Related Papers
Approaches to the Typology of Word Classes. Berlin
When can a language have adjectives? An Implicational Universal (Hb 1999, Pb 2000)
2000 •
Jan Rijkhoff
Quantity Systems and the Count/Mass Distinction
Quantity Systems and the Count/Mass Distinction
Jenny Doetjes
Julie Jiang 2012 PhD Thesis Nominal Arguments and Language Variation
L. Julie Jiang
Mass and Count in Linguistics, Philosophy, and Cognitive Science (to appear with Benjamins)
Friederike Moltmann
Selected papers from the colloquium 'Mass/Count in Linguistics, Philosophy and Cognitive Science', Paris, December 2012 with an introduction by F. Moltmann
Definiteness in Nuosu Yi and the theory of argument formation
L. Julie Jiang
This paper analyzes argument formation in Nuosu Yi, a language that is typologically unusual in having classifiers as well as a definite determiner. Also unusual is the fact that demonstratives do not combine directly with nouns in this language but require the mediation of classifiers. Properties such as these are shown to pose a challenge to current accounts of argument formation. The Neocarlsonian approach of Chierchia (1998) explains the absence of definite articles in classifier languages as resulting from considerations of economy. If nouns in classifier languages are names of kinds, they can occur directly as arguments of verbs, thereby obviating the need for extra structure to host a determiner. The data from Nuosu Yi alters the empirical generalization and calls for a modification of the explanation. The specific account of Nuosu Yi that is presented bears on current discussions about the nature of argument formation. Must arguments necessarily occur with overt or covert determiners or is it possible for languages to differ in this respect? Must bare nominal arguments necessarily denote kinds or can they denote properties? In this sense, the discovery of a new type of classifier language contributes to a theory of language variation and argument formation in general.
Hungarian Classifier Constructions, Plurality and the Mass-Count Distinction
Bridget R Schvarcz
We argue that Hungarian has both mass and count nouns, and a plural marker which is sensitive to the distinction, as well as a system of sortal classifiers. In English, most nouns are either mass (e.g mud) or count (e.g. book), and there are only a limited number of fully flexible nouns with both mass and count forms (e.g. stone/stones). In Hungarian, however, most count nouns are flexible, and a noun like rózsa ‘rose’ is ambiguous between a mass and a count item. This results in two ways of counting: rózsa as a count noun can be directly modified by a numeral as in két rózsa ‘two roses’, but if it is a mass noun counting uses a classifier construction as in két szál rózsa.
MA Thesis. The Hungarians who say -nyi: Issues in Counting and Measuring
Bridget R Schvarcz
Ch 3 Classifier Languages without D: Mandarin Jiang 2012
L. Julie Jiang
Classifiers and Plurality: evidence from a deictic classifier language. The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication
Dimitris Michelioudakis, Filomena Sandalo
This paper investigates the semantic contribution of plural morphology and its interaction with classifiers in Kadiwéu. We show that Kadiwéu, a Waikurúan language spoken in South America, is a classifier language of the same type as Chinese, with classifiers being an obligatory ingredient of all determiner-like elements, such as quantifiers, numerals, and wh-words for arguments. What all elements with classifiers have in common is that they contribute an atomized/individuated interpretation of the NP. Furthermore , this paper revisits the relationship between classifiers and number marking and challenges the common assumption that classifiers and plurals are mutually exclusive, proposing a syntactic way of recasting Chierchia's (1998) generalisation.
Proceedings of the 42nd Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society
Plurality in classifier languages: A view from Vietnamese pluralizers
2016 •
Ni La Lê
Languages with plural inflection on noun phrases (NP) such as English, French or Italian do not have CLs while, in contrast, classifier languages tend not to have obligatory number marking. Many classifier languages have pluralizers which are often optional and portmanteau morphemes carrying more than plural features. Vietnamese is also a classifier language with two pluralizers: những and các. The obligatory existence of these pluralizers in certain contexts and their ability to appear together with CLs in NPs make Vietnamese differ from most classifier languages such as Mandarin, Korean or Japanese (whose pluralizers in general do not co-occur with CLs). This paper is going to address the similarities and differences in distribution and interpretation between the two pluralizers, and then propose the NP structures that can account for their syntactic and (begin to account) for their semantic properties. In particular, we focus on two main differences between những and các. First, những has more grammatically restricted distribution than các: it needs to be licensed by some sort of restrictive modification. Second, the behavior of các is consistent with it being definite whereas the interpretations of những can vary. Những can be interchangeable with các in all definite contexts, but is also compatible with many typical indefinite constructions like wh-phrases and ‘there are’ expressions. Following an analysis of based on minimalist assumptions as implemented by Adger (2003), we develop NP structures for những and các, in which the pluralizers have a D feature but this feature is not specified in the morpheme itself and những, unlike các, selects not for a ClP but rather for a small clause of sorts.
