Just published "Negation in English and other languages" by Otto Jespersen, edited by Brett Reynolds & Peter Evans
https://langsci-press.org/catalog/book/501
Otto Jespersen's landmark study of negation provides a wide-ranging analysis of how languages express negative meaning. Drawing on an impressive array of historical texts and comparative examples, primarily from Germanic and Romance languages, Jespersen examines the forms, functions, and historical development of negative expressions. The work traces the evolution of negative markers, analyzes how negative prefixes modify word meanings, and reveals coherent patterns in how languages structure negative expressions.
Through meticulous analysis of authentic examples, Jespersen documents both common patterns and language-specific variations in negative expressions. His treatment of topics such as double negation, the distinction between special and nexal negation, and the various forms of negative particles provides a methodical account of negation's complexity. The work's enduring importance stems not only from its analysis of the cyclical renewal of negative markers (later termed “Jespersen's Cycle”) but from its comprehensive scope and detailed examination of negative expressions across multiple languages and historical periods.
This new critical edition makes this classic work accessible to modern readers while preserving its scholarly depth. The text has been completely re-typeset, with examples presented in contemporary numbered format and non-English examples given Leipzig-style glosses. A new introduction contextualizes Jespersen's achievement and demonstrates its continued significance for current linguistic research.
Fun. I learnt about Jespersen’s cycle when we discussed the historical Dutch negation, which, roughly speaking, was [negative particle] [finite verb] in Old Dutch, [negative particle] [finite verb] [negative particle] in Middle Dutch and is [finite verb] [negative particle] in Modern Dutch.
Eg. (using an invented sentence with modern spelling) ‘Ik en/ne hebbe brood’ - ‘Ik en/ne hebbe geen brood’ - ‘Ik heb geen brood’ (‘I don’t have bread’).
I was fascinated by the Middle Dutch ‘double’ negative before I studied Dutch in university (we had to call it a ‘tweeledige ontkenning’, so a two-part negation, instead of ‘dubbele ontkenning’). It’s used in the Early Modern Dutch (±1550-1800) Statenvertaling of the Bible of 1637, when it was already an archaic feature.
The first negation lives on in a so-called ‘petrified’ expression, ‘tenzij’: ‘[he]t en zij’, thus ‘it [negative particle] be [conjunctive]’, meaning ‘unless’.
I learned about it in a rather off-topic way; syntax professor talking about Portuguese phrase structure, someone asks a question referring to a local variety, she answers to not assume the same structure for dialectal phenomena. Her example was the Jespersen's cycle, something like:
She also mentioned other negative concord words (nenhum[a]/none, nada/nothing, etc.) might be undergoing the same process for the relevant dialects.