Implications on Nominal Argument Formation in General

2020 ◽  
pp. 306-333
Author(s):  
Li Julie Jiang
Keyword(s):  
Classifier System ◽  
Classifier Languages ◽  
General Classifier ◽  
Plural Marking ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Nominal Arguments

Chapter 6 discusses the relationship between argument formation in classifier languages and argument formation more generally. It begins with a discussion on the variable and uniform properties concerning nominal arguments in NMLs and shows that their variation can be captured by two of the parameters in classifier languages proposed in Chapter 5. It further shows that the variation in whether nouns are coded as kinds or properties can differentiate classifier languages from NMLs. It then discusses languages, which have neither a general classifier system (unlike Mandarin or Nuosu Yi) nor obligatory singular/plural marking on nouns (unlike English or Hindi). Building on previous analyses, this chapter analyzes Yudja as a language with a silent Cl and Lhasa Tibetan a language with a silent Div. This chapter allows us to further update the variation and typology of nominal argument formation and to predict more types of languages.

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.

scholarly journals ZCS: A Zeroth Level Classifier System

1994 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stewart W. Wilson
Keyword(s):  
Genetic Algorithm ◽  
Action Selection ◽  
Q Learning ◽  
Classifier System ◽  
General Classifier ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Temporary Memory

A basic classifier system, ZCS, is presented that keeps much of Holland's original framework but simplifies it to increase understandability and performance. ZCS's relation to Q-learning is brought out, and their performances compared in environments of two difficulty levels. Extensions to ZCS are proposed for temporary memory, better action selection, more efficient use of the genetic algorithm, and more general classifier representation.

A new classifier-based plural morpheme in German Sign Language (DGS)

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 115-136
Author(s):  
Marjorie Herbert
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
Spatial Localization ◽  
Classifier System ◽  
Phonological Features ◽  
Small Set ◽  
Plural Marking ◽  
Quantifier Phrases ◽  
German Sign Language

Abstract German Sign Language (DGS) displays variation in the simple plural, the form of which is conditioned by classes of phonological features within the lexicon. As a consequence, the overt realization of the plural marker is restricted to a small set of nouns specified for the appropriate phonological features, while the rest are left bare (Pfau & Steinbach 2005, 2006; Steinbach 2012). Pfau & Steinbach (2005) report a number of ‘alternative pluralization strategies’ available as repairs for this underspecification, including classifier constructions, spatial localization, and number and quantifier phrases. I propose a previously undescribed mechanism for plural marking, the ‘classifier-based plural morpheme’ (CLP), grammaticalized from the classifier system into a morpheme in the grammars of individual DGS signers. Elicitation data show that this morpheme attaches only to nouns which are specified for phonological features that restrict the realization of the canonical plural marker, adding a new option to the range of pluralization strategies available.

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.

Is a Learning Classifier System a Type of Neural Network?

1994 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 19-36 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert E. Smith ◽  
H. Brown Cribbs
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Adaptive Genetic Algorithm ◽  
Diverse Population ◽  
Distinguishing Characteristic ◽  
Classifier Systems ◽  
Learning Classifier System ◽  
Classifier System ◽  
System A ◽  
Learning Classifier ◽  
The Relationship

This paper suggests a simple analogy between learning classifier systems (LCSs) and neural networks (NNs). By clarifying the relationship between LCSs and NNs, the paper indicates how techniques from one can be utilized in the other. The paper points out that the primary distinguishing characteristic of the LCS is its use of a co-adaptive genetic algorithm (GA), where the end product of evolution is a diverse population of individuals that cooperate to perform useful computation. This stands in contrast to typical GA/NN schemes, where a population of networks is employed to evolve a single, optimized network. To fully illustrate the LCS/NN analogy used in this paper, an LCS-like NN is implemented and tested. The test is constructed to run parallel to a similar GA/NN study that did not employ a co-adaptive GA. The test illustrates the LCS/NN analogy and suggests an interesting new method for applying GAs in NNs. Final comments discuss extensions of this work and suggest how LCS and NN studies can further benefit each other.

Introduction

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Li Julie Jiang
Keyword(s):  
The Other ◽  
Classifier Languages ◽  
Bare Nominal ◽  
Definition Of ◽  
Nominal Arguments

This chapter offers a brief introduction to the book. It provides general criteria for the definition of a “classifier language” and offers an overview of the properties along which classifier languages may vary. After briefly discussing two ongoing debates regarding nominal arguments—one is about the syntax of nominal arguments and the other is about the reference of bare nominal argument terms—this chapter provides a brief summary of each of the remaining chapters.

Classifiers, Quantifiers and Class Nouns in Hmong

1993 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-51 ◽  
Author(s):  
Walter Bisang
Keyword(s):  
Present Article ◽  
Three Dimensional ◽  
Classifier System ◽  
Classifier Languages

Four operations of nominal concretization are crucial for presenting a typology of classifier languages: individualization, classification, relationalization (possession), and referentialization. The first three of these operations are at work in the Hmong classifier system. The development of classifiers is described in connection with the degree of grammaticalization which will be measured by the three parameters of [± exact], [± entity], and cohesion. These parameters will be arranged in a three-dimensional continuum (cf. Fig. II.) which leads to the following evolutional steps of increasing grammaticalization: nouns, class nouns, quantifiers, intrinsic quantifiers (to be defined in the present article), and classifiers.

The Semantics of Chinese Noun Phrases

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xuping Li
Keyword(s):  
Noun Phrases ◽  
General Area ◽  
Single Issue ◽  
Kind Terms ◽  
Classifier System ◽  
Semantic Notion ◽  
General Classifier ◽  
Bare Nouns ◽  
Syntactic Context ◽  
Object Level

Chinese nominal phrases are typologically distinct from their English counterparts in many aspects. Most strikingly, Chinese is featured with a general classifier system, which not only helps to categorize nouns but also has to do with the issue of quantification. Moreover, it has neither noncontroversial plural markers nor (in)definite markers. Its bare nouns are allowed in various argument positions. As a consequence, Chinese is sometimes characterized as a classifier language, as an argumental language, or as an article-less language. One of the questions arising is whether these apparently different but related properties underscore a single issue: that it is the semantics of nouns that is responsible for all these peculiarities of Mandarin nominal phrases. It has been claimed that Chinese nouns are born as kind terms, from which the object-level readings can be derived, being either existential or definite. Nevertheless, the existence of classifiers in Chinese is claimed to be independent of the kind denotation of its bare nouns. Within the general area of noun semantics, a number of other semantic issues have generated much interest. One is concerned with the availability of the mass/count distinction in Mandarin nominal phrases. Another issue has to do with the semantics of classifiers. Are classifiers required by the noun semantics or the numeral semantics, when occurring in the syntactic context of Numeral/Quantifier-Classifier-Noun? Finally, how is the semantic notion of definiteness understood in article-less languages like Mandarin Chinese? Should its denotation be characterized with uniqueness or familiarity?

Morphology in Dravidian Languages

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Amritavalli
Keyword(s):  
Verbal Morphology ◽  
Number Agreement ◽  
Light Verbs ◽  
Classifier System ◽  
Dative Case ◽  
Serial Verbs ◽  
Aspect Markers ◽  
Plural Marking

The Dravidian languages are rich in nominal and verbal morphology. Three nominal gender systems are extant. Pronouns are gender-number marked demonstratives. Gender-number agreement in the DP suggests an incipient classifier system. Oblique cases are layered on a genitive stem; iterative genitive and plural marking is seen. Genitive and dative case mark possession/ experience (there is no verb have), and the adjectival use of property nouns. Verbs inflect for agreement (in affirmative finite clauses), aspect, causativity, and benefactivity/ reflexivity. Light verbs are ubiquitous as aspect markers and predicate formatives, as are serial verbs. Variants of the quotative verb serve as complementizers and as topic and evidential particles. Disjunctive particles serve as question particles; conjunctive and disjunctive particles on question words derive quantifiers. Reduplication occurs in quantification and anaphor-formation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document