This paper proposes an analysis of the semantics of even that is consistent with the assumptions about the syntax and semantics of negation in Collins and Postal (Classical NEG raising, MIT Press, Cambridge, 2014). First, I review the distribution of negation, showing how negation may modify quantificational expressions where it gives rise to scope freezing effects. Second, I discuss the fact that even-phrases can be modified by negation, as in Not even John is there. On the basis of this fact, I argue that even is a quantifier. Lastly, I show that my data provides new empirical support for the assumption that there are two kinds of even, depending on the role played by focus in the scalar presupposition.

中文翻译：

---

甚至不

本文提出了对甚至语义的分析，该分析与关于柯林斯和邮政中否定的语法和语义的假设是一致的（经典NEG提出，麻省理工学院出版社，剑桥，2014年）。首先，我回顾了否定的分布，显示了否定如何在导致范围冻结效应的地方修改量化表达式。其次，我讨论了甚至可以通过否定来修饰短语的事实，例如甚至约翰都没有。基于这一事实，我认为甚至是一个量词。最后，我证明了我的数据为存在两种偶数的假设提供了新的经验支持，这取决于焦点在标量预设中所起的作用。