Observing some asymmetries in cross-clausal negative polarity licensing in Korean, Lee (2017) proposes that, under the SVO word order hypothesis (Kayne 1994), negative polarity items (NPIs) are licensed at the “Spec domain” of a negated predicate, rather than being regulated by the clause mate condition (CMC, Choe 1988, Lee 1994, Sohn 1995, Kim 1995, Chung 2006, a.o.). This paper argues, however, that Lee’s Spec domain approach faces some non-trivial difficulties and that a CMC-based theory like Sohn’s (1995) in terms of NPI movement to Spec of NegP more appropriately accommodates the cross-clausal NPI licensing facts.

1. Introduction
2. Lee’s (2017) Spec Domain Account
3. Problems with the Spec Domain Approach
    3.1. On the Treatment of (NPI) Object
    3.2. Asymmetry between Contained vs. Non-contained NPIs
    3.3. NPIs in a Preposed CP
    3.4. Scope Interaction between NPI and Negation
    3.5. Focus and Prosody Effects: NPIs contained in a -nun Marked CP
4. Polarity Licensing at Spec of NegP
    4.1. Contained vs. Non-contained NPIs in a Post-verbal Position
    4.2. NPIs in a Preposed CP
    4.3. Quantifier-negation Scope Interpretation
    4.4. On the Ameliorating Effects Induced by -nun
    4.5. Clausal Types and Cross-clausal NPI Licensing
5. An Alternative Approach: A Predicate+Predicate Reanalysis
6. Conclusion
References

• Daeho Chung(Hanyang University.)