Are all languages 'Numeral Classifier Languages'?

Abstract

Greenberg (1975) observes that, “it is generally the case that numeral classifier languages will apparently lack a classifier in nouns indicating periods of time, units of distance and the word ‘time’ in such phrases as ‘five times’. [In Greenberg 1972] it was hypothesized that in these cases the correct interpretation was not that the classifier is omitted but that words like ‘day’, ‘mile’ and ‘time’ are themselves measures of verbal action so that we have to do with a subtype of the overall classifier or measure phrases. In other words, such phrases as ‘five days’ are rather to be identified with (Q ↔ Cl) than (Q ↔ N).” (p. 30). Certain numeral classifier languages provide direct evidence for this conclusion as the apparently classifier-less N does not occupy the normal position of the noun but that of the “absent” classifier. This is especially evident in Thai, where the noun and the numeral classifier are on opposite sides with respect to the numeral: N Num CL. As Allan (1977, 306f) notes, nouns like ‘year’, in adverbial constructions, unexpectedly appear with a numeral without an accompanying numeral classifier:

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 51 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.