on newer and newer
data) by means of three clines of acceptability. The last section § 2.2.2.9 deals with non-conditional
constructions which as per traditional grammar are compound and not complex sentences – the neither-nor
constructions. These also show the use of the negative particle before a finite verb.
A completely different phenomenon is described in § 2.3 where the correlation between the universal and
existential quantifiers in Bengali on one hand, and the negative particle on the other hand, is shown. The
differences between structural negation and semantic negation, differences in the scope of negations,
inconsistencies in the use of a certain quantifier and its interpretation as a different quantifier, change in
singular-plural sense due to double/reduplicated use of quantifiers and their anomalous negation, etc. have all
been dealt with in detail.

Part 2 deals with the pseudo-negatives. It is divided into seven chapters all of which show negation through
the negative particle and not the negated copula. Chapter 3 deals with the functioning of the negative particle
as a disjunctive particle and also deals with the propositional negation at an underlying level. If no other
negative particle is present the resultant disjoined utterance (compound sentence) is not a negative statement.
What type of sentence structures allow such disjunctions are also distinctly elaborated.
xiv | .

Chapter 4 deals with implicit tag questions, however the structural pattern of such peripheral clauses in
Bengali are shown to be different from those in English. Why they are implicit is also discussed. The
distribution, occurrence and semantic contribution of such a tag question toward the propositional meaning of
the main clause have all been enumerated. What are the constituents of such tag questions have also been
discussed. Section § 4.2 deals with the sociolinguistic function of such tag questions, how they are used as
politeness devices to achieve a certain politeness strategy, how commands are turned into polite requests by
means of the use of implicit tags have also been discussed.
Chapter 5 deals with temporal clauses. Bengali makes use of such temporal markers which are either separate
words denoting only an approximate point of time or are inflections marking tense of a verb. Here for the
temporal clauses it is not the tense-marking inflections but rather the time denoting (temporal deictic)
expressions which as per traditional terminology would be called adverbs of time. However, there are ways of
forming temporal constructions (always complex sentences) even without the use of such overt time deictic
expressions or adverbs. The emphatic and negative particles (most often jointly) help in the formation of
temporal clauses, all of which have been discussed elaborately inside.
Chapter 6 kicks off with a morphological discussion whereby the interrogative particle is introduced as a
separate entity distinct from the interrogative or wh-pronouns or k-pronouns. Different morphological
combinations of this interrogative particle with the negative particle gives rise to different morphemes whose
syntactic and semantic behavior have been duly discussed. For such derived morphemes, the negative particle
alone participates in the covert negation while the resultant derived morphemes like /ki-na/ and /na-ki/
perform the other linguistic functions – conjunction, disjunction, etc.
Discussions on Pragmatics and Modal logic are present in all the chapters, but most importantly in chapters 7
and 8. Chapter 7 deals with the pragmatic notion of Implicature and associates it with epistemic modality, and
enumerates how the negative particle /na/ contributes towards this. Chapter 8 goes beyond the domain of
structural negation into the realm of propositional negation. Different types of Prohibition by means of the use
of the negative particle and other words are shown. How the negative particle is used to make denials and
refusals and how these operations are differentiated based on the propositional meanings of the previous
utterances (in the most natural discourse contexts) are all discussed in the 8 th chapter. How modal variations
occur, how difference in illocutionary force occur, how different speech acts are performed depending on
whether a propositional negation is a certain kind of prohibition, or a denial or a refusal have been discussed
explicitly.

Chapter 9 presents two extremities. On one hand it deals with affixed negation whereby a negative affix is
used to negate a single word and not a phrase or clause or sentence or proposition – so it deals with the
smallest scope of negation within the domain of a word. On the other hand, we find propositional negation by
means of interjections and semi-idiomatic phrases. How semi-idiomatic phrases differ from idioms, how their
idiosyncratic non-natural meanings are sometimes contextually determined have been discussed with ample
examples. One thing which is common in all the sections under chapter 9 is that, negation here occurs without
the use of the negated copula and/or the negative particle, and hence do not form a part of the domain of
proper negation which we find in Part I.
 PART I

THE PROPER NEGATIVES

1| 1.1 Introducing the negated copula
2| 1.2 Usage or distribution of the negated copula .
3| 1.3 Existential negation
4| 1.3 Existential negation .
5| 1.3 Existential negation
6| 1.4 Implicit Prohibition .
7| 2.1 Shape of the negative particle
8| 2.1 Shape of the negative particle .
9|2.1 Shape of the negative particle
10| 2.2.1 Copula verb and the negative particle .
11|2.2.1 Copula verb and the negative particle
12| 2.2.1 Copula verb and the negative particle .
13|2.2.1 Copula verb and the negative particle
14| 2.2.2.1 Non-conditional complex sentences .
15|2.2.2.1 Non-conditional complex sentences
16| 2.2.2.1 Non-conditional complex sentences .
17|2.2.2.2 Overt if-then conditional sentences
18| 2.2.2.3 Covert if-then conditional sentences .
19|2.2.2.3 Covert if-then conditional sentences
20| 2.2.2.4 Doubly-negated overt if-then conditional sentences .
21| 2.2.2.4 Doubly-negated overt if-then conditional sentences
22| 2.2.2.4 Doubly-negated overt if-then conditional sentences .
23| 2.2.2.5 Doubly-negated covert if-then conditional sentences
24| 2.2.2.5 Doubly-negated covert if-then conditional sentences .
25| 2.2.2.5 Doubly-negated covert if-then conditional sentences
26| 2.2.2.5 Doubly-negated covert if-then conditional sentences.
27| 2.2.2.6 Doubly-negated overt imperative conditional sentences
28| 2.2.2.6 Doubly-negated overt imperative conditional sentences .
29| 2.2.2.6 Doubly-negated overt imperative conditional sentences
30| 2.2.2.6 Doubly-negated overt imperative conditional sentences .
31| 2.2.2.6 Doubly-negated overt imperative conditional sentences
32| 2.2.2.7 Doubly-negated overt and covert subjunctive conditional sentences
33| 2.2.2.7 Doubly-negated overt and covert subjunctive conditional sentences
34| 2.2.2.7 Doubly-negated overt and covert subjunctive conditional sentences
35| 2.2.2.7 Doubly-negated overt and covert subjunctive conditional sentences
36| 2.2.2.8 Doubly Negated Perfective and Progressive conditional sentences
37| 2.2.2.8 Doubly Negated Perfective and Progressive conditional sentences
38| 2.2.2.8 Doubly Negated Perfective and Progressive conditional sentences
39| 2.3.1 Subject NP is quantified
40| 2.3.1 Subject NP is quantified
41| 2.3.1 Subject NP is quantified
42| 2.3.1 Subject NP is quantified
43| 2.3.1 Subject NP is quantified
44| 2.3.1 Subject NP is quantified
45| 2.3.1 Subject NP is quantified
46| 2.3.1 Subject NP is quantified
47| 2.3.1 Subject NP is quantified
48| 2.3.1 Subject NP is quantified
49| 2.3.1 Subject NP is quantified
50| 2.3.2 Object NP is quantified
51| 2.3.2 Object NP is quantified
52| 2.3.2 Object NP is quantified
53| 2.3.2 Object NP is quantified
54| 2.3.2 Object NP is quantified
55| 2.3.2 Object NP is quantified
56| 2.3.2 Object NP is quantified

So far we have seen that the presence of the negative particle or the negative verb negates or the other structural
element in a sentence – this kind of negation is explicit or proper. In the rest of the chapters we shall explore how
the negative particle occurs in an utterance/sentence but does not overtly negate any element but rather negates the
whole proposition and adds some peculiar semantic values – this kind of negation occurs at a very deeper syntactic
level and hence these have been labeled as pseudo-negatives. Phonological and suprasegmental features (especially
intonation and emphatic stress) would be seen to have a very important role in the semantic variations of
utterances.
 PART II

THE PSEUDO – NEGATIVES

59| 3. The Disjunctive Particle
60| 3. The Disjunctive Particle
61| 3. The Disjunctive Particle
62| 3. The Disjunctive Particle

Therefore the actual disjunctive particle in Bengali is /ba/ or /kimba/ but /na/ is actually a pseudo-negative here
because it doesn’t overtly seem to negate anything, but it semantically negates the functional or propositional
meaning of one disjunct and asserts the function/proposition of the second disjunct, thereby giving an exclusive
disjunction.
63| 4.1 Implicit tag questions

4. IMPLICIT TAGS and POLITENESS STRATEGY

64| 4.1 Implicit tag questions
65| 4.1 Implicit tag questions
66| 4.1 Implicit tag questions
67| 4.1 Implicit tag questions
68| 4.2 Implicit tags used as a politeness strategy

4.2 Implicit tags used as a politeness strategy

69| 4.2 Implicit tags used as a politeness strategy
70| 4.2 Implicit tags used as a politeness strategy
71| 5.1 Temporal clauses with Adverbs of time
72| 5.2 Temporal clauses without Adverbs of time .
73| 5.2 Temporal clauses without Adverbs of time
74| 5.2 Temporal clauses without Adverbs of time .
75| 5.2 Temporal clauses without Adverbs of time
77| 6.1 Introducing the interrogative particle
78| 6.1 Introducing the interrogative particle .
79| 6.2.1 /na/ + /ki1/ = /naki/
80| 6.2.1 /na/ + /ki1/ = /naki/ .
81| 6.2.2 /ki1/ + /na/ = /ki-na/ -- a disjunctive particle
82| 6.2.2 /ki1/ + /na/ = /ki-na/ -- a disjunctive particle .
83| 6.2.2 /ki1/ + /na/ = /ki-na/ -- a disjunctive particle
84| 6.2.3 /ki1/ + /na/ = /ki-na/ -- a conjunctive particle .
85| 6.2.3 /ki1/ + /na/ = /ki-na/ -- a conjunctive particle
86| 6.2.3 /ki1/ + /na/ = /ki-na/ -- a conjunctive particle .
87| 7. SCALAR IMPLICATURE and EPISTEMIC MODALITY
88| 7. SCALAR IMPLICATURE and EPISTEMIC MODALITY .
89| 7. SCALAR IMPLICATURE and EPISTEMIC MODALITY
90| 7. SCALAR IMPLICATURE and EPISTEMIC MODALITY .
91| 8.1 Immediate Prohibition – Directive speech act
92| 8.1 Immediate Prohibition – Directive speech act .
93| 8.1 Immediate Prohibition – Directive speech act
94| 8.2 Remote Prohibition – declarative/assertive speech act .
95| 8.2 Remote Prohibition – declarative/assertive speech act
96| 8.2 Remote Prohibition – declarative/assertive speech act .
97| 8.2 Remote Prohibition – declarative/assertive speech act
98| 8.3 Denials and Refusals – how much different from prohibitions? .
99| 8.3 Denials and Refusals – how much different from prohibitions?
100| 8.3 Denials and Refusals – how much different from prohibitions? .
101| 8.3 Denials and Refusals – how much different from prohibitions?
102| 8.3 Denials and Refusals – how much different from prohibitions? .
103| 8.4 Prohibition and Modality
104| 8.4 Prohibition and Modality .
105| 9.1.1 Historically Inherited negative affixes
106| 9.1.1 Historically Inherited negative affixes .
107| 9.1.1 Historically Inherited negative affixes
108| 9.1.1 Historically Inherited negative affixes .
109| 9.1.2 Borrowed negative affixes – foreign origin
110| 9.2 Propositional negation – Interjections .
111| 9.3 Propositional negation – Semi-idiomatic phrases
112| 9.3 Propositional negation – Semi-idiomatic phrases .
113| 9.3 Propositional negation – Semi-idiomatic phrases
114| 9.3 Propositional negation – Semi-idiomatic phrases .
115|

LIST OF VERBAL INFLECTIONS

117|

References and Further reading

Akatsuka, N. (1985) Conditionals and Epistemic scale. Language, 61.

Anderson, J.M. (1977). A Localist Theory of Case Grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Atlas, J. and Levinson, S.C. (1981). It-clefts, informativeness, and logical form, In: P. Cole ed., Radical Pragmatics,
1-61, New York: Academic Press.

Austin, J. L. (1961). Performative Utterances. In Philosophical Papers, ed. J. O. Urmson & G. J. Warnock). Oxford: Oxford
University Press.

Austin, J. L.(1962 – 2nd ed. 1975). How to Do Things with Words. Oxford University Press.

Bach, K. (1994). Conversational Implicature – Mind and Language 9: 124-62.

Bachman, L. & Palmer, A.(1996). Language Testing in Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Berne, E. (1964). Games People Play. New York, Grove Press.

Basu, D. & Wilbur, R. (2010). Complex predicates in Bangla :An event-based analysis – Purdue University – Rice Working
Papers in Linguistics vol. 2, Spring 2010.

Bhattacharya, K. (1988). Bengali Phonetic Reader. Mysore: CIIL, Reprint 2000.

Bhattacharya K. (1993). Bengali-Oriya Verb Morphology. Dasgupta & Co. Kolkata.

Brown, G. & Yule G. (1983). Discourse Analysis. Cambridge University Press.

Brown, P. & Levinson, S.C. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
First published 1978 as part of Ester N. Goody (ed.): Questions and Politeness.

Bühler, K. (1934 – 2nd ed. 1965). Sprachtheorie: Die Darstellungsfunktion der Sprache. [Theory of language: The
representational function of language.] Jena, Germany: Fischer.

Canale, M. and Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing.
Applied Linguistics 1, 1: 1-47.

Cann, R. (1993). Formal Semantics: an introduction. Cambridge textbooks in Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.

Carnap, R. (2nd edn. 1956) Meaning and Necessity: A study in Semantics and Modal Logic. University of Chiago Press
(Midway Reprint 1988, U.S.A.)

Chakrabarti, B. (1994). A comparative study of Santali and Bengali. K.P. Bagchi & Co.

Chakrabarti, B. (2000). Style in Bengali proverbs. The University of Burdwan, India.

Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic Structures. The Hague: Mouton.

Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

Chomsky, N. and Halle, M. (1968). The Sound Pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.

Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on Government and Binding. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press

Chomsky, N. (1995). The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

118| .

Chimombo, M., and Roseberry, R (1998): The Power of Discourse: An Introduction to Discourse Analysis. New Jersey:
Lawrence Eribaum Associates, Inc.

Coupland, J., Coupland, N. & Robinson, J.D. (1992). How are you?: Negotiating phatic communion. Language in Society
21.2: 207-230.

Cruse, A. (2000). Meaning in language: an introduction to semantics and pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Cruse, D. (1986). Lexical Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Dan, M. (1992). Some Issues in Metrical Phonology of Bangla: the indigenous research tradition. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis,
University of Poona, Pune. (available at www.caluniv.academia.edu/mina dan/)

Dasgupta, P. (1980). Questions and Relative and complement clauses in a Bangla Grammar. Unpublished Ph.D Dissertation.
New York University. New York.

Dasgupta, P. (1982). Phonology and the Bangla verb. Indian Linguistics. 43.1-2. 17-28

Dasgupta, P. (1984). Bangla Emphasizers and Anchors. Indian Linguistics Vol 45.

Di Sciullo, A.M. & Williams, E. (1987) On Defining the Word. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Enc, M. (1986). Towards a referential analysis of temporal expressions. Linguistics and Philosophy 9:405–426.

Erler, B. (2010). The speech act of forbidding and its realizations: A linguistic analysis. Saarbrücken: VDM Verlag Dr.
Müller.

Gazdar G. (1976). Formal Pragmatics for Natural Language Implicature: Presupposition and Logical Form, Unpublished.
Ph.D dissertation

Gazdar, G. & Rogers. A (1978). Conventional Implicature: University of Texas

Gazdar G. (1979). Pragmatics. Implicature, Presupposition and Logical form New York: Academic Press.

Ghosh, S. K. (1968). Idiom and Bengali Numbers.Anthropological LinguisticsVol. 10, No. 4, pp. 11-14

Ghosh, S. K. (1969). Colloquial Bengali Kha-Eat. Anthropological Linguistics Vol. 11, No. 9, pp. 267-270

Giorgi, A. and Pianesi F. (1997). Tense and Aspect: From Semantics to Morphosyntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Grice, H.P. (1957). Meaning: Philosophical Review (Reprinted in Strawson -1971)

Grice, H.P. (1968). Utterer's Meaning, Sentence Meaning and Word Meaning, Foundations of Language 4

Grice, H.P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In Cole, P. and Morgan, J. (eds.) Syntax and semantics, vol 3. New York:
Academic Press.

Grice, H.P. (1981). Presupposition and Conversational Implicature, in P. Cole (ed.), Radical Pragmatics, Academic Press,
New York.

Grundy, P. (2000). Doing Pragmatics. London: Oxford University Press.

Haegeman, L. (1995). The Syntax of Negation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Halion, K. (2003). Deconstruction and Speech Act theory: A defence of the distinction between normal and parasitic speech
acts (Ph.D. Dissertation)
119|

Halliday, M.A.K & Hasan, R. (1976). Cohesion in English. London : Longman

Halliday, M.A.K., and Hasan, R. (1991). Language Context and Text: Aspects of Language in a Social-Semiotic Perspective.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Halvorsen, P. (1978). The Syntax and Semantics of Cleft Constructions. Texas Linguistic Forum 11, Austin: University of
Texas, Dept. Of Linguistics.

Hanks, W. (1992). The indexical ground of deictic reference. In A. Duranti and C. Goowin (eds) Rethinking context,
language as an interactive phenomenon. Cambridge: Cambribge University Press.

Hare, R.M. (1949). Imperative Sentences, in Mind 58 (reprinted in Hare, 1971)

Hare, R.M. (1952): The Language of Morals. Oxford: Clarendon Press

Hare, R.M. (1971). Practical Inferences. London: Macmillan

Haspelmath, M. (1997 – paperback edn. 2000). Indefinite Pronouns: Oxford Studies in Typology and Linguistic theoy.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Higginbotham, J. (1985). On Semantics. Linguistic Inquiry 16:547–593.

Hirschberg, J. (1985). A Theory of Scalar Implicature. New York: Garland Press. (PhD thesis) University of Pennsylvania.
Reprinted 1991.

Hymes, D.H. (1962). The Ethnography of Speaking. T. Gladwin and W. C. Sturtevant (eds) Anthropology and Human
Behaviour. Washington, D. C.: Anthropology Society of Washington.

Hymes, Dell (1964). Introduction: Toward Ethnographies of Communication. American Anthropologist 66 (6): 1–34.

Hymes, D. (1971). On communicative competence. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence in J. B. Pride and J. Holmes,. (eds.): Sociolinguistics. Harmondsworth,
Middlesex: Penguin Education

Hymes, D. & Gumperz, J. (1972). Directions in sociolinguistics: The ethnography of communication. New York: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston.

Hymes, Dell (1974). Foundations in sociolinguistics: An ethnographic approach. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania
Press.

Irvine, J. (1998). Ideologies of honorific language. In B. Schieffelin, K. Woolard and P. Kroskrity

(eds.), Language Ideologies: Practice and Theory. New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 51-67.

Islam, S.M.A. (2004). ‘L1 Influence on the Spoken English Proficiency of Bengali Speakers. 3.2.3 Formation of negative and
interrogative sentence’ – C-Essay in English, Högskolan Dalarna, Supervisor: Una Cunningham

Jackendoff, R. (1976). Towards an Explanatory Semantic Representation. Linguistic Inquiry, 7.

Jacobson, R. (1960). Closing statement: Linguistics and poetics. In: Sebeok, T.A. (ed.). Style in language. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: M.I.T. Press

Kamp, H. and Reyle, U. (1993). From Discourse to Logic. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
120| .

Karttunen, L. (1973). Presuppositions of Compound Sentences. Linguistic Inquiry,4.

Karttunen, L. & Peters, S. (1979). Conventional implicature. In Choon-Kyu Oh and David A. Dinneen, eds., Presupposition,
Syntax and Semantics, Volume 11: New York Academic Press.

Kataoka, K. (2004) Co-construction of a mental map in spatial discourse: A case study of Japanese rock
climbers use of deictic verbs of motion. Pragmatics 14.4: 409-438.

Katz, J. J. and Fodor, J. A. (1963). The structure of a semantic theory. Language 39:2/1.170-210

Krifka, M. (1989). Nominal reference, temporal constitution and quantification in event semantics. In Bartsch R.and J. Van
Benthem and P. Van Emde Boas, eds., Semantics and Contextual Expressions, Dordrecht:Foris.

Krifka, M. (1992). Thematic relations as links between nominal reference and temporal constitution. In I. Sag and A.
Szabolcsi, eds., Lexical Matters, Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information CSLI.

Krifka, M. (1999). ‘At least some determiners aren’t determiners’. In The semantics/pragmatics interface from different
points of view, ed. K. Turner, 257–291. North-Holland: Elsevier Science.

Laka, I. (1994). On the Syntax of Negation – Outstanding Dissertations in Linguistics Series, J. Hankamer ed., Garland
Publishing Co., New York.

Lakoff, G., and Johnson, M (1980). Metaphors we Come to Live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Leech, G. (1974 – 2nd edn.1981) Semantics. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Leech, G. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. New York: Longman.

Levinson, S.C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lyons, J. (1979). Deixis and anaphora…Edinburgh University Press.

Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics 2. London: Cambridge University Press.

Majumdar, A. (2000). Studies in the Anaphoric Relations in Bengali. Calcutta: Subarnarekha.

Malinowski, B. (1923). ‘The problem of meaning in primitive languages'. Supplement to C. K. Ogden and I. A. Richards
(eds.) The meaning of meaning: A study of the influence of language upon thought and the science of symbolism (pp. 451-
510). London; Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Mey, J. (2001). Pragmatics: An Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

Miller, J.E. (1985). Semantics and Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Milne, W.S. (1993). A Practical Bengali grammar. Asian Educational Services

Nida, E. A. (1975). Componential Analysis of Meaning. The Hague: Mouton.

Nunberg, G.D., Sag, I. & Wasow, T. (1994). Idioms. Language 70.

Odebunmi, A. (2002). The pragmatics of face acts in a Nigerian university administration. In Babatunde and Adeyanju (eds.),
Language, Meaning and Society. Ilorin: Haytee, pp. 179-192.

Ouhalla, J. (1990): Sentential negation, relativised minimality and the aspectual status of auxiliaries. Linguistic Review
7:183–231.

Palmer, F.R. (2001). Mood and Modality. Cambridge textbooks in Linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Palmer, F.R. (1981 2nd edn.) Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
121|

Partee, B. (1984). Nominal and temporal anaphora. Linguistics and Philosophy 7(3):243–286.

Pollock, J.Y. (1989). Verb movement, Universal Grammar and the structure of IP. Linguistic Inquiry 20:365–424.

Pulman, S.G. (1983). Word Meaning and Belief. London: Croom Helm.

Putnam, H. (1975). Mind, Language and Reality. Philosophical Papers vol ii. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ramchand, G. (1990). Complex predicate formation in Bangla. In Proceedings of the Ninth Annual West Coast Conference
on Formal Linguistics.

Ramchand, G. (1997). Aspect and Predication: the Semantics of argument structure. Clarendon Press : Oxford.

Ramchand, G. and Butt, M. (2002). Complex Aspectual Structure in Hindi/Urdu. UMIST, Oxford University.

Ramchand, G. (2004). ‘Two Types of Negation in Bengali’, in Clause Structure in South Asian Languages by V. Dayal & A.
Mahajan (eds.). Dordrecht: Kluwer.

Reichenbach, H. (1947). Elements of Symbolic Logic. New York: Macmillan.

Sadock, J. (1972). Speech Act idioms. Chicago Linguistic Society 8.

Saville-Troike, M. (1982). The Ethnography of Communication: An Introduction. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Searle, J. (1969). Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Searle, J. (1975). ‘Indirect speech acts’. In Syntax and Semantics, 3: ed. P. Cole & J. L. Morgan, New York: Academic Press.
Reprinted (1991) in Pragmatics: A Reader, ed. S. Davis, pp. 265–277. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Searle, J. (1979). Expression and Meaning: Studies in the Theory of Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Searle, J. (1980). The background of Meaning. In J.R. Searle, F. Kiefer and M. Bierwisch (eds) Speech Act Theory and
Pragmatics. Dordrecht: Reidel.

Smith, C. (1991). The Parameter of Aspect. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

Stockwell, P. (2002) Sociolinguistics. London and New York: Routledge.

Tanner, B. (1976) Language and Communication in General Practice. London Hodder Stoughton.

Thomas, J. (1983) Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics 4.2: 90-112.

Thomas, J. (1995) Meaning in Interaction: An Introduction to Pragmatics. New York: Longman.

Thompson, H.R. (2006). ‘Negation patterns in Bengali’. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 69, pp 243-
265

Urbanová, Ludmila. Implicit and Explicit Dialogic Structure in Fiction. Praha : Ústav pro jazyk český AV ČR, 2002. 10 pp.
Linguistica Pragensia , vol. XII/2.

Van Dijk, T. (1976) Text and Context: Exploration into the Semantics and Pragmatics of Discourse. London: Longman.

Van Dijk, T. (1981) Studies in the Pragmatics of Discourse. The Hague: Mouton Publishers.

Van Dijk, T. (1997) Discourse as Social Interaction. London: Sage Publications.

Watts, R.J. (2003). Politeness. Key Topics in Sociolinguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
122| .

Yule, G. (1996) Pragmatics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Zanuttini, R. (1991). Syntactic properties of sentential negation: A comparative study of romance languages. Ph.D. thesis,
University of Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania.

Zanuttini, R. (1997). Negation and Clausal Structure. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Zhang, S. (1990). The status of imperatives in theories of grammar. Ph.D. thesis, University of Arizona,Tucson.
123|

Index
124| .