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.

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.

On the semantic properties of mass and count nouns in Guajajára (Tenetehára)

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 366-381
Author(s):  
Pilar Chamorro ◽  
Fábio Bonfim Duarte
Keyword(s):  
Number Marking ◽  
Mass Nouns ◽  
Count Nouns ◽  
Units Of Measurement ◽  
Classifier Languages ◽  
Semantic Properties

Abstract In this paper we show that Guajajára has grammaticalized the distinction between mass and count nouns, but that the coding of this distinction is different from the systems of coding in classifier languages, number-marking languages, and number-neutral languages (Chierchia 1998a, 1998b, 2010; Wilhelm 2008). As a result, we conclude that Guajajára presents a challenge to the tripartite classification of languages proposed in Chierchia’s work, since Guajajára number marking is non-inflectional and optional when plural is already expressed by other quantificational expressions. Furthermore, in Guajajára notional mass nouns can pluralize and directly combine with numerals without the mediation of container or measure constructions in contexts where conventional and non-conventional container and units of measurement are implied. This last observation suggests that coercion is not a mechanism that operates in this language.

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.

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.

Multiple facets of constructional Arabic gender and ‘functional universalism’ in the DP

2018 ◽  
pp. 67-92 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdelkader Fassi Fehri
Keyword(s):  
South Asian ◽  
Speech Act ◽  
Linguistic Variation ◽  
Nominal Property ◽  
Classifier Languages ◽  
Or Groups

Rather than being confined to an intrinsic nominal property (of the low n), and expressing sex or animacy, gender is shown to be polysemous, contributing ‘unorthodox’ meanings such as quantity, perspective, evaluation, performativity, and interacting with various layers and categories in the nominal domain. It is then constructional, and distributed over the various syntactic projections, including RootP, nP, DivP, GroupP, and SAP (Speech Act Phrase). Appealing to data from Arabic varieties shows that gender plays the same role played by classifiers in South Asian classifier languages. Two alternating (and equivalent) modes of unitization are used in forming individual units or groups: (a) morphological gender builds singulatives or pluratives, and (b) pseudo-partitives contribute semi-lexical classifier structures. Close interactions between gender, classifier, and number (in addition to other interactions) make it difficult to account for linguistic variation through traditional typologies, and open the room for a more appropriate ‘functional universalism’.

All notional mass nouns are count nouns in Yudja

2015 ◽  
Vol 24 ◽  
pp. 534 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suzi Lima
Keyword(s):  
Linguistic Expression ◽  
Main Claim ◽  
Fundamental Properties ◽  
Mass Nouns ◽  
Count Nouns ◽  
Quantity Judgments

<p>This paper investigates the linguistic expression of individuation and counting in Yudja (Juruna family), a Tupi language spoken in Brazil. Relying on the principles of mereotopology (Casati and Varzi 1999, Varzi 2007), the main claim of this paper is that in Yudja all nouns can be used as count nouns. That is, in Yudja maximal self-connected concrete portions of a kind can be considered as atoms and can be counted. This claim is based on two fundamental properties of Yudja. First, all notional mass nouns can be directly combined with numerals. Second, the results of quantity judgments studies with Yudja children and adults suggest that all nouns can be directly combined with count-quantifiers and that count-quantifiers are necessarily interpreted as referring to the number of concrete portions. These properties together suggest that all nouns in Yudja are interpreted as count nouns.</p>

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document