Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-skzmx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-04T07:56:40.849Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Grammatical Number and the Scale of Individuation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2026

Scott Grimm
Scott Grimm*
Affiliation:
University of Rochester
*
[scott.grimm@rochester.edu]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A central debate in the literature on grammatical number systems and nominal semantics is whether the countable/noncountable contrast is ontologically based or ultimately arbitrary. This article examines this question in light of several languages that express three or more categories of grammatical number, in particular including a collective category containing nouns of an intermediate status between prototypical countable nouns and prototypical noncountable nouns. I connect this crosslinguistic data to psycholinguistic research on individuation, identifying several individuation types, that is, noun meanings organized into equivalence classes based on shared individuation properties. The individuation types themselves can be ordered, giving rise to a scale of individuation. I propose that the organization of grammatical number systems reflects the scale of individuation, effectively steering a middle course between ontological and grammatical accounts. This approach accounts for a range of grammatical number systems and makes broad predictions bearing on what possible grammatical number systems are.

Keywords

grammatical numbermass/countcollectivesindividuationanimacy

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 94 , Issue 3 , September 2018 , pp. 527 - 574
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 Linguistic Society of America

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Acquaviva, Paolo. 2008. Lexical plurals: A morphosemantic approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aissen, Judith. 2003. Differential object marking: Iconicity vs. economy. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 21. 435-83. DOI: 10.1023/A:1024109008573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allan, Keith. 1980. Nouns and countability. Language 56. 541-67. DOI: 10.2307/414449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Awbery, Gwenllian Mair. 2009. Pluralization in Welsh, and the need for phonologically null suffixes. Journal of Celtic Linguistics 13. 1–20.Google Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald, Burani, Cristina; and Schreuder, Robert. 1997. Effects of semantic markedness in the processing of regular nominal singulars and plurals in Italian. Yearbook of Morphology 1996. 13–33. DOI: 10.1007/978-94-017-3718-0_3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baayen, R. Harald, Piepenbrock, Richard; and Gulickers, Leon. 1996. CELEX2 [CD-ROM]. LDC96L14. Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium.Google Scholar
Bale, Alan C., and Barner, David. 2009. The interpretation of functional heads: Using comparatives to explore the mass/count distinction. Journal of Semantics 26. 217-52. DOI: 10.1093/jos/ffp003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barner, David, and Snedeker, Jesse. 2005. Quantity judgments and individuation: Evidence that mass nouns count. Cognition 97. 41–66. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2004.06.009.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bloom, Paul. 1990. Semantic structure and language development. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Bloom, Paul. 1994. Possible names: The role of syntax-semantics mappings in the acquisition of nominals. Lingua 92. 297–329. DOI: 10.1016/0024-3841(94)90345-X.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bloomfield, Leonard. 1933. Language. New York: Henry Holt and Co.Google Scholar
Bodomo, Adams. 1997. The structure of Dagaare. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Bodomo, Adams. 2000. Dagaare. (Languages of the world/materials 165.) Munich: LIN-COM Europa.Google Scholar
Borer, Hagit. 2005. Structuring sense, vol. 1: In name only. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Borg, Albert J. 1980. An aspectual distinction in verbs and nouns in Maltese. Archivum Linguisticum 11. 107-17.Google Scholar
Brennan, Andrew. 1988. Conditions of identity. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J., and Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2005. Lexicalization and language change. (Research surveys in linguistics.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Cecil H. 1999. Lexical acculturation in Native American languages. (Oxford studies in anthropological linguistics 20.) Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bunt, Harry C. 1985. Mass terms and model-theoretic semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cheng, Lisa L. S., Doetjes, Jenny; and Sybesma, Rint. 2008. How universal is the universal grinder? Linguistics in the Netherlands 2008. 50–62. DOI: 10.1075/avt.25.08che.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chierchia, Gennaro. 1998. Plurality of mass nouns and the notion of ‘semantic parameter’. Events and grammar, ed. by Rothstein, Susan, 53–104. Dordrecht: Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chierchia, Gennaro. 2010. Language, thought, and reality after Chomsky. The Chomsky notebook, ed. by Franck, Julie and Bricmont, Jean, 142-69. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Contini-Morava, Ellen. 2000. Noun class as number in Swahili. Between grammar and lexicon, ed. by Contini-Morava, Ellen and Tobin, Yishai, 3–30. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corbett, Greville G. 1996. Minor number and the plurality split. Rivista di Linguistica 8. 101-22. Online: http://linguistica.sns.it/RdL/8.1/Corbett.pdf.Google Scholar
Davidson, Donald. 1973. On the very idea of a conceptual scheme. Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association 47. 5–20. DOI: 10.2307/3129898.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Denny, J. Peter. 1976. What are noun classifiers good for? Chicago Linguistic Society 12. 122-32.Google Scholar
Dimmendaal, Gerrit J. 1983. The Turkana language. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dimmendaal, Gerrit J. 2000. Number marking and noun categorization in Nilo-Saharan languages. Anthropological Linguistics 42. 214-61. Online: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30028548.Google Scholar
Doron, Edit, and Müller, Ana. 2013. The cognitive basis of the mass-count distinction: Evidence from bare nouns. Syntax and semantics, vol. 39: Crosslinguistic studies on noun phrase structure and reference, ed. by Hofherr, Patricia Cabredo and Zribi-Hertz, Anne, 73–101. Leiden: Brill. DOI: 10.1163/9789004261440_005.Google Scholar
Dowty, David. 1991. Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67. 547–619. DOI: 10.2307/415037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falkum, Ingrid Lossius. 2010. Systematic polysemy and the count-mass distinction. University College London Working Papers in Linguistics 22. 16–40.Google Scholar
Fargetti, C. M. 2001. Estudo fonológico e morfossintático da língua Juruna. São Paulo: University of Campinas dissertation.Google Scholar
Galmiche, Michel. 1989. Massif/comptable: De l'un à l'autre et inversement. Termes massifs et termes comptables (Recherches linguistiques 13), ed. by David, Jean and Kleiber, Georges, 63–77. Paris: Klincksieck.Google Scholar
Gentner, Dedre, and Boroditsky, Lera. 2001. Individuation, relational relativity and early word learning. Language acquisition and conceptual development, ed. by Bowerman, Melissa and Levinson, Stephen, 215-56. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Gil, David. 1996. Maltese ‘collective’ nouns: A typological perspective. Rivista di Linguistica 8. 53–87. Online: http://linguistica.sns.it/RdL/8.1/Gil-collective.pdf.Google Scholar
Gillon, Brendan S. 1992. Towards a common semantics for English count and mass nouns. Linguistics and Philosophy 15. 597–639. Online: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25001491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gleason, Henry A. 1965. Linguistics and English grammar. New York: Holt Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Greenberg, Joseph. 1966. Language universals. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Grimm, Scott. 2012a. Degrees of countability: A mereotopological approach to the mass/count distinction. Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 22. 584–603. DOI: 10.3765/salt.v22i0.2633.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grimm, Scott. 2012b. Individuation and inverse number marking in Dagaare. Count and mass across languages, ed. by Massam, Diane, 75–98. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199654277.003.0005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grimm, Scott. 2012c. Number and individuation. Stanford, CA: Stanford University dissertation.Google Scholar
Grimm, Scott, and Levin, Beth. 2017. Artifact nouns: Reference and countability. North East Linguistic Society (NELS) 47. 55–64.Google Scholar
Harbour, Daniel. 2008. Morphosemantic number: From Kiowa noun classes to UG number features. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 2005. Occurrence of nominal plurality. The world atlas of language structures, ed. by Haspelmath, Martin, Dryer, Matthew S., Gil, David, and Comrie, Bernard, 142-45. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 2008. Creating economical morphosyntactic patterns in language change. Linguistic universals and language change, ed. by Good, Jeff, 185–214. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horn, Laurence. 1989. A natural history of negation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Imai, Mutsumi, and Gentner, Dedre. 1997. A cross-linguistic study of early word meaning: Universal ontology and linguistic influence. Cognition 62. 169–200. DOI: 10.1016/S0010-0277(96)00784-6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jakobson, Roman. 1971 [1957]. Shifters, verbal categories, and the Russian verb. Selected writings, vol. 2: Word and language, ed. by Jakobson, Roman, 386-92. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Jones, Morris, and Thomas, Alan R.. 1977. The Welsh language: Studies in its syntax and semantics. Cardiff: University of Wales Press for the Schools Council.Google Scholar
Joosten, Frank. 2003. Accounts of the count-mass distinction: A critical survey. Lingvisticæ Investigationes 26. 159-73. DOI: 10.1075/li.26.1.11joo.Google Scholar
Joosten, Frank, Sutter, Gert De, Drieghe, Denis, Grondelaers, Stef, Hartsuiker, Robert J.; and Speelman, Dirk. 2007. Dutch collective nouns and conceptual profiling. Linguistics 45. 85–132. DOI: 10.1515/LING.2007.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Katamba, Francis. 2003. Bantu nominal morphology. The Bantu languages, ed. by Nurse, Derek and Philippson, Gérard, 103-20. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
King, Gareth. 2003. Modern Welsh: A comprehensive grammar. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul, and Tonhauser, Judith. 2012. Semantics of inflection. Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning, ed. by Maienborn, Claudia, Heusinger, Klaus von, and Portner, Paul, 2070-97. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Koontz-Garboden, Andrew. 2007. States, change of state, and the monotonicity hypothesis. Stanford, CA: Stanford University dissertation.Google Scholar
Krifka, Manfred. 1992. Thematic relations as links between nominal reference and temporal constitution. Lexical matters, ed. by Sag, Ivan and Szabolcsi, Anna, 29–53. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Landau, Barbara, Smith, Linda B.; and Jones, Susan S.. 1988. The importance of shape in early lexical learning. Cognitive Development 3. 299–321. DOI: 10.1016/0885-2014(88)90014-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landman, Fred. 1989. Groups, I. Linguistics and Philosophy 12. 559–605. Online: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25001360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landman, Fred. 2011. Count nouns—mass nouns, neat nouns—mess nouns. The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication 6. DOI: 10.4148/biyclc.v6i0.1579.Google Scholar
Lima, Suzi. 2014. The grammar of individuation and counting. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Amherst dissertation.Google Scholar
Lucy, John A. 1992. Grammatical categories and cognition: A case study of the linguistic relativity hypothesis. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maho, Jouni Filip. 1999. A comparative study of Bantu noun classes. Gothenburg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.Google Scholar
Mathieu, Éric. 2012. Flavors of division. Linguistic Inquiry 43. 650-79. DOI: 10.1162/ling_a_00110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCawley, James D. 1975. Lexicography and the count-mass distinction. Berkeley Linguistics Society 1. 314-21. DOI: 10.3765/bls.v1i0.2335.Google Scholar
Middleton, Erica L., Wisniewski, Edward J., Trindel, Kelly A.; and Imai, Mutsumi. 2004. Separating the chaff from the oats: Evidence for a conceptual distinction between count noun and mass noun aggregates. Journal of Memory and Language 50. 371-94. DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2004.02.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mifsud, Manwel. 1996. The collective in Maltese. Rivista di Linguistica 8. 29–51. Online: http://linguistica.sns.it/RdL/8.1/Mifsud.pdf.Google Scholar
Mourelatos, Alexander P. D. 1978. Events, processes, and states. Linguistics and Philosophy 2. 415-34. DOI: 10.1007/BF00149015.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mufwene, Salikoko S. 1980. Number, countability and markedness in Lingala LI-/MA-noun class. Linguistics 18. 1019-52. DOI: 10.1515/ling.1980.18.11-12.1019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mufwene, Salikoko S. 1984. The count/mass distinction and the English lexicon. Chicago Linguistic Society (Parasession on lexical semantics) 20(2). 200–221.Google Scholar
Nichols, Lynn. 2008. Lexical semantic constraints on noun roots and noun borrowability. Studies in Language 32. 683–700. DOI: 10.1075/sl.32.3.10nic.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nunberg, Geoffrey. 1979. The non-uniqueness of semantic solutions: Polysemy. Linguistics and Philosophy 3. 143-84. Online: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25001016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nunberg, Geoffrey. 2004. Pragmatics of deferred interpretation. The handbook of pragmatics, ed. by Horn, Laurence R. and Ward, Gregory, 343-64. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Nunberg, Geoffrey, and Zaenen, Annie. 1992. Systematic polysemy in lexicology and lexicography. Euralex 1992, part 2, 387-96. Online: http://euralex.org/publications/systematic-polysemy-in-lexicology-and-lexicography/.Google Scholar
Nurmio, Silva. 2016. Collective nouns in Welsh: A noun category or a plural allomorph? Transactions of the Philological Society 115. 1–21. DOI: 10.1111/1467-968X.12086.Google Scholar
Ohta, Itaru. 1989. A classified vocabulary of the Turkana in Northwestern Kenya. (African study monographs.) Kyoto: The Center for African Area Studies at Kyoto University.Google Scholar
Ostler, Nicholas, and Atkins, B. T. S.. 1991. Predictable meaning shift: Some linguistic properties of lexical implication rules. Lexical semantics and knowledge representation: SIGLEX 1991, ed. by Pustejovsky, James and Bergler, Sabine, 87–100. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI: 10.1007/3-540-55801-2_29.Google Scholar
Palmer, Frank R. 1971. Grammar. Harmondsworth: Penguin.Google Scholar
Pelletier, Francis Jeffry. 1975. Non-singular reference: Some preliminaries. Philosophia 5. 451-65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pelletier, Francis Jeffry, and Schubert, Lenhart K.. 2004. Mass expressions. Handbook of philosophical logic, vol. 10, ed. by Gabbay, Dov and Guenthner, Franz, 249–335. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Prasada, Sandeep, Ferenz, Krag; and Haskell, Todd. 2002. Conceiving of entities as objects and as stuff. Cognition 83. 141-65. DOI: 10.1016/S0010-0277(01)00173-1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Press, Ian. 2009. Breton. The Celtic languages, ed. by Ball, Martin J. and Müller, Nicole, 427-87. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Quine, W. V. O. 1960. Word and object. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Ravid, Dorit, and Hayek, Lubna. 2003. Learning about different ways of expressing number in the development of Palestinian Arabic. First Language 23. 41–64. DOI: 10.1177/0142723703023001003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rothstein, Susan. 2010. Counting and the mass/count distinction. Journal of Semantics 27. 343-97. DOI: 10.1093/jos/ffq007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Samuelson, Larissa K., and Smith, Linda B.. 1999. Early noun vocabularies: Do ontology, category structure and syntax correspond? Cognition 73. 1–33. DOI: 10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00034-7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schwarzschild, Roger. 2011. Stubborn distributivity, multiparticipant nouns and the count/mass distinction. North East Linguistic Society (NELS) 39(2). 661-78.Google Scholar
Seifart, Frank. 2009. Towards a typology of unitization: Miraña noun classes compared to numeral classifiers and singulatives. Regensburg: University of Regensburg, ms.Google Scholar
Sharvy, Richard. 1978. Maybe English has no count nouns: Notes on Chinese semantics. Studies in Language 2. 345-65. DOI: 10.1075/sl.2.3.04sha.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith-Stark, T. C. 1974. The plurality split. Chicago Linguistic Society 10. 657-71.Google Scholar
Soja, Nancy N., Carey, Susan; and Spelke, Elizabeth S.. 1991. Ontological categories guide young children's inductions of word meaning: Object terms and substance terms. Cognition 38. 179–211. DOI: 10.1016/0010-0277(91)90051-5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stebbins, Tonya. 2007. Asymmetrical nominal number marking: A functional account. STUF—Language Typology and Universals 50. 5–47. DOI: 10.1524/stuf.1997.50.1.5.Google Scholar
Stolz, Thomas. 2001. Singulative-collective: Natural morphology and stable cases in Welsh number inflexion on nouns. STUF—Language Typology and Universals 54. 52–76. DOI: 10.1524/stuf.2001.54.1.52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutcliffe, Edmund F. 1936. A grammar of the Maltese languages. Valletta: Progress.Google Scholar
Tiersma, Peter Meijes. 1982. Local and general markedness. Language 58. 832-49. DOI: 10.2307/413959.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ware, Robert X. 1975. Some bits and pieces. Synthese 31. 379-93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watkins, Laurel. 1984. A grammar of Kiowa. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Wierzbicka, Anna. 1988. The semantics of grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiese, Heike, and Maling, Joan. 2005. Beers, kaffi, and Schnaps: Different grammatical options for restaurant talk coercions in three Germanic languages. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 17. 1–38. DOI: 10.1017/S1470542705000012.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wiggins, David. 1980. Sameness and substance. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wilhelm, Andrea. 2006. Count and mass nouns in Dëne Sųłıné. West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics (WCCFL) 25. 435-43. Online: http://www.lingref.com/cpp/wccfl/25/paper1477.pdf.Google Scholar
Wisniewski, Edward J., Imai, Mutsumi; and Casey, Lyman. 1996. On the equivalence of superordinate concepts. Cognition 60. 269-98. DOI: 10.1016/0010-0277(96)00707-X.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wisniewski, Edward J., Lamb, Christopher A.; and Middleton, Erica L.. 2003. On the conceptual basis for the count and mass noun distinction. Language and Cognitive Processes 18. 583–624. DOI: 10.1080/01690960344000044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zwicky, Arnold. 2001. Counting chad. Handout from Stanford Semantics Fest, March 16, 2001.Google Scholar