Bare classifiers and definiteness

2011 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 168-193 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Simpson ◽  
Hooi Ling Soh ◽  
Hiroki Nomoto
Keyword(s):  
Mandarin Chinese ◽  
Classifier Languages ◽  
Elicitation Study ◽  
Numeral Classifier ◽  
Sinitic Languages ◽  
Definite Reference

In some (numeral) classifier languages, a classifier may occur “bare” (i.e. with a noun but without a numeral) and the nominal expression receives a definite interpretation. On the basis of evidence from Cantonese and Mandarin Chinese, Cheng and Sybesma (1999) hypothesize that classifier languages exhibit either the bare classifier or the bare noun pattern for definite reference, but not both. To evaluate this hypothesis against more typologically diverse languages, a parallel elicitation study of three non-Sinitic languages was conducted — Vietnamese, Hmong and Bangla — as well as two geographical varieties of Cantonese, focusing on the definite interpretation of bare classifier and bare noun patterns. The results show that although the use of bare classifier patterns for definite reference is a cross-linguistically connected phenomenon, there is more variation than previously described in the alternation between definite bare classifier and bare noun patterns, and that the preference for one pattern over another may receive functional/ pragmatic explanations.

Numeral base, numeral classifier, and noun

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 511-556
Author(s):  
Marc Allassonnière-Tang ◽  
One-Soon Her
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Analysis ◽  
Mandarin Chinese ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Language Contact ◽  
Classifier Languages ◽  
Detailed Statistical Analysis ◽  
Numeral Classifier ◽  
Main Factor

Abstract Greenberg (1990a: 292) suggests that classifiers (clf) and numeral bases tend to harmonize in word order, i.e. a numeral (Num) with a base-final [n base] order appears in a clf-final [Num clf] order, e.g. in Mandarin Chinese, san1-bai3 (three hundred) ‘300’ and san1 zhi1 gou3 (three clf animal dog) ‘three dogs’, and a base-initial [base n] Num appears in a clf-initial [clf Num] order, e.g. in Kilivila (Eastern Malayo-Polynesian, Oceanic), akatu-tolu (hundred three) ‘300’ and na-tolu yena (clf animal-three fish) ‘three fish’. In non-classifier languages, base and noun (N) tend to harmonize in word order. We propose that harmonization between clf and N should also obtain. A detailed statistical analysis of a geographically and phylogenetically weighted set of 400 languages shows that the harmonization of word order between numeral bases, classifiers, and nouns is statistically highly significant, as only 8.25% (33/400) of the languages display violations, which are mostly located at the meeting points between head-final and head-initial languages, indicating that language contact is the main factor in the violations to the probabilistic universals.

Unifying two general licensors of completive adverbials in syntax

Linguistics ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 371-411
Author(s):  
Niina Ning Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Mandarin Chinese ◽  
Special Form ◽  
Functional Projection ◽  
Classifier Languages ◽  
Resultative Construction ◽  
Numeral Classifier

Abstract It is well-known that an agent-oriented adverbial is syntactically licensed by a functional projection in which an agent is base generated. How is a completive adverbial, such as in three minutes, licensed? It has been noted that such an adverbial is licensed by either a resultative or an incremental theme in the form of a nominal that is quantified by a numeral (and a classifier in numeral classifier languages). Both licensing conditions encode a bounded scale. This paper argues that the nominal in the special form can be analyzed as an element hosted in a ResultP, and thus the two conditions are also unified syntactically. The evidence for the analysis comes from the syntactic similarities and interactions between such a nominal and the resultative in a VV resultative construction in Mandarin Chinese.

Bare classifier/noun alternations in the Jinyun (Wu) variety of Chinese and the encoding of definiteness

Linguistics ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 55 (2) ◽  
pp. 305-331 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew Simpson
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Study ◽  
Current Paper ◽  
Definite Article ◽  
Personal Relations ◽  
Classifier Languages ◽  
Individual Entity ◽  
Bare Nouns ◽  
Numeral Classifier ◽  
Cross Reference ◽  
Definite Reference

Abstract Certain numeral classifier languages allow for the combination of a classifier and a noun to represent a definite individual/entity when no numeral accompanies the classifier (Vietnamese, Bangla, Oriya, Hmong, varieties of Chinese). In many instances, such a patterning alternates with the use of a bare noun to reference definite individuals/entities, but there has been little systematic study of such alternations, and whether the “bare classifier” and “bare noun” patterns are in free variation or encode different aspects of definite reference. The current paper argues for the latter conclusion with a detailed study of the Jinyun variety of Chinese, showing that bare classifier and bare noun patterns are used to highlight different aspects of “definiteness.” The bare classifier pattern dominates cases of anaphoric definite reference, bridging cross-reference, reference to salient visible entities and non-speaker kin terms and personal relations, while bare nouns are used predominantly for individuals and entities perceived to be specifically unique or directly connected to the speaker. This distribution interestingly shows strong parallels to the way that languages with more than one definite article use such elements for definite reference.

Variation in Classifier Languages

2020 ◽  
pp. 255-305
Author(s):  
Li Julie Jiang
Keyword(s):  
Linguistic Variation ◽  
Classifier Languages ◽  
Bare Nouns ◽  
Bare Nominal ◽  
The One ◽  
Numeral Classifier ◽  
Nominal Arguments

Chapter 5 develops a uniform account of bare nominal arguments (i.e., bare numeral classifier phrases, bare classifier phrases, bare nouns) in classifier languages. It achieves that by extending the scope of discussion to more classifier languages. It starts with three points on which Mandarin and Nuosu Yi differ and which make this comparison interesting from the perspective of building a theory of cross-linguistic variation. Their differences are: (i) whether or not they have the function category D in their grammar, (ii) whether or not they freely allow numeral-less classifier phrases to appear in argument positions, as a result of applying covert argument formation operations unrestrictedly, and (iii) whether or not they allow one-deletion from the [one Cl N] phrase in the PF. Three parameters based on these differences account for the variation.

Nominal Arguments and Language Variation

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Li Julie Jiang
Keyword(s):  
Theoretical Investigation ◽  
Empirical Data ◽  
Language Variation ◽  
Noun Phrases ◽  
Detailed Examination ◽  
Prima Facie ◽  
Number Marking ◽  
Classifier Languages ◽  
Numeral Classifier ◽  
Nominal Arguments

This book investigates nominal arguments in classifier languages. A long-held claim is that classifier languages do not have overt article determiners (D). This book, however, brings to the forefront the theoretical investigation on the typologically unique Nuosu Yi, a classifier language that will be shown to have an overt article determiner. By comparing nominal arguments in Nuosu Yi to those in Mandarin, the book provides a parametric account of variation among classifier languages and extends the account to argument formation in general. This book begins with a detailed examination of bare numeral classifier phrases in Mandarin by comparing them with bare numeral noun phrases in number marking languages, such as English, French, and Russian. The book argues for a unified structure of bare numeral containing phrases with no reference to D across languages as well as for a D-less structure for various types of nominal arguments in Mandarin. It further studies nominal argument formation in Nuosu Yi. The facts from Nuosu Yi essentially alter the landscape of empirical data and constitute an immediate (prima facie) challenge to the proposed analysis of nominal arguments based on the Mandarin data. This book argues that despite the fact that Nuosu Yi has an overt article determiner, this should not force us to change anything about the proposed analysis of nominal arguments. Lastly, the book puts the analysis of Mandarin and Nuosu Yi nominal arguments in a broader, cross-linguistic perspective and develops a parametric account of variation in nominal argument formation in general.

scholarly journals Measure words and classifiers

2017 ◽  
Vol 96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jenny Doetjes
Keyword(s):  
Preliminary Evidence ◽  
Units Of Measurement ◽  
Classifier Languages ◽  
Numeral Classifier

This paper investigates the relation between measure words and mensural classifiers in numeral classifier languages. Based on data from three numeral classifier languages (Mandarin, Mokilese and Taba), the paper gives some preliminary evidence that measure words can be both classifier-like and noun-like in numeral classifier languages. This observation is discussed in the light of Rothstein’s (2009, 2011) distinction between measuring and counting, Krifka’s (1995) numeral based analysis of numeral classifier languages and Chierchia’s (1997) proposal of treating nouns in classifier languages as kinds. Crucially, if the measure words are treated as nouns, one has to take into account that the atomic entities corresponding to units of measurement typically overlap. This is problematic for the type of interpretation that Chierchia (1997) assigns to kinds, as the kinds corresponding to different units of time would be indistinguishable. Other approaches will need a non-overlap condition on counting structures.

scholarly journals The grammatical distinction between count nouns and mass nouns in Mandarin Chinese

2020 ◽  
Vol 62 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-76
Author(s):  
Nastazja Stoch
Keyword(s):  
Mandarin Chinese ◽  
Count Noun ◽  
Ontological Status ◽  
Mass Noun ◽  
Numeral Classifiers ◽  
Mass Nouns ◽  
Count Nouns ◽  
Classifier Languages

Abstract The purpose of this paper is to prove the Mass Noun Hypothesis wrong. The hypothesis claims that all common nouns in classifier languages like Mandarin Chinese are mass nouns. The objection against it consists in displaying its implausible deduction, where false conclusions have been drawn due to relying on the grammar of English, which is incongruent with the grammar of Chinese. Consequently, this paper defends the Count Noun Thesis, stating that in Chinese there are count as well as mass nouns. In support of this statement, first, the typology of numeral classifiers had to be established, which resulted in gathering and completing all the reasons to distinguish classifiers from measure words. After only this necessary differentiation was made, it was possible to show that the count/mass distinction exists in Mandarin Chinese. That is, count nouns by default have only one classifier, with certain disclaimers. Apart from that, count nouns, as in every language, may undergo some measurement with measure words. Mass nouns, however, in the context of quantification may appear only with measure words, but not with classifiers. These conditions naturally follow from the ontological status of the two types of nouns’ referents, i.e. bounded objects denoted by count nouns, and scattered substances denoted by mass nouns.

scholarly journals Do classifiers predict differences in cognitive processing? A study of nominal classification in Mandarin Chinese

2010 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 177-190 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mahesh Srinivasan
Keyword(s):  
Mandarin Chinese ◽  
Cognitive Processing ◽  
Visual Display ◽  
English Speakers ◽  
Search Performance ◽  
Numeral Classifiers ◽  
Classifier Languages ◽  
Nominal Classification ◽  
Mandarin Speakers ◽  
And Function

AbstractIn English, numerals modify nouns directly (two tables), but in Mandarin Chinese, they modify numeral classifiers that are associated with nouns (two flat-thing table). Classifiers define a system of categories based on dimensions such as animacy, shape, and function (Adams and Conklin 1973; Dixon 1986), but do these categories predict differences in cognitive processing? The present study explored possible effects of classifier categories in a speeded task preventing significant deliberation and strategic responding. Participants counted objects in a visual display that were intermixed with distractor objects that had either the same Mandarin classifier or a different one. Classifier categories predicted Mandarin speakers' search performance, as Mandarin speakers showed greater interference from distractors with the same classifier than did Russian or English speakers. This result suggests that classifier categories may affect cognitive processing, and may have the potential to influence how speakers of classifier languages perform cognitive tasks in everyday situations. Two theoretical accounts of the results are discussed.

scholarly journals Classifiers as Count Syntax: Individuation and Measurement in the Acquisition of Mandarin

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peggy Li ◽  
David Barner ◽  
Becky H. Huang
Keyword(s):  
Mandarin Chinese ◽  
Empirical Test ◽  
Test Case ◽  
Older Children ◽  
Syntactic Knowledge ◽  
Mass Nouns ◽  
Count Nouns ◽  
Classifier Languages ◽  
Or Groups ◽  
English Speaking

The distinction between mass nouns (e.g., butter) and count nouns (e.g.,table) offers a test case for asking how the syntax and semantics ofnatural language are related, and how children exploit syntax-semanticsmappings when acquiring language. Virtually no studies have examined thisdistinction in classifier languages (e.g., Mandarin Chinese) due to thewidespread assumption that such languages lack mass-count syntax. However,Cheng and Sybesma (1998) argue that Mandarin encodes the mass-count at theclassifier level: classifiers can be categorized as “mass-classifiers” or“count-classifiers.” Mass and count classifiers differ in semanticinterpretation and occur in different syntactic constructions. The currentstudy is first an empirical test of Cheng and Sybesma’s hypothesis, andsecond, a test of the acquisition of putative mass and count classifiers bychildren learning Mandarin. Experiments 1 and 2 asked whethercount-classifiers select individuals and whether mass classifiers selectportions of stuff or groups of individual things. Adult Mandarin-speakersindeed showed this pattern of interpretation, while 4- to 6-year-olds hadnot fully mastered the distinction. Experiment 3 tested participants’syntactic sensitivity by asking them to match two syntactic constructions(one that supported the mass or portion reading and one that did not) totwo contrasting choices (a portion of an object and a whole object). Adevelopmental trend in syntactic knowledge was observed: adults were nearperfect and the older children were more likely than the younger childrento correctly match the contrasting phrases to their correspondingreferents. Thus, in three experiments we find support for Cheng andSybesma’s analysis, but also that children master the syntax and semanticsof Mandarin classifiers much later than English-speaking children acquireknowledge of the English mass-count distinction.

NP-ellipsis and numeral classifiers in Korean

Linguistics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
So-Young Park
Keyword(s):  
Controversial Subject ◽  
Numeral Classifiers ◽  
Internal Argument ◽  
Complementary Distribution ◽  
Classifier Languages ◽  
Syntactic Status ◽  
Numeral Classifier ◽  
Additional Support ◽  
Pf Deletion

Abstract The syntactic status of numeral classifiers with respect to NP-ellipsis in classifier languages has been a controversial subject in many recent discussions. Addressing this issue, this article argues that Korean numeral classifiers can serve as functional heads that license NP-ellipsis via PF-deletion. A null NP appearing in a numeral classifier context cannot be identified with any other null categories, such as a pro or a null NP pro-form. This null NP induces a different reading from a pro, especially when a possessor argument is stacked with a numeral classifier construction. Unlike an NP pro-form, it allows the extraction of an internal argument and exhibits a complementary distribution with kes ‘one’, a visible counterpart of a Korean NP pro-form. This article’s claim gains additional support from the asymmetries in NP-ellipsis of a uy-marked numeral classifier, contingent on its ambiguity, such as a ‘quantity’ or ‘property’ interpretation. In addition, the distribution of bare numerals in relation to the NP pro-form kes offers further evidence, reinforcing the claim.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document