Journal articles on the topic 'Mass and count nouns'
To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Mass and count nouns.
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Mass and count nouns.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Coutinho Costa, Isabella. "The count/mass distinction in Taurepang." Linguistic Variation 20, no. 2 (October 1, 2020): 352–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/lv.00026.cou.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract This paper presents a description of the count/mass distinction in Taurepang, a Cariban language spoken in Brazil and Venezuela. The methodology used was based on Lima & Rothstein’s questionnaire (this volume). We show that Taurepang is a bare noun language and that mass and count nouns can be pluralized. Despite nominal quantifiers have the same distribution, they show different interpretation with count and mass nouns. As the data also shows that numerals distinguish count and mass nouns and that container phrases trigger the count/measure interpretation, we assume here that the denotation of mass nouns in Taurepang cannot be count.
2
Bomfim, Anari, and Suzi Lima. "Count and mass nouns in Patxohã." Linguistic Variation 20, no. 2 (October 1, 2020): 324–35. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/lv.00024.bom.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract This paper describes the count/mass distinction in Patxohã, a revitalized language spoken in Bahia and Minas Gerais, Brazil. We observe that only count nouns can be directly combined with numerals and that only count nouns can co-occur with plural determiners. Furthermore, only count nouns can be combined with size adjectives. As for quantifiers, we observe that at least one quantifier in the language (nitxi) can be combined with count and mass nouns, but trigger different interpretations depending on the noun it is combined with. We also discuss the use of container phrases in counting and measuring contexts.
3
Gordon, Peter. "Count/mass category acquisition: distributional distinctions in children's speech." Journal of Child Language 15, no. 1 (February 1988): 109–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0305000900012083.
Full textAbstract:
ABSTRACTThe count/mass distinction represents a categorical differentiation of nouns into count nouns which can be individuated when quantified (e.g. a car, several tables) and mass nouns which may not (cf. *a water, *several sands). The emergence of this distinction was examined in the longitudinal speech data of two children. In the first analysis, use of count nouns and mass nouns was compared in noun phrase contexts that require count nouns (e.g. a X, another X). It was found that from the earliest samples children used more count nouns in these contexts, hence showing a distributional distinction of noun types. This result suggests very rapid acquisition of count/mass subcategories. A series of further analyses assessed the possibility that early differentiation of count and mass nouns may be due to rote learning. No evidence was found for this proposal. A final analysis examined the development of a rule that requires that singular count nouns must be modified by a determiner. Acquisition here was found to be more protracted in nature since determiners are not used consistently in ‘telegraphic’ speech. Problems concerning the learnability of the obligatory determiner rule are discussed along with some speculations concerning the role of semantics in the acquisition of the count/mass distinction.
4
Coutinho Costa, Isabella. "The count/mass distinction in Ye’kwana." Linguistic Variation 20, no. 2 (October 1, 2020): 409–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/lv.00030.cou.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract This paper presents a description of the count/mass distinction in Ye’kwana, a Cariban language spoken in Brazil and Venezuela. The methodology used was based on Lima & Rothstein’s questionnaire this volume). The data shows that Ye’kwana is a bare noun language and that mass and count nouns can be pluralized. However, numerals need a container phrase in order to be directly combined with mass nouns. Nominal quantifiers wanna and ooje can be directly combined with count and mass nouns, but they show different interpretations.
5
Sanchez-Mendes, Luciana, Ana Paula Quadros Gomes, and Aronaldo Julio. "The count-mass distinction in Terena." Linguistic Variation 20, no. 2 (October 1, 2020): 382–97. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/lv.00028.san.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract This paper examines the count-mass distinction in Terena (Aruák, Brazil) by focusing on plural marking availability, numeral and quantifier distribution and cardinal versus volume interpretation in quantity judgment tests. The data collected from the initial research of these features in Terena reveals the relevancy of the count-mass distinction in the language with some signature properties: (i) only count nouns can be directly combined with numerals; (ii) only count nouns can be used with the quantifier êno with the interpretarion of many individuals rather than a large quantity; and finally, (iii) only count nouns can express cardinality of individuals in a comparative sentence such as John has more N than Peter. Plural morpheme distribution is unsuitable for distinguishing count from mass nouns (such as in English) since mass nouns can be pluralized in Terena, provided noun denotations have individuals to allow for number rather than volume quantity interpretation.
6
Robins, Dan. "Mass Nouns and Count Nouns in Classical Chinese." Early China 25 (2000): 147–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0362502800004296.
Full textAbstract:
This article defends three theses concerning the semantics of nouns in classical Chinese. First, they are all free to function as mass nouns. Second, though many of them can also function as count nouns, they do not do so as frequently as do corresponding English nouns. Third, unlike English nouns, nouns in classical Chinese do not need to be classified as count nouns and mass nouns in order to explain their behavior in particular contexts. I argue that classical Chinese nouns function as count nouns only when specific elements of the syntactic context force them to do so, including numbers, some quantifiers, and some adjectives. Because classical Chinese nouns usually occur without such elements, they function more often as mass nouns. I develop this argument in opposition to an alternative analysis defended by Christoph Harbsmeier, according to which classical Chinese nouns divide into three classes: count nouns, mass nouns, and generic nouns. I show that the syntactic and semantic distinctions Harbsmeier draws in support of his analysis do not illuminate the behavior of classical Chinese nouns. The article also briefly addresses the ontological issues that have seemed to some linguists and philosophers to be related to the count/mass distinction.
7
Mihatsch, Wiltrud. "Collectives, object mass nouns and individual count nouns." Lexical plurals and beyond 39, no. 2 (December 31, 2016): 289–308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/li.39.2.05mih.
Full textAbstract:
Mass superordinates such as clothing, clothes and furniture form a distinct and peculiar class of nouns in languages with an obligatory singular/plural distinction. These nouns often have pluralia-tantum variants as well as count equivalents – both within one linguistic system as well as cross-linguistically. This study is a follow-up of my earlier analysis of Romance superordinates (Mihatsch, 2006). The data are taken from English, German, French and Spanish in order to demonstrate the striking cross-linguistic pattern. The highly variable Spanish ropa(s) ‘clothing/clothes’ is analysed in greater detail. I argue that in most cases the apparently unsystematic synchronic variants arise from partly unidirectional diachronic changes, namely a lexicalisation process leading from collective nouns to object mass nouns, often followed by the appearance of plural forms, which oscillate between a lexical and an inflectional plural.
8
Stoch, Nastazja. "The grammatical distinction between count nouns and mass nouns in Mandarin Chinese." Lingua Posnaniensis 62, no. 1 (June 1, 2020): 55–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/linpo-2020-0004.
Full textAbstract:
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.
9
Mohler, Charles L., and Linda A. Heyne. "Count Nouns and Mass Nouns: Crops, Produce, and the Plural of Seed." Weed Technology 32, no. 2 (December 7, 2017): 221–23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/wet.2017.110c.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThe distinction between count nouns and mass nouns affects thinking and writing about various types of crops and produce. Count nouns are words that indicate discrete, countable objects (e.g., forks, viewpoints), whereas mass nouns are words that indicate some relatively undifferentiated substance (e.g., water, energy). We explain the grammar of these two forms and point out some writing pitfalls to avoid. The word seed is one of the few English nouns that is both a count noun and a mass noun. An argument is presented for using seeds as the plural when several individuals are counted and for using seed as the singular when referring to seeds in the aggregate.
10
Storto, Luciana R. "Count and mass nouns in Dâw." Linguistic Variation 20, no. 2 (October 1, 2020): 219–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/lv.00016.sto.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract The goals of this paper are to describe the grammatical properties of nouns and number in Dâw (Naduhup family, Northwestern Amazonia, Brazil) using Lima & Rothstein’s questionnaire (this volume) on mass versus count nouns and to contribute to the typological and semantic literature on nouns and number. Our results show that Dâw is a bare argument language, with no plural on nouns or numeral classifiers, in which all nouns can be counted directly without the need of a measure or container phrase. A difference between notionally count and mass nouns can be found only when different sets of quantifiers are combined with mass and count nouns and in comparatives.
11
McPherson, Leslie Maggie Perrin. "A little goes a long way: evidence for a perceptual basis of learning for the noun categories COUNT and Mass." Journal of Child Language 18, no. 2 (June 1991): 315–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0305000900011089.
Full textAbstract:
ABSTRACTVarious theories of learning for the categories COUNT NOUN and MASS NOUN are compared. It is argued that children assign words to these categories on the basis of intuitions arising from perception that are relevant to Macnamara's (1986) semantic definitions of the categories. These definitions rest on the centrality of identity in the meaning of nouns and the centrality of individuation in the meaning of count nouns but not mass nouns. Empirical evidence is presented that supports the hypothesis that young children classify words as count nouns or mass nouns on the basis of perceptual information about the extension of the words, that is, whether or not the extension consists exclusively of enduring individuals whose discreteness from one another is perceptually salient (count nouns) or not (mass nouns). In an experiment, 48 children with a mean age of 2;10 (S.D. = 0;5) were taught a word for a kind of object (i.e. a perceptually distinct individual) or for a kind of substance (i.e. a collection of small granules). For some children the word was syntactically COUNT and for others it was syntactically MASS. Half of the children received incongruous perceptual and syntactic cues. For most of these children, classification of the word was guided by the object- or substance-like appearance of the stimulus despite the presence of incongruent syntactic cues. Syntactic cues influenced classification of the word for a minority of subjects, most of whom were among the oldest in the sample. It is concluded that perceptual information is critical in early decisions about membership in the categories COUNT NOUN and MASS NOUN.
12
Lima, Suzi. "All notional mass nouns are count nouns in Yudja." Semantics and Linguistic Theory 24 (April 5, 2015): 534. http://dx.doi.org/10.3765/salt.v24i0.2419.
Full textAbstract:
<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>
13
Vilacy Galucio, Ana, and Carla Nascimento Costa. "Count-mass distinction in Sakurabiat." Linguistic Variation 20, no. 2 (October 1, 2020): 336–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/lv.00025.gal.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Acknowledging the fact that not all languages seem to distinguish grammatically between mass nouns and count nouns, this paper aims to provide information on whether or not the count-mass distinction is expressed in the Sakurabiat language, which belongs to the Tuparic branch of the Tupian linguistic family. The paper presents a brief survey of the grammatical properties associated with notional mass and notional count nouns in Sakurabiat. The properties of constructions with nouns and numerals are described and compared to constructions with pluralized nouns and numerals. The question of individual versus event quantification with numerals, and the role played by quantifiers and comparatives are also analyzed. The Sakurabiat data contributes to the investigation about the expression (or non-expression) of a count-mass distinction in underrepresented and understudied languages.
14
DROŻDŻ, GRZEGORZ. "New insights into English count and mass nouns – the Cognitive Grammar perspective." English Language and Linguistics 24, no. 4 (September 25, 2020): 833–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1360674319000480.
Full textAbstract:
The article deals with two of the long-standing problems in English linguistics: whether it is possible that each noun can have both count and mass senses, and the problem of determining a complete list of the regularities of count-to-mass and mass-to-count changes. While there have been numerous attempts to solve each of these problems, this article shows the results of applying Cognitive Grammar to them.The analysis covers a set of concrete nouns representative of English – sixty nouns with different ontological properties and all frequencies of occurrence. These are nouns that are classified by dictionaries as solely count and solely mass. Because of its usage-based character, the analysis scrutinises over 1,700 real-life utterances produced by native speakers of English. The analysis shows that even such nouns possess senses whose properties are the reverse of the properties of the nouns’ basic senses. A thorough examination of the nouns’ basic and extended senses leads to certain grammatical regularities of count-to-mass and mass-to-count changes. The analysis not only systematises the grammatical regularities determined so far and solves many problems that can be noticed about them, but also proposes novel regularities.
15
Mondini, Sara, Eva Kehayia, Brendan Gillon, Giorgio Arcara, and Gonia Jarema. "Lexical access of mass and count nouns." Mental Lexicon 4, no. 3 (December 15, 2009): 354–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/ml.4.3.03mon.
Full textAbstract:
Two psycholinguistic experiments were carried out in Italian to test the role played by the feature that distinguishes mass nouns from count nouns, as well as by the feature that distinguishes singular nouns from plural nouns. The first experiment, a simple lexical decision task, revealed a sensitivity of the lexical access system to the processing of the features Mass and Plural as shown by longer reaction times. In particular, nouns in the plural yielded longer reaction times than in the singular except when the plural form was irregular. Furthermore, the feature Mass also affected processing, yielding longer reaction times. In the second experiment, a sentence priming task, both the Plural and the Mass effects did not surface when a grammatical sentence fragment was the prime. These data show a direct correlation between the linguistic ‘complexity’ of plural/mass nouns and processing time. They also suggest that this complexity does not affect normal fluent spoken language where words are embedded in a semantic and syntactic context.
16
Kulkarni, Ritwik, Susan Rothstein, and Alessandro Treves. "A Neural Network Perspective on the Syntactic-Semantic Association between Mass and Count Nouns." JOURNAL OF ADVANCES IN LINGUISTICS 6, no. 2 (March 31, 2016): 964–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.24297/jal.v6i2.5176.
Full textAbstract:
Analysing aspects of how our brain processes language may provide, even before the language faculty is really understood, useful insights into higher order cognitive functions. We take a small exploratory step in this direction with an attempt to test the ability of a standard, biologically plausible self-organising neural network to learn the association between syntax and semantics around the mass-count distinction. The mass-count distinction relates to the countability or un-countability of nouns, both in terms of their syntactic usage and of their semantic perception. A previous statistical study has shown that the mass-count distinction is not bimodal and exhibits complex fuzzy relations between syntax and semantics. A neural network that expresses competition amongst output neurons with lateral inhibition is shown to identify the basic classes of mass and count in the syntactic markers and to produce a graded distribution of the nouns along the mass-count spectrum. The network however fails to successfully map the semantic classes of the nouns to their syntactic usage, thus corroborating the hypothesis that the syntactic usage of nouns in the mass-count domain is not simply predicted by the semantics of the noun.
17
Zhang, Anqi. "Referentiality and incompletive reading in Mandarin." Proceedings of the Linguistic Society of America 3, no. 1 (March 3, 2018): 48. http://dx.doi.org/10.3765/plsa.v3i1.4338.
Full textAbstract:
As an exception to Krifka’s (1989) famous generalization that a quantized incremental theme always induces an event-homomorphic completive reading, Singh (1991, 1998) observes that in Hindi only the quantized mass noun phrases as the incremental theme entails a completive reading, but unexpectedly quantized count nouns phrases can have an incompletive reading. She proposes that count nouns can introduce a partial thematic relation, whereas mass nouns introduce a total thematic relation. With new data in Mandarin, instead of the mass/count distinction, I argue that referentiality is the crucial factor because the non-culmination readings are only felicitous with the referential objects for consumption verbs in Mandarin.
18
Gathercole, Virginia C. "‘He has too much hard questions’: the acquisition of the linguistic mass–count distinction in much and many." Journal of Child Language 12, no. 2 (June 1985): 395–415. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0305000900006504.
Full textAbstract:
ABSTRACTSubjects aged 3;6–9;0 were asked to judge sentences in which much and many modified prototypical and non-prototypical mass and count nouns, and to correct those sentences judged to be deviant. The experimental results indicate that children do not approach the co-occurrence conditions of much and many with various nouns from a semantic point of view, but rather from a morphosyntactic or surface-distributional one. Children learn the proper form that the noun must take in these constructions before they learn the proper choice of quantifier. In addition, they reserve many for use with plural count nouns long before they learn that much is restricted in direct noun modification to use with singular mass nouns.
19
Sutton, Peter, and Hana Filip. "Counting in Context: count/mass variation and restrictions on coercion in collective artifact nouns." Semantics and Linguistic Theory 26 (October 15, 2016): 350. http://dx.doi.org/10.3765/salt.v26i0.3796.
Full textAbstract:
A major factor grounding the mass/count distinction is the (non-)resolution of overlap in context. We argue that counting presupposes that nouns be interpreted relative to counting contexts, which are contexts enforcing a resolution of overlap in noun denotations. While, in this respect, we largely follow some suggestions in Rothstein 2010 and Landman 2011, what is novel about our proposal is the role of context in the (non-) resolution of overlap. Lexical entries of mass Ns specify the null context as the context for evaluation, which makes them uncountable. The reason for this is that the null context allows for overlap in noun denotations, because it is the union of the interpretations of the predicate at all counting contexts (i.e. variants). In contrast, lexical entries of count Ns do not specify such a context, and therefore their counting context may vary from utterance to utterance. Adopting this semantics has two major benefits. First, we can predict, on semantic grounds, for a large class of nouns, when we can(not) expect to find mass/count variation cross- and intralinguistically. Second, we are able to explain why ‘collective artifact’ nouns (aka ‘object’ or ‘fake’ mass nouns) resist mass-to-count coercion.
20
Salanova, Andrés Pablo. "Counting and measuring in Mẽbengokre and the count/mass distinction." Linguistic Variation 20, no. 2 (October 1, 2020): 300–311. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/lv.00022.sal.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Though there is no formal differentiation between count and mass nouns in Mẽbengokre, a Jê language from central Brazil, a contrast can be seen in the coercion that numerals and some quantifiers induce in mass nouns. This coercion, that leads to both a type of and unit of readings, is the only type of discretization of mass concepts that can be done within a noun phrase in the language, as measure classifiers do not exist, something that we argue for in some detail.
21
Erbach, Kurt. "Predicting object mass nouns across languages." Proceedings of the Linguistic Society of America 5, no. 1 (March 23, 2020): 228. http://dx.doi.org/10.3765/plsa.v5i1.4698.
Full textAbstract:
The hypothesis explored in this paper is that the amount of object mass nouns (e.g., furniture, jewelry) in a given language is related to the amount of morphosyntax that indicates the countability of nouns (e.g., many, much) in that language. This hypothesis, together with the analysis of Sutton & Filip (2016) best captures the occurrence of object mass nouns across languages. The analysis of Sutton & Filip (2016) accurately predicts which class of nouns will have object mass nouns across languages—collective artifacts—and the novel hypothesis provides a means of predicting the amount of object mass nouns in a given language: languages with many morphosyntactic reflexes of the mass/count distinction will likewise have many object mass nouns—e.g. English—and languages with few morphosyntactic reflexes of the mass/count distinction will likewise have few object mass nouns—e.g., Greek, Hungarian, and Japanese.
22
Smith, Peter W. "Lexical plurals in Telugu." Lexical plurals and beyond 39, no. 2 (December 31, 2016): 234–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/li.39.2.02smi.
Full textAbstract:
In this paper I provide a description and analysis of a small class of plural mass nouns in Telugu (Dravidian), as well as an overview of the major properties of the mass/count distinction in the language. The plural mass nouns show the semantic behaviour of mass nouns in Telugu, however, they show the morphosyntactic behaviour of count nouns. I provide an analysis whereby the plurality is inherent to the roots, and it is this inherent plurality interacting with other properties of the morphosyntax of Telugu that makes these nouns appear to be count on the surface, though in reality they are mass nouns.
23
INAGAKI, SHUNJI. "Syntax–semantics mappings as a source of difficulty in Japanese speakers’ acquisition of the mass–count distinction in English." Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 17, no. 3 (November 12, 2013): 464–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1366728913000540.
Full textAbstract:
This paper investigates Japanese speakers’ acquisition of the mass–count distinction in English. Learners judge whether two large objects/portions of stuff are more than six tiny objects/portions of stuff or vice versa. Results show that learners correctly base judgments on number for count nouns (judging that six small cups are more cups than two large cups) and object-mass nouns (e.g., furniture) and on volume for substance-mass nouns (judging that two large portions of mustard are more mustard than six tiny portions of it). For nouns that can be either mass or count in English (e.g., string(s)) or cross-linguistically (e.g., “spinach”), learners fail to shift judgments according to the mass–count syntax in which the words appear. Results suggest that Japanese learners have difficulty using mass–count syntactic cues to disambiguate the meanings and thus fail to acquire the mass–count distinction in English.
24
Gillon, Carrie. "Evidence for mass and count in Inuttut." Linguistic Variation 12, no. 2 (December 31, 2012): 211–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/lv.12.2.03gil.
Full textAbstract:
While it is clear that some languages have a grammatical mass/count distinction (e.g. English), in other languages (e.g. Inuktitut) it is not so obvious. In this paper, I show that Inuttut (Labrador Inuktitut) has a subtle grammatical mass/count distinction: while number, numerals, and most quantifiers do not disambiguate between mass and count nouns, in a few places, the morphology or the semantics disambiguates between mass and count. Thus, Inuttut is not a counterexample to Doetjes (1997) or Chierchia (2010), who both argue that all languages distinguish between mass and count. I further argue against Borer (2005) who claims all nouns in all languages are underlyingly neutral, and are assigned mass interpretation by default in the absence of individuation. I show that Inuttut nouns cannot all be underlyingly neutral and/or mass by default. Keywords: mass; count; classifiers; Inuktitut; number; numerals; quantifiers
25
Kulkarni, Ritwik, Susan Rothstein, and Alessandro Treves. "A Statistical Investigation into the Cross-Linguistic Distribution of Mass and Count Nouns: Morphosyntactic and Semantic Perspectives." Biolinguistics 7 (March 27, 2013): 132–68. http://dx.doi.org/10.5964/bioling.8959.
Full textAbstract:
We collected a database of how 1,434 nouns are used with respect to the mass/count distinction in six languages; additional informants characterized the semantics of the underlying concepts. Results indicate only weak correlations between semantics and syntactic usage. In five out of the six languages, roughly half the nouns in the database are used as pure count nouns in all respects; the other half differ from pure counts over distinct syntactic properties, with fewer nouns differing on more properties, and typically very few at the pure mass end of the spectrum. Such a graded distribution is similar across languages, but syntactic classes do not map onto each other, nor do they reflect, beyond weak correlations, semantic attributes of the concepts. Considerable variability is seen even among speakers of the same language. These findings are in line with the hypo-thesis that much of the mass/count syntax emerges from language- and even speaker-specific grammaticalization.
26
Alam, Md. "Prototyping Mass Nouns from Students’ Perspective: A Pedagogical Implication." Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal 7, no. 1 (January 13, 2020): 76–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.14738/assrj.71.7607.
Full textAbstract:
This paper investigates ESL learners’ prototyping mass nouns as a grammatical category. The study is supported by the theory of prototype developed by Rosch in 1970s which plays a wide role in graded categorization of the existent entities in the world. With an expected inspiration from the theory, the prototyping of vocabulary received research attention especially in the pedagogical world. Promisingly, this study seeks to extend the theory to explore a lexico-grammatical category i.e. “mass nouns” from learners’ perspective. Actually, the study was directed to find out which prototypical feature ESL students exploit to prioritize some mass nouns as prototypical examples over some other mass nouns, and how far students’ experientially and pedagogically perceived “prototypes” of mass nouns help them to correctly grouping up nouns as in mass category. The study was focused on shedding some light on a few pedagogical tips and implications in some likely challenging contexts of teaching mass nouns. The study reveals that ESL students shortlist ‘liquids’ (such as water, milk, wine, juice etc.) ‘gases’(such as hydrogen, oxygen etc.), ‘abstract ideas’ (such as childhood, anger, safety, knowledge etc.), ‘powdered substances’ (such as sand, sugar etc.), and some ‘natural entities’ (such as heat, sunshine etc.) as “prototype of mass nouns” which all are un-individuated and sometimes intangible - meaning uncountable - while the learners recognize ‘non-countable’ status as the most important prototypical feature of mass nouns. And, the students isolated ‘rice’, ‘wheat’, ‘hair’, ‘grass’ , ‘cotton’ and ‘coal’ as less prototypical mass nouns based on their intrinsic sense that these mass nouns are plural and they even can be individuated. However, the study reflects that the students’ perceived prototypes are not sufficient as they selected and considered many of mass nouns as so distant members as countable. It was further found that contextual type shifts of mass-count nouns, arbitrary sematic distributions to lexis, cross-linguistic approach to mass nouns, intrinsic and realistic conception, superordinate-subordinate influence, and perception of enumerating status etc. account for students’ this surprise selection of a number of mass nouns as opposite category i.e. count nouns. If pedagogues are non-responsive to these factors and fail to redefine their approaches to mass noun teaching, it is most likely to lead to learners’ grammatical inaccuracy resulted from their determiner-number-mass noun mismatch.
27
Quyen, Nguyen Thi. "VIETNAMESE EFL COLLEGE STUDENTS’ SENSITIVITY TO THE ENGLISH MASS-COUNT DISTINCTION." VNU Journal of Foreign Studies 38, no. 3 (June 30, 2022): 125. http://dx.doi.org/10.25073/2525-2445/vnufs.4848.
Full textAbstract:
This paper examines how Vietnamese learners of L2 English interpret the English mass-count distinction. In a picture-based judgment experiment, sixty-two college students learning English as their L2 made judgments that reflect their sensitivity to the English mass-count distinction and morphosyntax-semantics mappings. The findings indicate that Vietnamese learners of L2 English correctly based their judgments on number for count nouns (e.g., cup) and object-mass nouns (e.g., furniture), and on volume for substance-mass nouns (e.g., milk). In addition, Vietnamese learners performed at chance level with English flexible nouns, i.e., nouns that are interpreted as count in the presence of the plural marker -s and as mass in its absence. Furthermore, no significant correlation was found between learners’ L2 proficiency scores and their judgments. Taken together, these findings suggest that Vietnamese college students are insensitive to the morphosyntactic cues of English flexible nouns when interpreting their meaning. Such insensitivity might be due to L1 effects and can be independent of L2 proficiency.
28
Semenza, C. "The (neuro)-psychology of mass and count nouns." Brain and Language 95, no. 1 (October 2005): 88–89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2005.07.049.
Full text
29
Lima, Suzi, and Susan Rothstein. "A typology of the mass/count distinction in Brazil and its relevance for mass/count theories." Linguistic Variation 20, no. 2 (October 1, 2020): 174–218. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/lv.00015.lim.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract While much work has been done on the description of the mass/count distinction in different geographical areas, Brazilian Indigenous languages are still highly underrepresented in the field. This paper presents the results of a project that involved researchers describing the mass/count distinction in 15 Brazilian Indigenous languages, based on a questionnaire we prepared in 2016 in order to explore the distribution of bare nouns, plurals, numerals, and quantifiers (see Appendix). Three main observations will be drawn. First, number marking and countability are independent. Second, counting is not restricted to natural atoms. Third, since there seems to be no systematic symmetry in the distribution of plurals, numerals, and quantifiers, we argue that the standard diagnostics for countable vs. non-countable nouns are highly language-specific.
30
Shapiro, Lewis P., Edgar Zurif, Susan Carey, and Murray Grossman. "Comprehension of Lexical Subcategory Distinctions by Aphasic Patients." Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 32, no. 3 (September 1989): 481–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.1044/jshr.3203.481.
Full textAbstract:
Previous research has found that agrammatic Broca aphasic patients have particular difficulty using determiners like "a" and "the" for the purposes of sentence comprehension. In this study, we test whether or not such difficulty extends to the level where lexical subcategories are distinguished by these articles. The absence or presence of a determiner distinguishes proper from common nouns (e.g., "ROSE vs. "A ROSE"), and mass from count nouns (e.g., "GLASS" vs. "A GLASS"). Groups of agrammatic Broca and fluent aphasic subjects were required to point to one of two pictures in response to a sentence such as "Point to the picture of rose" or "Point to the picture of a rose". Sentences were presented in either printed or spoken form. Results indicated that for the agrammatic Broca patients, printed presentation yielded significant improvement over spoken presentation only for the proper noun/common noun distinction. Performance was significantly poorer for the mass noun/count noun distinction as compared to the proper/common distinction for these patients, and mass nouns proved particularly difficult. Interpretable patterns were not observed on either subcategory distinction for the fluent aphasic subjects. Current theories of agrammatism cannot fully explain these data. An independent explanation is offered that suggests proper noun/common noun is a universal semantic distinction. On the other hand, the mass noun/count noun distinction is more purely syntactic, and thus is particularly difficult for agrammatic Broca patients.
31
Joosten, Frank. "Accounts of the count–mass distinction." Grammaires et Lexiques Comparés 26, no. 1 (September 30, 2003): 159–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/li.26.1.11joo.
Full textAbstract:
Summary The issue of what is usually, but also misleadingly called the count– mass distinction, i.e. the distinction between nouns that can be counted (e.g. a car, two cars, many cars) and nouns that cannot (e.g. *a sand, *two sands, *many sands, sand, much sand), has been addressed and accounted for in different ways. This paper gives a critical survey of four main theoretical views on the distinction and points out that each of them is problematic in some way. It is argued that that the count–mass distinction should not be reduced to an exclusively grammatical, ontological, semantic, or contextual issue. A proper characterisation of the distinction can only be given if its multidimensional character is fully acknowledged and if parameters such as basic count- or masshood, degree of lexicalisation, conceptualisation, and (non-)arbitrariness are taken into account.
32
Müller, Henrik Høeg. "Danish bare singular count nouns in subject position." Globe: A Journal of Language, Culture and Communication 14 (November 22, 2022): 52–78. http://dx.doi.org/10.54337/ojs.globe.v14i.7559.
Full textAbstract:
This paper aims at investigating under which conditions Danish Bare Singular Count Nouns (BSCNs) can function as subjects in standard categorical statements, i.e. outside special discourse types such as proverbs, newspaper headlines, titles of paintings, etc. Taking as a point of departure a brief discussion of the distributional differences between, on the one hand, Bare Plural count nouns (BPs) and mass nouns and, on the other, BSCNs, it is shown that, contrary to BP- and mass noun subjects, BSCNs in subject position are non-referential and do not imply existential presupposition. On these grounds, and on the basis of analyses of phenomena such as agreement features, genericity and pseudo-incorporation, it is argued that the BSCN-subjects of categorical statements are objects which, owing to the lack of realisation of nominal functional categories, act as property-denoting modifiers restricting the denotation of a covert predicate. Consequently, it is concluded that BSCNs in subject position do not function as arguments in themselves, but are instead pseudo-incorporated into the covert predicate as modifiers.
33
Nevins, Andrew, and Mário Coelho da Silva. "Maxakalí has suppletion, numerals and associatives but no plurals." Linguistic Variation 20, no. 2 (October 1, 2020): 271–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/lv.00020.nev.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract The Maxakalí language lacks additive plurals (akin to dog-s) on nouns, but has associative plurals, and a large set of suppletive verbs that indicate whether the internal argument is plural or not. Although it has no plural marking, Maxakalí distinguishes between count nouns and mass nouns. The former can be followed by numerals, while the latter must be coerced or occur with container words. Only count nouns can be distinguished between singular and plural with verbal number. Mass nouns always require plural verbal number. Count nouns are compatible with words like ‘many’ indicating cardinality, while mass nouns are compatible with words like ‘big’ for volume. Granulated substances have variable behavior, depending on whether treated as a whole or as several individuated items. Numerals in Maxakalí show an unusual pattern, whereby 1–3 are treated as unaccusative verbs, and 4 and up, being loanwords, are treated as unergative verbs.
34
Levy-Forsythe, Zarina, and Olga Kagan. "Classifiers and the mass-count distinction in Uzbek." Semantics and Linguistic Theory 1 (December 29, 2022): 685. http://dx.doi.org/10.3765/salt.v1i0.5360.
Full textAbstract:
The paper argues for the existence of the (NP-level) mass-count distinction in Tashkent Uzbek, an obligatory classifier dialect. Evidence is provided based on the distribution and interpretation of modifiers, classifiers and quantificational suffixes of different types, as well as properties of flexible and object mass nouns. A formal analysis is further provided that treats classifiers as sensitive to the mass-count distinction but not uniformly serving as “individuators” of otherwise mass nouns. Sortal classifiers are argued to differ from mensural ones in that only the latter contribute a measure function.
35
Husić, Halima. "Atomic Structures in the Denotation Of Abstract Nouns." Društvene i humanističke studije (Online), no. 1(14) (February 4, 2021): 45–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.51558/2490-3647.2021.6.1.45.
Full textAbstract:
Countability is a universal lexical category that provides a binary division of nouns into countable and uncountable nouns or is also called count and mass nouns. Usually, count nouns refer to things or objects which can be individuated and thus counted, while mass nouns refer to substances or stuff such as water,wine, blood, or mud for which it is less easy to identify what and how to count. This cognitive division leaves abstract nouns out. Abstract nouns neither refer to things or objects nor to substances or stuff. On the contrary, the reference of abstract nouns is rather heterogeneous comprising different kinds of nouns such as processes, states, events, measure and time terms, and alike. The aim of this paper is to present the challenges abstract nouns pose for theories of countability, and to reflect on possibilities to incorporate abstract nouns in contemporary theories of countability. The research discussed in this paper circles around English abstract nouns but we will also discuss the application of certain semantic phenomena onto Bosnian nouns.
36
Domahs, Frank, Arne Nagels, Ulrike Domahs, Carin Whitney, Richard Wiese, and Tilo Kircher. "Where the Mass Counts: Common Cortical Activation for Different Kinds of Nonsingularity." Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 24, no. 4 (April 2012): 915–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00191.
Full textAbstract:
Typically, plural nouns are morphosyntactically marked for the number feature, whereas mass nouns are morphosyntactically singular. However, both plural count nouns and mass nouns can be semantically interpreted as nonsingular. In this study, we investigated the hypothesis that their commonality in semantic interpretation may lead to common cortical activation for these different kinds of nonsingularity. To this end, we examined brain activation patterns related to three types of nouns while participants were listening to a narrative. Processing of plural compared with singular nouns was related to increased activation in the left angular gyrus. Processing of mass nouns compared with singular count nouns was related to increased activity bilaterally in the superior temporal cortex and also in the left angular gyrus. No significant activation was observed in the direct comparison between plural and mass nouns. We conclude that the left angular gyrus, also known to be relevant for numerical cognition, is involved in the semantic interpretation of different kinds of nonsingularity.
37
NAGATA, RYO, FUMITO MASUI, ATSUO KAWAI, and NAOKI ISU. "A method for distinguishing English mass and count nouns." Journal of Natural Language Processing 12, no. 4 (2005): 227–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.5715/jnlp.12.4_227.
Full text
38
Barner, David, and Jesse Snedeker. "Quantity judgments and individuation: evidence that mass nouns count." Cognition 97, no. 1 (August 2005): 41–66. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2004.06.009.
Full text
39
El Yagoubi, Radouane, Sara Mondini, Patrizia Bisiacchi, Valentina Chiarelli, Alessandro Angrilli, and Carlo Semenza. "The electrophysiological basis of mass and count nouns processing." Brain and Language 99, no. 1-2 (October 2006): 199–200. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2006.06.108.
Full text
40
Sabir, Mona. "The L2 Acquisition of Mass Nouns by Arab Leaners of English." Advances in Language and Literary Studies 10, no. 5 (October 30, 2019): 152. http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.10n.5p.152.
Full textAbstract:
This study explores how Arab L2 learners of English acquire mass nouns. The mass/count distinction is a morphosyntactically encoded grammatical distinction. Arabic and English have different morphosyntactic realisations of mass nouns. English mass nouns take the form of bare singular whereas Arabic mass nouns can take the definite singular form or the indefinite singular, but never the bare singular form. Therefore, the study explores how Arab learners interpret English mass nouns in light of the morphosyntactic differences between the two languages. 45 upper- and lower-intermediate Arab English learners were given a context-based acceptability judgment task on English mass nouns. It was hypothesised that Arabic learners would be influenced by their first language (L1), causing them to over accept definite singulars and under accept bare singulars as grammatical in mass noun contexts. The findings are consistent with what was hypothesised, except that Arab learners were found to interpret bare singulars accurately. It is argued that learners’ performance is affected by not only L1transfer but also UG accessibility where learners can structure away from L1 and more towards L2. Consequently, the findings implicate that L2 teachers should not teach grammatical structures that come for free and instead they should focus on grammatical structures that cause L2 acquisition difficulty.
41
Ziegeler, Debra. "Count-mass coercion, and the perspective of time and variation." Constructions and Frames 2, no. 1 (July 30, 2010): 33–73. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/cf.2.1.02zie.
Full textAbstract:
In an earlier study (Ziegeler 2007), it was emphasised that it was redundant to discuss construction coercion in the face of more transparent mechanisms of cognitive pragmatics such as metonymy, and within the sphere of grammaticalisation studies. The present paper extends such arguments, including examples of (apparent) coercion of count-to-mass nouns in Colloquial Singaporean English, and, comparing the data with examples of noun referentiality in earlier historical English, illustrates that what on the surface may appear to be coercion is just a sub-type of metonymy, involved in the metaphorical generalisation of constructions across lexical-syntactic boundaries. Comparison with retention and unresolved mismatch in grammaticalisation is also considered.
42
마유미 and Oh, Yoon-Ja. "Korean EFL Learners’ Perceptions and Uses of Count/Mass Nouns." English21 27, no. 4 (December 2014): 463–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.35771/engdoi.2014.27.4.021.
Full text
43
Gillon, Brendan S. "Towards a common semantics for english count and mass nouns." Linguistics and Philosophy 15, no. 6 (December 1992): 597–639. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf00628112.
Full text
44
Godoy, Gustavo, and Walter Alves. "Notes on plurality and the count/mass distinction in Guató." Linguistic Variation 20, no. 2 (October 1, 2020): 230–38. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/lv.00017.god.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract Guató is an isolate, nearly extinct indigenous language. Only two elders, VS and EF, remember it. They both live in the Pantanal (State of Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil). Despite the decline in the number of speakers due to farmers’ invading land that once belonged to Indigenous people, new research has been conducted, resulting in a description of some aspects of its grammar. This paper shows the distribution of plural affixes, as used by EF. In Guató, all nouns combine directly with numerals, whether these nouns are mass or count. The language grammaticalizes the mass-count distinction only in the interpretation of quantifiers.
45
Thomas, Guillaume. "Countability in Mbyá." Linguistic Variation 20, no. 2 (October 1, 2020): 288–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/lv.00021.tho.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract This paper investigates the distribution of nouns in Mbyá (Tupi-Guarani), with respect to plural marking, numerals and quantifiers. The study reveals the existence of a robust grammatical distinction between a class of count nouns, which consists mostly of individual denoting nouns, and a class of mass nouns, which consists mostly of substance denoting nouns.
46
Brinton, Laurel J. "Aspectuality and countability: a cross-categorial analogy." English Language and Linguistics 2, no. 1 (May 1998): 37–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s136067430000068x.
Full textAbstract:
This paper expands the analogy between events and count nouns, and between states/activities and mass nouns in English to include other situation types, including iteratives, habits, and multiple situations. It explores the evidence used to make such analogies, namely, the quantificational features of deverbal nouns, as each of the deverbalizing devices in English has its own aspectual qualities. It shows further that a number of parallels can be drawn between different types of bounding and debounding in the nominal and verbal domains. Finally, the paper presents a schema of the cross-categorial analogies relating to inherent meaning (mass/count features in nouns, situation types in verbs) and the semantic operations of (de)bounding and (de)collectivizing (quantificational and aspectual modification).
47
Lin, Jing, and Jeannette Schaeffer. "Nouns are both mass and count: Evidence from unclassified nouns in adult and child Mandarin Chinese." Glossa: a journal of general linguistics 3, no. 1 (April 27, 2018): 54. http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.406.
Full text
48
Franchetto, Bruna. "Count, mass, number and numerals in Kuikuro (Upper Xingu Carib)." Linguistic Variation 20, no. 2 (October 1, 2020): 255–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/lv.00019.fra.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract This article deals with the multiple reflexes of the mass versus count distinction in Kuikuro, a dialect of a southern-branch language of the Carib family, spoken by 600 people at the edge of Brazilian Southern Amazonia. It updates and deepens previous research results presented in Franchetto et al. (2013). It is organized into four sections. After a summary profile of Kuikuro morphosyntax, the second and third sections present, respectively, the resources available for pluralization, with their sensitivity to the animate/inanimate and count/mass distinctions, and the system of cardinal numerals. Both sections are a required introduction to the rest of the article. The relevance of the distinction, which we consider primordial, between count nouns and mass nouns is the first-order question of the fourth section. Here we show not only Kuikuro’s basic sensitivity to this distinction, but also the specific contributions that this language brings to cross-linguistic comparisons and to the revision of possible cross-linguistic generalizations.
49
Muromatsu, Keiko. "Adjective ordering as the reflection of a hierarchy in the noun system." Linguistic Variation Yearbook 2001 1 (December 31, 2001): 181–207. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/livy.1.08mur.
Full textAbstract:
Adjective ordering in English, as in other languages, is nonrandom. In English, the restrictions involve left-to-right sequence, this being a specific case of the general principle: proximity of adjectives to the noun. This article provides a syntactic analysis of such restrictions, focusing not on the adjectives themselves but rather on properties of the nouns modified by them, namely their count/mass properties. Based on the claim that count and mass are hierarchically organized rather than dichotomous, as previously thought adjective ordering is shown to be a reflection of the count/mass distinction. This system accounts for the universality of the ordering restriction on adjectives, the universal principle being proximity to the noun. The difference in linear ordering in English and Spanish is ascribed to the presence/absence of a functional category, this being considered as a parameter. Non-canonically ordered adjectives in English are given a syntactic account as well, thus obviating the need for a pragmatic account.
50
Chamorro, Pilar, and Fábio Bonfim Duarte. "On the semantic properties of mass and count nouns in Guajajára (Tenetehára)." Linguistic Variation 20, no. 2 (October 1, 2020): 366–81. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/lv.00027.cha.
Full textAbstract:
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.