Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T00:53:15.198Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Associative forms in a typology of number systems: evidence from Yup'ik1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2008

Greville G. Corbett  and
Marianne Mithun
Greville G. Corbett
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistic and International Studies, University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey GU2 5XH, U.K. E-mail: [email protected]
Marianne Mithun
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, U.S.A. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

A general typology of number systems has to confront the problem of variation both in the number values in different languages and in the inventories of nominals involved. We start from the Smith-Stark Hierarchy and extend this approach to additional numbers (such as dual and paucal). Associative plurals appear to undermine this typology, if we treat them as a third number. Either the associative plural or the ordinary plural proves to be exceptional.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Linguistics , Volume 32 , Issue 1 , March 1996 , pp. 1 - 17
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1996

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allan, Keith. (1980). Nouns and countability. Language. 56 541–567.Google Scholar
Corbett, Greville G. (1995). Minor number and the plurality split. In Borg Albert & Plank Frans (eds.) The Maltese noun phrase meets typology. (European Science Foundation Programme in Language Typology: Theme 7, Noun Phrase Structure: Working Paper 25). [EUROTYP Working Paper VII/25.] Revised version to appear in Rivista di Linguistica.Google Scholar
Durie, Mark. (1986). The grammaticization of number as a verbal category. In Nikiforidou, Vassiliki; Vanclay, MarysemicolonNiepokuj, Mary & Feder, Deborah (eds.) Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society: February 13–17, 1986. Berkeley, California: B.L.S., University of California. 355–370.Google Scholar
Gil, David. (1993). Nominal and verbal quantification. Sprachtypologie und Universaltenforschung. 46 275–317.Google Scholar
Hammerich, Louis L. (1959). Wenn der Dualis lebendig ist. Die Sprache. 5 16–26.Google Scholar
Jacobson, Steven A. (1984). Yup'ik Eskimo dictionary. Fairbanks: Alaska Native Language Center, University of Alaska.Google Scholar
Jacobson, Steven A. (1993). A practical grammar of the Central Alaskan Yup'ik Eskimo language. Ms., Native Language Center and Program, University of Alaska, Fairbanks, Alaska.Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. (1924). The philosophy of grammar. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Kibrik, Alexandr E. (1992). Defective paradigms: number in Daghestanian. (European Science Foundation Programme in Language Typology: Theme 7, Noun Phrase Structure: Working Paper 16.) [EUROTYP Working Paper VII/16.]Google Scholar
Mithun, Marianne. (1988a). Lexical categories and the evolution of number marking. In Hammond, Michael & Noonan, Michael (eds.) Theoretical morphology: approaches in modern linguistics. San Diego: Academic Press. 211–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mithun, Marianne. (1988b). Lexical categories and number in Central Porno. In Shipley, William (ed.) In honor of Mary Haas: From the Haas Festival Conference on Native American linguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 517–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moravesik, Edith. (1994). Group plural – associative plural or cohort plural. Email document, LINGUIST List: Vol-5–681. 11 June 1994. ISSN: 1068–4875.Google Scholar
Moravesik, Edith, (forthcoming). Inflectional morphology in the Hungarian noun phrase - a typological assessment. In Plank, Frans (ed.) Noun phrase structure in the languages of Europe. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Myrkin, V. Ja. (1964). Tipologija licnogo mestoimenija i voprosy rekonstrukeii ego v indoevropejskom aspekte. Voprosy jazykoznanija no. 5. 78–86.Google Scholar
Plank, Frans. (1989). On Humboldt on the dual. In Corrigan, Roberta, Eckman, Fred & Noonan, Michael (eds.) Linguistic categorization. (Amsterdam Studies in the Theory and History of Linguistic Science 61.) Amsterdam: Benjamins. 293–333.Google Scholar
Smith-Stark, T. Cedric. (1974). The plurality split. In La, Galy, Michael, W., Fox, Robert A. & Bruck, Anthony (eds.) Papers from the Tenth Regional Meeting, Chicago Linguistic Society, April 19–21, 1974. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society. 657–671.Google Scholar
Sulejmanov, Ja. G. (1985). O formax ogranicennogo i neogranicennogo mnozestvennogo cisla imen suscestvitel'nyx v avarskom jazyke. In Mikailov, K. S. (ed.) Kategorija cisla v dagestanskix jazykax: sbornik statej. Maxackala: Dagestanskij filial AN SSSR. 114–119.Google Scholar
Woodbury, Anthony. (1981). Study of the Chevak dialect of Central Yup'ik Eskimo. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.Google Scholar