Two Types of Classifier Languages: A Typological Study of Classification Markers in Paiwan Noun Phrases

Abstract

Recently many claims have been made concerning the contrasts in the occurrence of classifiers in the presence of numerals with nouns as well as the nonoccurrence of plural morphology in the presence of classifiers with nouns between languages like Chinese and those like English. This paper examines some relevant analyses such as Cheng & Sybesma (1999), Li (1999), and Chierchia (1998) in view of the morphological, syntactic, and semantic behavior of numerals in languages like Paiwan. Our findings in Paiwan, together with those in other Formosan and Tibeto-Burman languages, indicate that these accounts are all problematic in that they cannot capture the cross-linguistic distribution of numerals with classifiers, plural morphology, and nouns. For a more plausible approach, it is suggested that, in addition to the cross-linguistic variations in the morphological, syntactic, and semantic structures of numerals, classifiers, and plural morphology, so-called classifier languages should be further distinguished as poor- or rich-classifier languages.

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 — 45 citations exist upstream.

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