Abstract This is a comparative investigation of contrastive negation in English and Finnish, i. e. combinations of a negated and an affirmed part construed as alternatives to one another. In both languages, there are several constructions that express contrastive negation, but their division of labour remains unclear. The aims of the paper are two-fold: first, to see what constructional strategies are available for contrastive negation in the two languages and, second, to see how the strategies are motivated by its interactional functions. In English, contrastive negation may be expressed by using the adversative conjunction but correctively (e. g. It’s not the bikers but the other vehicle on the road), whereas standard Finnish has a specialised corrective conjunction vaan alongside the adversative mutta. Moreover, many constructions can express contrastive negation, including ones without a conjunction (e. g. It’s not the bikers, it’s the other vehicle on the road). An analysis of conversational data shows that English favours constructions without conjunctions, while in Finnish constructions both with and without conjunctions are frequent. The uses of contrastive negation are divided into reactive and non-reactive. The pragmatic functions largely explain the usage patterns, and these in turn can explain the cross-linguistic regularities of corrective conjunctions.

中文翻译：

---

从构造到功能再到背面：英语和芬兰语的否定对比

摘要这是对英语和芬兰语中的否定性对比的比较研究。e。否定部分与肯定部分的组合被解释为彼此的替代。在这两种语言中，都有几种表达对比否定的结构，但是它们的分工仍然不清楚。本文的目的有两个方面：首先，了解两种语言中可用于对比否定的构造策略；其次，了解其交互功能是如何激发这些策略的。用英语，对比否定可以通过使用对抗性连词来表达，但是可以是纠正性的（例如，这不是骑自行车的人，而是道路上的另一辆车），而标准的芬兰语在对抗性穆塔旁边有专门的纠正性连词。而且，许多结构都可以表现出对比性的否定性，包括没有连词的结构（例如，这不是骑自行车的人，而是路上的另一辆车）。对会话数据的分析表明，英语偏爱不带连词的结构，而在芬兰语中，不带连词的结构都很常见。对比否定的使用分为反应性和非反应性。语用功能在很大程度上解释了用法模式，而这些反过来又可以解释纠正性连词的跨语言规律。而在芬兰建筑中，带有或不带有连词的情况都很常见。对比否定的使用分为反应性和非反应性。语用功能在很大程度上解释了用法模式，而这些反过来又可以解释纠正性连词的跨语言规律。而在芬兰建筑中，带有或不带有连词的情况都很常见。对比否定的使用分为反应性和非反应性。语用功能在很大程度上解释了用法模式，而这些反过来又可以解释纠正性连词的跨语言规律。