0

Here's the issue.

Normally we don't say this -- "Few people had something to say" (because "few", as opposed to "a few", is negative and invites the non-assertive "anything")

unless we are deliberately leaving the object out of the scope of negation

Questions

  1. What can be a context for that sentence at the beginning?
  2. What are the practical implications of distinguishing the notion "scope of negation". How is it helpful?

EDIT: How about this: "When only means no more or other than it also functions as a negator so we encounter, e.g.: Only Mary knew anything and not, usually: Only Mary knew something unless, again, we are deliberately leaving the object out of the scope of negation."

Question: How do you understand that "unless, again, we are deliberately leaving the object out of the scope of negation"?

It's from this site: https://www.eltconcourse.com/training/inservice/lexicogrammar/negation.html#survey

ASDASD ASDASD
  • 195
  • For the negative assertion *Few [people] had anything, we don't include the article, but for the positive* assertion *A few had something* the article seems to be idiomatically required. I can't explain why that is, but it might be relevant that the *a few* version can be replaced by *Many had something* or *Some had something, but Many had anything* and *Some had anything* are totally unacceptable. Something about negative / positive polarity lexical items. – FumbleFingers Oct 28 '22 at 10:35
  • In short, if I understand this question, it's based on a false premise. There is no "meaning and possible context" for Few people had something because that's not an idiomatically valid utterance. We say *A few people had something, which is just "ordinary English" (Most people had nothing, but at least a few had something)*. – FumbleFingers Oct 28 '22 at 10:41
  • 1
    Are intending to use the actual word “something” here or is it a stand-in for all possible objects? That winter, few people had enough firewood to heat their homes. – Jim Oct 28 '22 at 14:33
  • When you ask "What can be a context for that?" are you asking us to provide that? – Yosef Baskin Oct 28 '22 at 14:34
  • "to know something" is idiomatic, meaning you're in on the secret at least partially. Likewise "to have something to say" means you have an opinion you urgently want to express. Such idioms aren't subject to ordinary rules. – Stuart F Oct 28 '22 at 15:01

1 Answers1

3

(1) A few is an ordinary quantifier; while few is an idiomatic negative quantifier.
They are not the same thing, and their difference has nothing to do with a, except that it marks one.

Anything will fit nicely with few

  • Few people know anything about it

because NPIs fit nicely with Negative Triggers.

(2) Something is an ordinary indefinite; while anything is an idiomatic negative polarity indefinite.

Something can be used in any construction, negative or not. There may or may not be a difference in meaning between something and anything in a negative context:

  • Did you eat anything yet? Did you eat something yet?
  • There were times when he didn't throw anything away.
  • There were times when he didn't throw something away.

Even if the speaker believes there to be a difference in meaning, the listener might not. This is an area where individual variation is widespread.

John Lawler
  • 107,887
  • You don't recognize the expectation of a negative or positive answer? Did you eat anything? (Expecting the person hasn't until that point). Versus: Did you eat something? (Just doesn't know. Wants to know). – Lambie Oct 28 '22 at 20:43
  • That's one way some people use it, but not all, and not always. As I said, individual variation is widespread. – John Lawler Oct 28 '22 at 20:55
  • I saw that. That said, they are either both the same or not. If not, I think it can only be about the expectation involved. Right? Or is there some other point I am missing? – Lambie Oct 28 '22 at 20:58
  • Oh, no, this is not a countable set of meanings; we're dealing with real numbers here, and meanings can be as close as you like in any number of dimensions and still not be "the same". – John Lawler Oct 29 '22 at 13:33
  • 1
    @Araucaria-Nothereanymore.: Thanks. Corrected. – John Lawler Oct 30 '22 at 15:44