Bipartite negation is the phenomenon in which two negators output to one instance of semantic negation. In this thesis I present an analysis of bipartite negation in Sgaw Karen, Ojibwe, and French, using original data from the former two languages and data from existing sources for French. I show that the negators in these languages differ with respect to clausal position, internal structure, meaning, and how the negators relate to each other. I argue that bipartite negation derives from either syntactic agreement or what I term NegP splitting, whereby two constituents in an extended projection of negation are merged in separate locations in the clause, similar to Poletto (2008) and de Clercq (2013). Sgaw Karen and French exhibit distinct variants of syntactic agreement. In Sgaw Karen, one negator is semantically uninterpretable and undergoes AGREE with the structurally lower interpretable negator, while in French both negators are interpretable goals for a structurally higher silent head responsible for imparting sentential negation. Ojibwe exhibits NegP splitting such that the sentential negator and a structurally higher negator are derived from a single extended projection of negation and are merged in two clausal positions. Both negators are interpretable for negation and cannot be in a syntactic agreement relation as I assume that only uninterpretable constituents initiate the AGREE operation. I present a framework of negation to explicate the functions of the negators in each language and to motivate why AGREE and NegP splitting are necessary to account for the range of facts on bipartite negation in these languages. Building on the work of de Clercq (2013), I argue that there are three classes of negators imparting contrary, contradictory, and focus negation respectively, each class having different internal structure. Each class of negator may merge in up to two distinct locations in the clausal spine, sentential negation being imparted by a contradictory negator merged in the TP domain. I show that dividing negators into classes based on meaning, internal structure, and clausal position has implications for the syntax of negative polarity emphasis, negative replies, and syntactic doubling outside of the domain of negation.