Classifiers in Autolexical Perspective

Eric Schiller

Linguistics Unlimited

Initial post: February ?, 1999

Latest revision:

Abstract: Classifiers…

Citation: Schiller, Eric. 1999. Classifiers in Autolexical Perspective. Published online at www.chessworks.com.

Introduction

Classifiers are used in many languages to specify units for counting things. As a semantic category they are (evidently) universal. English, for example, has Two slices of bread, but many languages have a far more elaborate system with many grammatical implications. The purpose of this paper is to outline the word order problems and present an autolexical analysis of the syntax and semantics of classifiers. The ALGAE framework will be used for the presentation of material, but the analysis is theory neutral.

For in-text discussion I will be presenting each lexical item in an English gloss. The linguistic data is in an appendix, or hyperlinked in the document. It is easier to follow the argumentation this way. Eventually, I hope to translate this document to the ALEXML scripting language, which will allow reader with XML-enabled browsers to display or hide information as desired.

This paper does not include discussion of relative clauses which may be part of the noun phrase. That topic will be treated in a separate article.

Data

Classifiers are found in many languages, but are often optional constituents of the noun phrase. The data to be discussed here are representative, and I have tried to use languages where classifiers are obligatory. The noun phrases under discussion will have a noun (N), optional modifier of the head (M), Numeral (#), Classifier (c) and Demonstrative (D). For the moment, the symbols used have no theory-specific meaning and can be taken as informal notational devices. The following word orders are attested:

Order	Languages	Examples
NA#CD	Most Mon-Khmer	KHM 1, CHR 1
NAD#C	Lahu	LAH 1
D#CAN	Mien, Mandarin	MIE 1, MAN 1
#CNAD	Hmong	HMO 1
DNA#C	Burmese	BUR 1

Analysis

We can immediately draw two useful conclusions.

The numeral always precedes the classifier

Noun modifiers are always adjacent to the noun

So, we can simplify the structure by moving up a level, where # and C are a constituent, we'll call CL, for the moment. The noun+modifier structure is N1, a conventional N-bar. Our chart is therefore:

Order	Languages	Examples
N1 CL D	Most Mon-Khmer	KHM 1, CHR 1
N1 D CL	Lahu	LAH 1
D CL N1	Mien, Mandarin	MIE 1
CL N1 D	Hmong	HMO 1
D N1 CL	Burmese	BRM 1
CL D N1	<not in sample>

There is no common ordering relation between the constituents. We can try correlating the orders with other aspects of the grammar, such as the order of verb and object, often taken as some sort of underlying parameter with great explanatory power.

Order	Languages	Verb-object order
N1 CL D	Most Mon-Khmer	VO
N1 D CL	Lahu	OV
D CL N1	Mien, Mandarin	VO, OV
CL N1 D	Hmong	VO
D N1 CL	Burmese	OV
CL D N1	<not in sample>

We cannot correlate the verb-object order with the order of NP constituents. To get a better picture, let's break up N1 into noun (N) and adjective (A). The CL constituent is always numeral-classifier, so there is no reason to divide that category. There are six linear precedence facts to consider, in addition to the verb-object order, which I'll take as representing the basic head-modifier order in the language. Items in bold indicate that the order seems to vary from the normal head-modifier relation.

MK	Hmong	Mien	Burmese	Lahu
N>A	N>A	N>A	N>A	N>A
N>CL	C>N	CL>N	N>CL	N>C
N>D	N>D	N<D	D>N	N>D
A>CL	CL>A	A>CL	A>CL	A>C
A>D	A>D	D>A	D>A	A>D
CL>D	CL>D	D>C	D>C	D>CL
V>O	V>O		O>V	O>V

Before investigating a fuller typological survey, let's look at the formal syntax of these constructions.

The Syntax of Classified Noun Phrases

The figures below represent the constituent structure of the syntax of noun phrases which contain classifiers.

Figure 1: Structure of the Mon-Khmer type classifier

Figure 2: Structure of the Hmong type classifier

Figure 3: Structure of the Mien type classifier

Figure 4: Structure of the Lahu type classifier

Figure 5: Structure of the Burmese type classifier

The first three are straightforward enough. The noun-modifier and classifier constructs are each N1. They join to form a larger N1 constituent, which is modified by a demonstrative (D) which functions as a syntactic operator converting the N1 into a full noun phrase (N2). Lahu, however, presents a problem, as the demonstrative combines with the head N1, leaving the classifier phrase to swing in the wind. One could propose a discontinuous structure, but that is hardly in the spirit of autolexical analysis.

Burmese, the final example, is different from the Lahu by having the demonstrative in the first position, to the left of the head N-bar instead of the right. The dominance relations are the same as that of the Khmer type, representing what we might take to be the normal or typical structure. We will return to this issue in the typology section below.

We have so far been treating each element as belonging to a distinct category. However, we have assumed that the structure containing the numeral and classifier is an N-bar. If so, shouldn't it have a noun as head? Most classifiers are nouns, so it seems reasonable to assign that element a head feature. On the other hand, that would violate all sorts of head-modifier rules.

The semantics of classified Noun Phrases

The classified noun phrases we have been looking at contain 5 elements organized as follows:

Figure 6: Semantic structure of a classified noun phrase

This can also be expressed as

Bound entity

(Quantified entity

(entity (entity, property))

(quantifier (quantifier, counter)))

(Binder)

Lexical Entries for elements of the noun phrase

The following chart presents relevant grammatical aspects of the lexical entries for elements which are typically found in a noun phrase.

Item	Semantics	Syntax	Morphology
Head noun	Semcat k	Syncat N0	Morcat nml
Adjective	Semcat f	Syncat [N0>>N1]	Morcat adj
Numeral	Semcat q	Syncat A	Morcat inert
Classifier	Semcat u [+count]	Syncat N	Morcat nml
Demonstrative	semcat D index(k, x) [Deixis {values...}] [Plurality {sng, plu}]	syncat [N1>>N2]	morcat inert

The category D is a function that assigns an index (binds a variable) to some appropriate entry in the context register.

Reconciling syntax and semantics

Keeping in mind that our semantic representation is not ordered linearly, most of the languages are harmonic:

Fig. 7: Syntax-semantics interface

The diagram above shows a completely harmonic relationship between syntax and semantics, with both linear order and configuration mirrored across the interface. We find this structure in the Mon-Khmer type of language. In these languages, the Head-Modifier precedence rule is Head > Modifier, and it is seen with great consistency. The languages are Verb > Object languages. For a typical Object > Verb language, we would expect the linear order to be reversed:

Fig. 8: Idealized harmonic classified noun phrase

However, this is never the case. The numeral always precedes the classifier, regardless of word order. The best the language can do is the following:

Fig. 9: Compromised classified noun phrase

This follows the Generalized Interface Principle (Sadock & Schiller). Given the linear precedence rule Num > Clf . There is no serious interface violation, because there is no linear precedence in semantics, only hierarchical structure. So the quantifier is unordered with respect to the counter, a sister node. Mien and Mandarin show this order. The Lahu data is anomalous., but again the interface violation is not problematic.

Fig. 10: Lahu-type classified noun phrase

Harmonic Typology of classified Noun Phrases

We have previously discussed some typological characteristics of the languages which have classifier systems. We'll expand the survey here so that we can examine the degree of syntactic harmony of each language. In a syntactically harmonious language, the word order reflects an underlying head-modifier hierarchy. We expect that in a language where a verb precedes and object, we'll find that the noun precedes all modifiers. When the object comes first, the modifier should too. Of course a great number of language violate this default association. English, for example, places the verb first, but puts adjectives in front of nouns.

{table not complete}

	Khmer	Hmong	Mien	Burmese	Lahu	Lao
Type	9	9		24		9
Family	MK	HM	HM	ST	ST	TK
Word	SVO	SVO		SOV	SOV	SVO
Adposition	P>N	P>N	P>N	N>P		P>N
Demonstrative	N>D			D>N		N>D
Adjective	N>A			N>A%		N>A
Genetive	N>G			G>N		N>G
Numeral	N>#			#>N		N>#

{The examples have not been prepared yet, so this draft effectively ends here.

Examples

Mon-Khmer

Tai-Kadai

Hmong-Mien

Sino-Tibetan

Revision history

Version 1.0 posted {DATE}

References

{link to general reference file}