Neat Mass Nouns

2020 ◽  
pp. 189-226
Author(s):  
Fred Landman
Keyword(s):  
Mass Nouns

Plural marking in the second language: Atomicity, definiteness, and transfer

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-30
Author(s):  
Sea Hee Choi ◽  
Tania Ionin
Keyword(s):  
Second Language ◽  
English Learners ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
Native Languages ◽  
L1 Transfer ◽  
Mass Nouns ◽  
Count Nouns ◽  
Grammaticality Judgment ◽  
L2 Learners ◽  
Plural Marking

Abstract This paper examines whether second language (L2)-English learners whose native languages (L1; Korean and Mandarin) lack obligatory plural marking transfer the properties of plural marking from their L1s, and whether transfer is manifested both offline (in a grammaticality judgment task) and online (in a self-paced reading task). The online task tests the predictions of the morphological congruency hypothesis (Jiang 2007), according to which L2 learners have particular difficulty automatically activating the meaning of L2 morphemes that are incongruent with their L1. Experiment 1 tests L2 learners’ sensitivity to errors of –s oversuppliance with mass nouns, while Experiment 2 tests their sensitivity to errors of –s omission with count nouns. The findings show that (a) L2 learners detect errors with nonatomic mass nouns (sunlights) but not atomic ones (furnitures), both offline and online; and (b) L1-Korean L2-English learners are more successful than L1-Mandarin L2-English learners in detecting missing –s with definite plurals (these boat), while the two groups behave similarly with indefinite plurals (many boat). Given that definite plurals require plural marking in Korean but not in Mandarin, the second finding is consistent with L1-transfer. Overall, the findings show that learners are able to overcome morphological incongruency and acquire novel uses of L2 morphemes.

Mass Nouns and Count Nouns in German

1969 ◽  
Vol 4 ◽  
pp. 19
Author(s):  
Madison S. Beeler
Keyword(s):  
Mass Nouns ◽  
Count Nouns

scholarly journals Children’s Early Understanding of Mass–Count Syntax: Individuation, Lexical Content, and the Number Asymmetry Hypothesis

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Barner ◽  
Jesses Snedeker
Keyword(s):  
Word Meaning ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Mass Nouns ◽  
Count Nouns ◽  
Lexical Content

How does mass–count syntax affect word meaning? Many theorists haveproposed that count nouns denote individuals, whereas mass nouns do not(Bloom, 1999; Gordon, 1985; Link, 1983), a proposal that is supported byprototypical examples of each (table, water). However, studies of quantityjudgments in 4-year-olds and adults demonstrate that some mass nouns(furniture) do denote individuals (Barner & Snedeker, 2005). This isproblematic for bootstrapping theories that posit one-to-onesyntax-semantics mappings (individual ↔ count; nonindividual ↔ mass; Bloom,1999), unless mass nouns that denote individuals are late-learnedexceptions to mappings. This article investigates this possibility in3-year-olds and adults using 2 methods: word extension and quantityjudgment. Both methods indicate that novel mass nouns can denoteindividuals in both age groups, and thus fail to support simplifiedsyntax-semantics mappings. Also, differences between word extension andquantity judgment raise the possibility that the tasks measure differentunderlying knowledge.

scholarly journals Bare singular and bare mass nouns in Brazilian Portuguese: First results of an empirical survey

2010 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 75 ◽  
Author(s):  
João Vinicius de A. Braga ◽  
Laiza de Sena ◽  
Ruan Mariano ◽  
Roberta Pires de Oliveira
Keyword(s):  
Brazilian Portuguese ◽  
Bare Mass ◽  
Empirical Survey ◽  
Mass Nouns ◽  
First Results

COUNT AND MASS NOUNS

2013 ◽  
pp. 191-198
Author(s):  
David Lee
Keyword(s):  
Mass Nouns

Measuring stuff and process

2019 ◽  
pp. 37-60
Author(s):  
Alexis Wellwood
Keyword(s):  
Central Thesis ◽  
Measure Function ◽  
Mass Nouns ◽  
Subsequent Chapter ◽  
Verb Phrases ◽  
Monotonicity Constraint ◽  
Function Selection

This chapter begins the book’s survey of non-canonical comparatives, and suggests a degree-based interpretation of the expression “much” which occurs implicitly as a morphosyntactic part of “more”, and explicitly in phrases like “as much” and “too much”. Focusing on comparatives targeting mass nouns like “mud” and atelic verb phrases like “run (in the park)”, a primary goal of this analysis is to capture both the variability and constraints (especially a hypothesized “monotonicity constraint”) on measure function selection in such cases. In line with the central thesis of the book, this chapter emphasizes the role that the order-theoretic properties (when present) of a predicate plays in fixing the available dimension(s) for comparison in a given nominal or verbal comparative. The success of this analysis suggests considering whether it can apply to the canonical comparatives, which is explored in the subsequent chapter.

Adjectival Nominalization

On Goodness ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 217-262
Author(s):  
David Conan Wolfsdorf
Keyword(s):  
Lattice Structure ◽  
Mass Noun ◽  
Gradable Adjective ◽  
Mass Nouns ◽  
Count Nouns ◽  
Standard Of Comparison ◽  
Semantic Properties ◽  
Second Degree

Chapter 6 focuses on the semantics and metaphysical implications of the semantics of the adjectival nominalization “goodness.” Adjectival nominalizations of the form “F-ness” are almost always mass nouns. The mass noun “goodness” derives gradability of a kind from the gradable adjective that it incorporates. So “goodness” is a gradable adjectival nominalization. Mass nouns are distinguished from count nouns on the basis of two semantic properties, called “semantic cumulativity” and “semantic divisibility.” The denotations of mass nouns are then interpreted in terms of the mereological structure of a join semi-lattice. The denotation of gradable mass nouns incorporate scalar as well as mereological structure. In the case of “goodness,” the elements at the base of the lattice structure are instances of goodness. An instance of goodness is a so-called qua quantitative trope, precisely one degree of purpose serving qua exceeding a second degree of purpose serving, where the latter is a standard of comparison.

7 Mass Nouns and Mass Terms in Montague Grammar

1979 ◽  
pp. 263-286
Author(s):  
Michael Bennett
Keyword(s):  
Mass Nouns ◽  
Montague Grammar ◽  
Mass Terms
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document