Quantity Systems and the Count/Mass Distinction

doi:10.1017/9781316823774.004

2 - Quantity Systems and the Count/Mass Distinction

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 June 2021

Jenny Doetjes

Edited by

Hana Filip

Show author details

Hana Filip: Affiliation:
Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf

Book contents

Get access

Summary

This chapter analyses the connections between quantity expressions, which, in English, include expressions such as three, several, a few, much, and many, and the mass/count distinction. Based on cross-linguistic evidence from Brazilian Portuguese, English, Mandarin, and Yudja, amongst others, Doetjes argues that quantity expressions can be exhaustively subdivided into two classes: count quantity expressions, which presuppose the availability of units that can be counted, and non-count quantity expressions, which do not presuppose the availability of units that can be counted. Anti-count quantity expressions, which presuppose the absence of units that can be counted, are subsumed under the class of non-count quantity expressions. On the basis of this distinction, Doetjes argues that while we may expect to find languages in which all nouns have a count denotation (Yudja being a good candidate), it is not predicted to be possible for there to be languages in which all nouns have a mass denotation.

Keywords

count and non-count quantity expressions anti-count quantity expressions Brazilian Portuguese Mandarin Yudja English

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: Countability in Natural Language , pp. 52 - 84
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316823774.004 [Opens in a new window]
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bach, Elke, Jelinek, Eloise, Kratzer, Angelika, and Partee, Barbara (2013). Quantification in Natural Languages, Vol. 54. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar

Bale, Alan, and Barner, David (2009). The interpretation of functional heads: Using comparatives to explore the mass/count distinction. Journal of Semantics 26.3: 217–252.Google Scholar

Bale, Alan, and Coon, Jessica (2014). Classifiers are for numerals, not for nouns: Consequences for the mass/count distinction. Linguistic Inquiry 45.4: 695–707.CrossRef Google Scholar

Barner, David, and Snedeker, Jesse (2005). Quantity judgments and individuation: Evidence that mass nouns count. Cognition 97: 41–46.Google Scholar

Beviláqua, Kayron (2014). Nomes nus e nomes plurais: Um experimento sobre a distinção contável-massivo no PB. MA Thesis, Universidade Federal do Paraná.Google Scholar

Beviláqua, Kayron, and de Oliveira, Roberta Pires (2014). Brazilian bare phrases and referentiality: Evidences from an experiment. Revista Letras 90: 253–275.CrossRef Google Scholar

Borer, Hagit (2005). Structuring Sense Volume i: In Name Only. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Brooks, Neon, Pogue, Amanda, and Barner, David (2011). Piecing together numerical language: Children’s use of default units in early counting and quantification. Developmental Science 14: 44–57.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Cabredo Hofherr, Patricia (forthcoming). Nominal number morphology. In Hofherr, Patricia Cabredo and Doetjes, Jenny (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Grammatical Number. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Chao, Yuen Ren (1968). A Grammar of Spoken Chinese. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar

Cheng, Chung-Ying (1973). Comments on Moravcsik’s paper. In Hintikka, Jaakko, Moravcsik, Julius, and Suppes, Patrick (eds.), Approaches to Natural Language, pp. 286–288. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRef Google Scholar

Cheng, Lisa, and Sybesma, Rint (1998). Yi-wan tang, yi-ge tang: Classifiers and massifiers. The Tsing Hua Journal of Chinese Studies 28.3: 385–412.Google Scholar

Cheng, Lisa, and Sybesma, Rint (1999). Bare and not so bare nouns and the structure of NP. Linguistic Inquiry 30: 509–542.CrossRef Google Scholar

Cheng, Lisa, and Sybesma, Rint (2005). Classifiers in four varieties of Chinese. In Cinque, Guglielmo and Kayne, Richard S. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Syntax, pp. 259–292. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Cheng, Lisa, Doetjes, Jenny, and Sybesma, Rint (2008). How universal is the universal grinder? In van Koppen, Marjo and Botma, Bert (eds.), Linguistics in the Netherlands 2008, pp. 50–62. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Cheng, Lisa, Doetjes, Jenny, Sybesma, Rint, and Zamparelli, Roberto (2012). On the interpretation of number and classifiers. Italian Journal of Linguistics 24: 175–194.Google Scholar

Chierchia, Gennaro (1998a). Plurality of mass nouns and the notion of “semantic parameter.” In Rothstein, Susan (ed.), Events and Grammar: Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy Vol. 7, pp. 53–103. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRef Google Scholar

Chierchia, Gennaro (1998b). Reference to kinds across languages. Natural Language Semantics 6.4: 339–405.Google Scholar

Chierchia, Gennaro (2010). Mass nouns, vagueness and semantic variation. Synthese 174.1: 99–149.CrossRef Google Scholar

Corbett, Greville (2000). Number. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Cowper, Elizabeth, and Hall, Daniel Currie (2012). Aspects of individuation. In Massam, Diane (ed.), Count and Mass across Languages, pp. 27–53. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Deal, Amy Rose (2017). Countability distinctions and semantic variation. Natural Language Semantics 25: 125–171.CrossRef Google Scholar

Dehaene, Stanislas (1997). The Number Sense. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Denny, J. Peter (1986). The semantic role of noun classifiers. In Craig, Colette (ed.), Noun Classes and Categorization, pp. 279–308. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Di Sciullo, Anna-Maria, and Williams, Edwin S. (1987). On the Definition of Word. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Doetjes, Jenny (1997). Quantifiers and Selection. On the Distribution of Quantifying Expressions in French, Dutch and English. The Hague: HAG.Google Scholar

Doetjes, Jenny (2008). Adjectives and degree modification. In McNally, Louise and Kennedy, Christopher (eds.), Adjectives and Adverbs: Syntax, Semantics and Discourse, pp. 123–155. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Doetjes, Jenny (2010). Mismatches in the lexicon. Paper presented at Conference on Empirical, Theoretical and Computational Approaches to Countability in Natural Language, Bochum.Google Scholar

Doetjes, Jenny (2012). Count/mass distinctions across languages. In Maienborn, Claudia, von Heusinger, Klaus, and Portner, Paul (eds.), Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, pp. 2559–2580. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar

Doetjes, Jenny (2017a). Measure words and classifiers. Revista Letras 96: 291–308.CrossRef Google Scholar

Doetjes, Jenny (2017b). The count/mass distinction in grammar and cognition. Annual Review of Linguistics 3: 199–217.Google Scholar

Doetjes, Jenny (2017c). Noun phrase. In Sybesma, Rint (ed.), Encyclopedia of Chinese Language and Linguistics. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar

Dryer, Matthew (2005). Coding of nominal plurality. In Haspelmath, Martin, Dryer, Matthew S., Gil, David, and Comrie, Bernard (eds.), The World Atlas of Language Structures, pp. 138–141. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Farkas, Donka, and de Swart, Henriëtte (2010). The semantics and pragmatics of plurals. Semantics and Pragmatics 3: 1–54.Google Scholar

Feigenson, Lisa, Dehaene, Stanislas, and Spelke, Elizabeth (2004). Core systems of number. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 8: 307–314.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Ferdinand, Astrid (1996). The Development of Functional Categories. PhD Thesis, Leiden University.Google Scholar

Ferreira, Marcelo (forthcoming). Bare nominals in Brazilian Portuguese. In Cabredo Hofherr, Patricia and Doetjes, Jenny (eds.), Oxford Handbook of Grammatical Number. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Franz, Donald G., and Russell, Norma J. (1995). Blackfoot Dictionary of Stems, Roots and Affixes, 2nd ed. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar

Gathercole, Virginia (1985). “He has too much hard questions.” The acquisition of the linguistic mass–count distinction in much and many. Journal of Child Language 12: 395–415.Google Scholar

Gillon, Brendan S. (2012). Mass terms. Philosophy Compass 7: 712–730.Google Scholar

Grimm, Scott (2012). Number and Individuation. PhD Dissertation, Stanford University.Google Scholar

Grimm, Scott (2014). Individuating the abstract. Paper presented at Sinn und Bedeutung 18, University of the Basque Country, Vitoria, Spain.Google Scholar

Grimm, Scott (2018). Grammatical number and the scale of individuation. Language 94.3: 527–574.Google Scholar

Grinevald, Colette (2005). Classifiers. In Lehmann, C., Booij, G., and Mugdan, J. (eds.), Morphology: A Handbook on Inflection and Word Formation, pp. 1016–1031. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Hamon, Roparz (1984). Grammaire bretonne. Saint Malo: Al liamm.Google Scholar

Harrison, Sheldon, and Albert, Salich (1976). Mokilese Reference Grammar. Honolulu, HI: University Press of Hawaii.Google Scholar

Heim, Irene (1991). Artikel und Definitheit. In von Stechow, Arnim and Wunderlich, Dieter (eds.), Semantics: An International Handbook of Contemporary Research, pp. 487–535. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Hsieh, Miao-Ling (2008). The Internal Structure of Noun Phrases in Chinese. Books Series in Chinese Linguistics, No. 2. Taipei: Crane Publishing.Google Scholar

Iljic, Robert (1994). Quantification in Mandarin Chinese: Two markers of plurality. Linguistics 32: 91–116.Google Scholar

Krifka, Manfred (1992). Thematic relations as links between nominal reference and temporal constitution. In Sag, Ivan and Szabolcsi, Anna (eds.), Lexical Matters, pp. 29–53. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Google Scholar

Lehrer, Adrienne (1986). English classifier constructions. Lingua 68: 109–148.Google Scholar

Li, Peggy, Dunham, Yarrow, and Carey, Susan (2009). Of substance: The nature of language effects on entity construal. Cognitive Psychology 58: 487–524.Google Scholar

Li, XuPing (2013). Numeral Classifiers in Chinese. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar

Lima, Suzi (2010). About the count-mass distinction in Yudja: A description. In Rogers, Beth and Szakay, Anita (eds.), Papers for WSCLA 15: The Fifteenth Workshop on Structure and Constituency in Languages of the Americas, pp. 157–164. Ottawa: University of British Columbia Working Papers in Linguistics.Google Scholar

Lima, Suzi (2012). Numerals and the universal packager in Yudja (Tupi). Paper presented at SULA 6, Manchester, UK.Google Scholar

Lima, Suzi (2014). The Grammar of Individuation and Counting. PhD Thesis, University of Massachusetts Amherst.Google Scholar

Link, Godehard (1983). The logical analysis of plurals and mass terms: A lattice-theoretical approach. In Baüerle, Rainer, Schwarze, Christoph, and von Stechow, Arnim (eds.), Meaning, Use, and Interpretation of Language, pp. 302–323. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar

Lourenco, Stella F., and Longo, Matthew R. (2011). Origins and development of generalized magnitude representation. In Dehaene, Stanislas and Brannon, Elizabeth M. (eds.), Space, Time, and Number in the Brain: Searching for the Foundations of Mathematical Thought, pp. 225–244. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Mathieu, Éric (2012). On the mass/count distinction in Ojibwe. In Massam, Diane (ed.), Count and Mass across Languages, pp. 172–198. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Nicolas, David (2004). Is there anything characteristic about the meaning of a count noun? Revue de la lexicologie 18–19.Google Scholar

Ojeda, Almerindo (1993). Linguistic Individuals. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Google Scholar

Pelletier, Francis J., and Schubert, Lenhart (1989). Mass expressions. In Gabbay, D. and Guenthner, F. (eds.), Handbook of Philosophical Logic. Volume iv: Topics in the Philosophy of Language, pp. 327–408. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar

Pelletier, Francis J. (2012). Lexical nouns are both +mass and +count, but they are neither +mass nor +count. In Massam, Diane (ed.), Count and Mass across Languages, pp. 9–26. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef Google Scholar

Pica, Pierre, Lemer, Cathy, Izard, Véronique, and Dehaene, Stanislas (2004). Exact and approximate arithmetic in an Amazonian indigene group. Science 306: 499–503.CrossRef Google Scholar

Pinker, Steven (1995). The Language Instinct: The New Science of Language and Mind. London: Penguin.Google Scholar

Pires de Oliveira, Roberta, and Rothstein, Susan (2011). Bare singular noun phrases are mass in Brazilian Portuguese. Lingua 121: 2153–2175.Google Scholar

Rothstein, Susan (2009). Towards a grammar of counting and measuring. Paper presented at Workshop on Nominal and Verbal Plurality, Paris, France.Google Scholar

Rothstein, Susan (2010a). Individuating and measure readings of classifier constructions: Evidence from Modern Hebrew. Brill’s Annual of Afroasiatic Languages and Linguistics 1: 106–145.Google Scholar

Rothstein, Susan (2010b). The semantics of count nouns. In Aloni, Maria and Schulz, Katrin (eds.), Amsterdam Colloquium 2009, pp. 395–404. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar

Rothstein, Susan (2011). Numbers: counting, measuring and classifying. Paper presented at Sinn und Bedeutung 16, Utrecht University.Google Scholar

Rothstein, Susan (2017). Semantics for Counting and Measuring: Key Topics in Semantics and Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Rullmann, Hotze, and You, Aili (2006). General number and the semantics and pragmatics of indefinite bare nouns in Mandarin Chinese. In von Heusinger, K. and Turner, K. (eds.), Where Semantics Meets Pragmatics, pp. 175–196. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar

Sauerland, Uli (2003). A new semantics for number. In Young, R. and Zhou, Y. (eds.), Proceedings of SALT xiii, pp. 258–275. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar

Saussure, Ferdinand de (1916). Cours de linguistique générale. Edited by Bally, C. and Sechehaye, A., assisted by A. Riedlinger. Lausanne and Paris: Payot.Google Scholar

Schvarcz, Brigitta R., and Rothstein, Susan (2017). Hungarian classifier constructions, plurality and the mass–count distinction. In van den Hulst, Harry and Lipták, Anikó (eds.), Approaches to Hungarian: Volume 15: Papers from the 2015 Leiden Conference, pp. 103–208. Amsterdam and Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Shipley, Elizabeth F., and Shepperson, Barbara (1990). Countable entities: Developmental changes. Cognition 34: 109–136.Google Scholar

Smith-Stark, T. Cedric (1974). The plurality split. Paper presented at the Chicago Linguistic Society.Google Scholar

Spelke, Elizabeth, and Kinzler, Katherine (2007). Core knowledge. Developmental Science 10: 89–96.Google Scholar

Wiese, Heike (2003). Numbers, Language and the Human Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Wiggins, David (1980). Sameness and Substance. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar

Wilhelm, Andrea (2008). Bare nouns and number in Denë Suliné. Natural Language Semantics 16: 39–68.CrossRef Google Scholar

Wiltschko, Martina (2008). The syntax of non-inflectional plural marking. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 26: 639–694.Google Scholar

Wiltschko, Martina (2012). Decomposing the mass/count distinction: Evidence from languages that lack it. In Massam, Diane (ed.), Count and Mass across Languages, pp. 46–170. Oxford: Oxford University PressGoogle Scholar

Zhang, Niina Ning (2012). Numeral classifier structures in Mandarin Chinese. Ms., National Chung Cheng University.Google Scholar

Zhang, Niina Ning (2013). Classifier Structures in Mandarin Chinese. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar

Zucchi, Sandro, and White, Michael (2001). Twigs, sequences and the temporal constitution of predicates. Linguistics and Philosophy 24.2: 223–270.Google Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

Accessibility compliance for the HTML of this chapter is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.