5. Conclusion
5.2 Limitations and Suggestion
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Chapter 5. Conclusion
5.1 Summary
In this paper, we try to clarify the relationship between numeral classifiers and plural marking. Are they in complementary distribution? Are they the same category?
Do they co-occur in a noun phrase? From the data analysis of 22 languages, we found that classifiers and plurals are not in complementary distribution in a noun phrase, but they are in complementary distribution in a language or within the range of their usage. Since classifiers and plurals are in complementary distribution in most languages in the world, and they are in complementary distribution in the range of their usage in the 19 languages (except for Mokilese and Kathmandu Newar), classifiers and plurals are the same category but in co-head structure as shown in (120).
5.2 Limitations and Suggestion
Although a wide range of data were collected in this paper, there are still some limitations. First, the majority of the 22 languages are not widely-used, so only a few linguists have done research. For example, Watter is the only linguist who has made a deep study of Kham; likewise Besnier for Tuvaluan. Second, the data are secondary sources, we can only analyze them based on the data presented by the authors. For
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
instance, we are unable to ascertain the exact usage of classifiers in Hatam, since the data only show four classifiers –ngud, -njon, -mon, and –ngan. Therefore, we do not know whether there are only four classifiers in Hatam, or whether these are four classifiers that the author has found. In Hungarian, there are human classifiers, inanimate classifiers and shape classifiers, but no animal classifiers were shown. So we can only infer that there are animal classifiers from the hierarchy in (23). Last, we are not sure whether our examples can lead to a correct result. For example, if a non-native speaker of Mandarin finds the two examples as in (124a) and (124b), he may consider Mandarin to be an optional classifier language. However, without classifiers, the sentence is ungrammatical in most cases, such as (124c) and (124d).
(124) a. 三 個 人 san ge ren three CL people
‘three people’
b. 二十 人 二十一 腳 ershi ren ershiyi jiao twenty people twenty-one feet
‘twenty people with twenty-one feet’
c. *我 需要 五 紙 wo xuyao wu zhi I need five paper
‘I need five sheet of paper’
d. *你 找到 三 書 了 嗎 ? ni zhaodao san shu le ma ?
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
You find three book ‘Did you find three books?’
Therefore, the analysis in this paper is limited.
To improve the deficiencies of this study, some suggestions for further research are given as following. First, fieldwork can be carried out to collect sufficient raw data to compensate for the less reliable secondary data. If we can consult native speakers in each language, we can collect enough data to allow for a convincing analysis to our topic. Second, the standard of the ranking can be set more strictly. In this way, we can differentiate the languages along a scale more clearly. Third, there are certain languages the data for which does not correspond to the conclusions in this paper as Mokilese which contains complete classifier and plural systems, and so such languages deserves a more detailed examination in further research. Last, if data from more languages were collected, we may find that the CPCD principle may be more reliable.
Although there are numerous ways to improve the results of this paper, in the current study, we make the conclusion that first, classifiers and plurals are in complementary distribution in appearance and usage. And second, that classifiers and plurals belong to the same category but co-head, so it is possible for them to co-occur in the same noun phrase.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Reference
Aarssen, J., & Backus, A. (2001). Colloquial Turkish: the complete course for beginner. London and New York: Routledge.
Aikhenvald, A.Y. (2000). Classifiers: A Typology of Noun Categorization Devices.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Alfons, N. A. (2010). Reduplication System of Hatam: Form and Function.
Linguistika, 17(1), 1-17.
Besnier, N. (2000). Tuvaluan: Polynesian Languages of the Central Pacific. London and New York: Routledge.
Bickel, B. (2003). Belhare. In G.Thurgood and R. J. LaPolla (Eds.) The Sino-Tibetan languages. 546-569. London: Routledge
Bisang, W. (1999). Classifiers in East and Southeast Asian languages. Counting and beyond. In J. Gvozdanović (Ed.), Numeral Types and Changes Worldwide.
pp.113-185. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Borer, H. (2005). Structuring Sense, Vol. 1: In Name Only. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Bowden, J. (2001) Taba: Description of a South Halmahera Language.Canberra:
Pacific linguistics.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Bugaeva, A. (2012). Southern Hokkaido Ainu. In N. Tranter (Ed.), The Languages of Japan and Korea. Routledge.
Burling, R. (1961). A Garo Grammar. Deccan College Postgraduate and Research Institute Poona.
Burling, R. (2003). Garo. In G.Thurgood and R. J. LaPolla (Eds.) The Sino-Tibetan languages. 387-400. London: Routledge
Burling, R. (2004). The Language of the Modhupur Mandi (Garo). Volume I:
Grammar. New Delhi: Bibliophile South Asia& Morganville, N.J. Promilla.
Chao, Y.-R. (1968). A Grammar of Spoken Chinese. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Cheng,L. L.-S. & Sybesma, R. (1999). Bare and not so bare nouns and the structure of NP. Linguistic Inquiry, 30(4), 509-542.
Chierchia, G. (1998). Plurality of mass nouns and the notion of “Semantic Parameter”
In: S. Rothstein (ed.). Events and Grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 53–103.
Corbett, G. (2000). Number. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Csirmaz, A., & Dékány, É . (2010). Hungarian Classifiers. Paper presented at Word Classes: Nature, Typology, Computational Representation.
Dalrymple, M. & Suriel M. (2009). Plural semantics, reduplication, and numeral modification in Indonesian. Journal of Semantics, 29, 229-260.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Day, C. (1973). Meaning in Mayan Languages (The Sementics of Social Categories in a Transformational Grammar of Jacaltec*). Munro S. Edmonson (ed.) Mounton and Co.N.V, Publishers, The Hague.
Day, C. (1973). The Jacaltec Langauge. Indiana University.
Dékány, É . K. (2011). A Profile of the Hungarian DP: The Interaction of lexicalization, agreement and linearization with the functional sequence.
Dissertation. Univerity of Tromsø.
Doetjes, J. (2008). Counting and degree modification. Recherches linguistiques de Vincennes, 37, 139-161.
Doetjes, J. (to appear). Count/mass distinction across languages. In Claudia Maienborn, Klaus von Heusinger and Paul Portner (Eds.) Semantics: an international handbook of natural language meaning, partIII, Berlin: De Gruyter.
Downing, P. (1996). Numeral classifier systems : the case of Japanese. Amsterdam:
Benjamins.
Dryer, M. (1989). Plural words. Linguistics, 27, 865-895.
Ehrman, M. E., & Sos K. (1972). Contemporary Cambodian: Grammatical Sketch.Washington, D.C.: Foreign Service Institute.
Emrah, G. (2011). Plural marking in Turkish: Additive or associative? Working Papers
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
of the Linguistics Circle of the University of Victoria, 21, 70-80.
Fehri, F. (2005). Distribution of Number and Classifier in Arabic and Chinese and parametrization. Linguistic Research, 9, 9-52
Gil, D. (2008). Numeral classifiers. In: Haspelmath, Martin & Dryer, Matthew S. &
Gil, David & Comrie, Bernard (Eds.) The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Munich: Max Planck Digital Library, chapter 55. Available online at http://wals.info/feature/55. Accessed on 2012/5/21.
Gilbert, R. K. (2008). Cambodian for Beginners. Paiboon Publishing.
Göksel, A., & Kerslake, C. (2005). Turkish: A comprehensive grammar. London, New York : Routledge.
Göksel, A., & Kerslake, C. (2011). Turkish: An Essential Grammar. London, New York : Routledge .
Gorgoniyev, Y. A. (1966). The Khmer Language. Moscow: Nauka Pub.
Greenberg, J. (1972). Numeral classifiers and substantival number: problems in the genesis of a linguistic type. Working Papers on Language Universals, 9, 1-39.
Stanford, CA: Department of Linguistics, Stanford University
Greenberg, J. (1990). On language. Selected writings of Joseph H. Greenberg, ed. By Denning, K. and S. Kemmer. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Greenberg, J. (1963). Universals of language. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Gruzdeva, E. (1998). Nivkh. LINCOM EUROPA.
Haiman, J. (1984). A Cambodian (Khmer) Grammar. John Benjamins B.V.
Hale, A. & Shrestha, K. P. (2006). Newar(Nepal Bhasa). LINCOM EUROPA Press.
Hale, A., & Shresthachrya, I.(1973). Is Newari a Classifier Language? Nepalese studies, 1(1), 1-21.
Harrison, S. (1976). Mokilese reference grammar. Honolulu: University Press of Hawaii.
Hargreaves, D. (2003). Kathmandu Newar. In G. Thurgood and R. J. LaPolla (Ed.) The Sino-Tibetan Languages (pp.371). London: Routledge.
Haspelmath, M. (2008). Occurrence of nominal plurality. In Haspelmath, Martin &
Dryer, Matthew S. & Gil, David & Comrie, Bernard (Eds.) The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Munich: Max Planck Digital Library, chapter 34.
Available online at http://wals.info/feature/34. Accessed on 2012/5/21.
Her, O.-S. and Lai, W.-J. (2011). Classifiers: The Many Ways to Profile ‘one’: A Case Study of Taiwan Mandarin. Unpublished manuscript. National Chengchi University.
Her, O.-S. (2012a). Distinguishing classifiers and measure words: A mathematical perspective and implications. Lingua, 122(14), 1668-1691.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Her, O.-S. (2012b). Deriving Classifiers Word Order Typology, or Greenberg’s Universal 20A*. Unpublished manuscript. National Chengchi University.
Huang, C.-T., Li, Y.-H., & Li, Y.-F. (2009). The Syntax of Chinese. Cambridge University Press.
Iljic, R. (1994). Quantification in Mandarin Chinese: two markers of plurality.
Linguistics, 32, 91-116.
Ishii, Y. (2000). Plurality and Definiteness in Japanese. Ganda University.
Kenesei, I., Vago, R. M., & Fenyvesi, A. (1998). Hungarian. New York: Routledge.
Kim, J. (2005). Plurality in Classifier Languages. University of California.
Dissertation.
Kim, Chonghyuck. (2005). The Korean Plural Marker Tul and its Implication.
University of Delaware. Dissertation.
Kindaichi, K. & Chiri, M（1936）。Ainu yu fagai shuo アイヌ語法槪說。東京都：
岩波。
van Klinken, C. L. (1999). A grammar of the Feban dialect of Tetun: An Austronesian language of West Timor. Pacific linguistics.
van Klinken, C. L., Hajek J., & Nordlinger R. (2002). A short grammar of Tetun Dili.
LINCOM EUROPA Press.
van Klinken, C. L., Hajek J., & Nordlinger R. (2002). Tetun Dili: A Grammar of an
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
East Timorese Language. Pacific linguistics.
Kornfilt, Jaklin. (1997). Turkish: Descriptive Grammar. London: Routledge.
Lewis, G. (2000). Turkish Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Li, Y.-H. (1999). Plurality in a classifier language. Journal of East Asian Linguistics.
8(1), 75-99.
Li, C. and Thopmson, S. (1981). Mandarin Chinese (A Functional Reference Grammar). Universality of California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles and London Lynch, J., Ross, M., & Crowley, T. (2002). The Oceanic Languages. Curzo Press.
Massam, D. (2009). On the Separation and Relatedness of Classifiers, Number, and Individuation in Niuean. University of Toronto Language and linguistics, 10(4), 669-699.
Mattissen, J. (2003). Dependent-Head Synthesis in Nivkh: A Contribution to a Typology Polythesis. John Benjamins B.V.
Nakanishi, K., & Tomioka, S. (2004). Japanese Plurals are Exceptional. Journal of East Asia Linguistics, 13, 113-140.
Nguyen, T. H. (2004). The Structure of the Vietnamese Noun Phrase. Boston: Boston University dissertation.
Nomoto, H. (2010). Reference to subkinds, general number and the role of classifiers.
Paper presented at the 2010 annual meeting of Linguistic Society of America
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
(LSA).
Norman, J. (1988) Chinese. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Noonan, M. (2003). Chantyal. In G. Thurgood and R. J. LaPolla (Ed.) The Sino-Tibetan Languages (pp.315-335). London: Routledge.
Noonan, M. (2003). Recent Language Contact in the Nepal Himalaya.
Park S.-Y. (2008). Plural marking in classifier languages: a case study of the so-called plural marking –tul in Korean. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics, 28, 281-295.
Patrie, J. (1982). The Genetic Relationship of the Ainu Langauge. The University Press of Hawaii.
Quesada, J. D. (2000). A Grammar of Teribe. LINCOM EUROPA Press.
Reesink, G. P. (1999). A grammar of Hatam: Bird’s Head Peninsula, Irian Jaya.
Canberra: Pacific linguistics
Sanches, M., & Slobin, L. (1973). Numeral classifiers and plural marking: An implicational universal. Working Papers in Language Universals, 11, 1-22.
Seifart, F. (2009). Towards a typology of unitization: Miraña noun classes compared to numeral classifiers and singulatives. University of Regensburg.
Shibatani, M. (1990). The languages of Japan. Cambridge University Press.
Shopen, T. (1979). Languages and Their Speakers. Winthrop Publishers. Inc
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Sneddon, J. N. (1996). Indonesian: A Comprehensive Grammar. New York:
Routledge.
Sohn, H.-M., & Bender, B.W. (1973). A Ulithian Grammar. Canberra: Austalian National University.
Thang, L. T. (1999). Representation of Space in Vietnamese. Mon-khmer Studies, (29),
71-80.
T’sou, B. K. (1976). The structure of nominal classifier systems. In P. N. Jenner, S.
Starosta, and L. C. Thompson. (eds.). Austoasiastic Studies, 2, 1215-1247.
Honolulu, Hawaiii: University of Hawaii Press.
Vinet M.-T. and Liu X.-Y. (2008). Plurality in Chinese with a restricted class of noun- classifier words. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics, 28, 357-373.
Wang, L. (王力)（1989). Han yu yu fa shi (漢語語法史)。商務印書館。
Watanabe, A. (2006). Functional Projections of Nominals in Japanese: Syntax of Classifiers. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 24, 241-306.
Watters, D. E. (2002). A Grammar of Kham. Cambridge University Press
Watters, D. E. (2003). Kham. In G. Thurgood and R. J. LaPolla (Ed.) The Sino-Tibetan Languages (pp. 683- 703). London: Routledge.
Weidert, A. K. (1984). The Classifier Construction of Newari and its Historical Southeast Asian Background. Kailash: A Journal of Himalayan Studies, 11(3-4),
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
185-210.
Xu, Q.-T. (徐啟庭)（1997）。 Gu jin han yu yu fa yi tong(古今漢語語法異同)。調 和文化事業股份有限公司。
Yang, B.- J. & He, L.-S. (扬伯峻、何乐士)（1992）。Gu han yu yu fa ji qi fa zhan. 古 (漢語語法及其發展)。YUWEN Chubarohe 語文出版社。
Zhang, H. (2007). Numeral classifiers in Mandarin Chinese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics, 16(1), 43-59.
Zhang, L.-H. (張龍虎) (1987)。gu jin cheng wei man hua (古今稱謂漫話)。華夏出 版社。
Zhang, X.-F. (2008). Chinese –men and associative plurals. Toronto Working Papers in Linguistics, 28, 407-425. University of Toronto.
‧
The 22 Languages Categorization in WALS Online Database
Categorization Languages
Plurals: All nouns, optional in inanimates
a. Belhare
‧
The Relation of Numeral Classifier and Plural Marker Slobin and Sanches (1973)