Cover not available
Article published In:
Lexical plurals and beyond
Edited by Peter Lauwers and Marie Lammert
[Lingvisticæ Investigationes 39:2] 2016
► pp. 289–308

Collectives, object mass nouns and individual count nouns

Nouns between lexical and inflectional plural marking

| Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen |

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.

Keywords: object mass nouns, collective nouns, lexical plural, inflectional plural, lexicalisation
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • 1.The conceptual domains of OMNs and the variability of their near-synonyms
  • 2.The variants of superordinates
    • 2.1Spatio-temporally bounded collective nouns
    • 2.2Object mass nouns (OMNs)
    • 2.3Between OMNs with a lexical plural and inflected individual count nouns
    • 2.4Individual count nouns
  • 3.Conceptual synchronic and diachronic links between the variants
  • 4.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgments
  • Author queries
  • References
Published online: 30 March 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/li.39.2.05mih
References
Acquaviva, P
(2008) Lexical plurals. A Morphosemantic Approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Baayen, R. H., McQueen, J., Dijkstra, T. & Schreuder, R
(2003) Frequency effects in regular inflectional morphology: Revisiting Dutch plurals. In R. H. Baayen & R. Schreuder (Eds.), Morphological structure in language processing (pp. 355–390). Berlin: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barner, D. & Snedeker, J
(2005) Quantity judgments and individuation: evidence that mass nouns count. Cognition 97,1, 41–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bosque Muñoz, I
(1999) El nombre común. In I. Bosque Muñoz & V. Demonte (Eds.), Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española (Vol. 11, pp. 3–75). Madrid: Espasa Calpe.Google Scholar
CDE Davies, Mark: Corpus del Español [URL] [04/08/2016].
Chierchia, G
(2010) Mass nouns, vagueness, and semantic variation. Synthese, 1741, 99–149. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Corbett, G
(2000) Number. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
CREA REAL ACADEMIA ESPAÑOLA: Banco de datos (CREA) [online]. Corpus de referencia del español actual. [URL] [04/08/2016]
CORPES REAL ACADEMIA ESPAÑOLA: Banco de datos (CORPES XXI) [online]. Corpus del Español del Siglo XXI (CORPES). [URL] [04/08/2016]
CORDE REAL ACADEMIA ESPAÑOLA: Banco de datos (CORDE) [online]. Corpus diacrónico del español. [URL] [04/08/2016]
Cruse, D. A
(1986) Lexical Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
DCECH = Corominas, J. & Pascual, J. A (Eds.) (1980–1991) Diccionario crítico etimológico castellano e hispánico (Vols. 1–61). Madrid: Gredos.Google Scholar
DHLF = Rey, A (Ed.) (1998) Dictionnaire historique de la langue française (Vols. 1–31, 2nd ed.). Paris: Dictionnaires Le Robert.Google Scholar
DLE = REAL ACADEMIA ESPAÑOLA (2014): Diccionario de la lengua española. 23rd edition [URL] [04/08/2016]Google Scholar
Enghels, R
(2008) Le rôle du nombre dans la recatégorisation massif – comptable en français et en espagnol. Romanistisches Jahrbuch, 541, 77–97.Google Scholar
FEW = Wartburg, W. von (1922−2002) Französisches etymologisches Wörterbuch: eine Darstellung des galloromanischen Sprachschatzes (Vols. 1–251, ed. by O. Jänicke & C. T. Gossen). Basel, et al.: Zbinden, et al.Google Scholar
Flaux, N
(1999) À propos des noms collectifs. Revue de Linguistique Romane, 631, 471–502.Google Scholar
GDW = Grimm, J. & Grimm, W (1854–1893) Deutsches Wörterbuch (Vols. 1–161). Leipzig: Hirzel.Google Scholar
Gréa, P
(2013) ‘Deux-trois mots’ sur les déterminants de petite quantité: pluriel continu et perception sémantique. Journal of French Language Studies, 231, 193–219. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, J
(1972) Numeral classifiers and substantival number: Problems in the genesis of a linguistic type. Working papers on language universals, 91, 1–39.Google Scholar
Grevisse, M. & Goosse, A
(1993) Le Bon Usage. Paris: De Boeck et Duculot.Google Scholar
Grimm, S. & Levin, B
(2011) Between count and mass: Furniture and other functional collectives. Paper presented at the Linguistics Society of America Annual Meeting , Pittsburgh, USA. Retrieved from [URL] [04/08/2016].
Imai, M. & Gentner, D
(1997) A cross-linguistic study of early word meaning: universal ontology and linguistic influence. Cognition, 621, 169–200. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Joosten, F
(2010) Collective nouns, aggregate nouns, and superordinates. When ‘part of’ and ‘kind of’ meet. Lingvisticæ Investigationes, 33(1), 25–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kleiber, G
(2014) Lorsque l’opposition massif / comptable rencontre les noms superordonnés. Travaux de linguistique, 691, 11–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lammert, M
(2010) Sémantique et cognition: les noms collectifs. Genève: Droz.Google Scholar
Langacker, R. W
(1991) Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Vol. 2: Descriptive application. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Lasersohn, P
(2011) Mass nouns and plurals. In K. von Heusinger, C. Maienborn & P. Portner (Eds.), Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, Vol. 21 (pp. 1131–1153). Berlin/ Boston: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Lauwers, P
(2014) Les pluriels ‘lexicaux’. Typologie quantifiée des déficits de dénombrabilité. Langue française, 1831, 117–132. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Markman, E. M
(1985) Why superordinate category terms can be mass nouns. Cognition, 191, 31–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McCawley, J
(1979) Lexicography and the count-mass distinction. In J. Mc Cawley (Ed.), Vowels, and Other Objects of Wonder (pp. 165–173). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
McRae, K. & Jones, M. N
(2013) Semantic Memory. In D. Reisberg (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Psychology (pp. 206–219). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Meisterfeld, R
(1998) Numerus und Nominalaspekt. Eine Studie zur romanischen Apprehension. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Michaux, C
(1992) The collectives in French: A Linguistic Investigation. Lingvisticae Investigationes, 161, 99–124. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mihatsch, W
(2005) Experimental Data vs. Diachronic Typological Data: Two Types of Evidence for Linguistic Relativity. In S. Kepser & M. Reis (Eds.), Linguistic Evidence - Empirical, Theoretical, and Computational Perspectives (pp. 371–392). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2006) Kognitive Grundlagen lexikalischer Hierarchien untersucht am Beispiel des Französischen und Spanischen. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007) Taxonomic and Meronomic Superordinates with Nominal Coding. In D. Zaefferer & A. Schalley (Eds.), Ontolinguistics. How ontological status shapes the linguistic coding of concepts (pp. 359–378). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
(2015) La position taxinomique et les réseaux méronymiques des noms généraux ‘être humain’ français et allemands. In W. Mihatsch & C. Schnedecker (Eds.), Les noms d’humains. Une catégorie à part? (pp. 85–113). Stuttgart: Steiner.Google Scholar
Moltmann, F
(1997) Parts and wholes in semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Morreale, M
(1973) Aspectos gramaticales y estilísticos del número (Segunda parte). Boletín de la Real Academia Española, 531, 99–206.Google Scholar
Murphy, G. L. & Wisniewski, E. J
(1989) Categorizing objects in isolation and in scenes: What a superordinate is good for. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 151, 572–586. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
OED = Simpson, J. & Weiner, E (Eds.) (1989) The Oxford English Dictionary (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press [OED-Online retrieved from [URL]].Google Scholar
Ojeda, A. E
(2005) The paradox of mass plurals. In S. Mufwene, et al. (Eds.), Polymorphous linguistics (pp. 389–410). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Quirk, R. et al.
(1985) A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Rosch, E., Mervis, C. B., Gray, W. D., Johnson, D. M. & Boyes-Braem, P
(1976) Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 81, 382–439. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rothstein, S
in press). Semantics for Counting and Measuring. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logo
Sánchez Avendaño, C
(2007) Para que la gente se enteren: la concordancia ad sensum en español oral. Revista de Filología y Lingüística de la Universidad de Costa Rica, 331, 205–226. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schön, I
(1971) Neutrum und Kollektivum. Das Morphem -a im Lateinischen und Romanischen. Innsbruck: Institut für vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft.Google Scholar
Schwarzschild, R
(2011) Stubborn Distributivity, Multiparticipant Nouns and the Count/ Mass Distinction. In S. Lima, K. Mullin & B. Smith (Eds.), NELS 39: Proceedings of the 39th Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society (Vol. 21, pp. 661–678). Amherst, MA: GLSA Publications.Google Scholar
Tiersma, P. M
(1982) Local and general markedness. Language, 581, 832–849. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
TLFi Le Trésor de la Langue Française Informatisé. (n.d.). Retrieved from [URL][04/08/2016]
Wierzbicka, A
(1985) Lexicography and Conceptual Analysis. Ann Arbor: Karoma.Google Scholar
Wiese, H
(2012) Collectives in the intersection of mass and count nouns: A cross-linguistic account. In D. Massam (Ed.), Count and mass across languages (pp. 54–74). Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Winston, M. E., Chaffin, R. & Herrmann, D
(1987) A taxonomy of part-whole relations. Cognitive Science, 111, 417–444. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 8 other publications

Franco, Ludovico, Benedetta Baldi & Leonardo M. Savoia
2020. Collectivizers in Italian (and beyond). The interplay between collectivizing and evaluating morphology (and the Div paradox). Studia Linguistica 74:1 ► pp. 2 ff. DOI logo
Gréa, Philippe
2024.  Quelques in French: a Clustered Plural. Journal of Semantics DOI logo
Kleineberg, Désirée
2023. Chapter 2. Collection nouns as a derivational category in Spanish. In Constructions in Spanish [Constructional Approaches to Language, 34], ► pp. 28 ff. DOI logo
Mackenzie, J. Lachlan
2019. Is there a pluralia tantum subcategory of nominal gerunds? Developing Gaeta's notion of morphological differentiation. Language Sciences 73 ► pp. 179 ff. DOI logo
Mihatsch, Wiltrud
2021. Chapter 14. French type-noun constructions based on genre. In Building Categories in Interaction [Studies in Language Companion Series, 220], ► pp. 373 ff. DOI logo
Mihatsch, Wiltrud & Désirée Kleineberg
2024. The Interaction of Morphosyntax and Semantics in Romance Object Mass Nouns. In Nouns and the Morphosyntax / Semantics Interface, ► pp. 153 ff. DOI logo
Schmid, Sarah Dessì
2021. Zur Beziehung von progressiven Verbalperiphrasen undstates. Ein erster Bericht aus Studien zu romanischen Sprachen. Romanistisches Jahrbuch 72:1 ► pp. 31 ff. DOI logo
Östling, Robert, Carl Börstell & Servane Courtaux
2018. Visual Iconicity Across Sign Languages: Large-Scale Automated Video Analysis of Iconic Articulators and Locations. Frontiers in Psychology 9 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 3 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.