One-Soon Her, Marc Allassonnière-Tang, Bing-Tsiong Li
{"title":"数词分类词与数词基的词序","authors":"One-Soon Her, Marc Allassonnière-Tang, Bing-Tsiong Li","doi":"10.1515/stuf-2019-0017","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract In a numeral classifier language, a sortal classifier (C) or a mensural classifier (M) is needed when a noun is quantified by a numeral (Num). Num and C/M are adjacent cross-linguistically, either in a [Num C/M] order or [C/M Num]. Likewise, in a complex numeral with a multiplicative composition, the base may follow the multiplier as in [n×base], e.g., san-bai ‘three hundred’ in Mandarin. However, the base may also precede the multiplier in some languages, thus [base×n]. Interestingly, base and C/M seem to harmonize in word order, i.e., [n×base] numerals appear with a [Num C/M] alignment, and [base×n] numerals, with [C/M Num]. This paper follows up on the explanation of the base-C/M harmonization based on the multiplicative theory of classifiers and verifies it empirically within six language groups in the world’s foremost hotbed of classifier languages: Sinitic, Miao-Yao, Austro-Asiatic, Tai-Kadai, Tibeto-Burman, and Indo-Aryan. Our survey further reveals two interesting facts: base-initial ([base×n]) and C/M-initial ([C/M Num]) orders exist only in Tibeto-Burman (TB) within our dataset. Moreover, the few scarce violations to the base-C/M harmonization are also all in TB and are mostly languages having maintained their original base-initial numerals but borrowed from their base-final and C/M-final neighbors. We thus offer an explanation based on Proto-TB’s base-initial numerals and language contact with neighboring base-final, C/M-final languages.","PeriodicalId":43533,"journal":{"name":"STUF-Language Typology and Universals","volume":"15 1","pages":"421 - 452"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Word order of numeral classifiers and numeral bases\",\"authors\":\"One-Soon Her, Marc Allassonnière-Tang, Bing-Tsiong Li\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/stuf-2019-0017\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract In a numeral classifier language, a sortal classifier (C) or a mensural classifier (M) is needed when a noun is quantified by a numeral (Num). Num and C/M are adjacent cross-linguistically, either in a [Num C/M] order or [C/M Num]. Likewise, in a complex numeral with a multiplicative composition, the base may follow the multiplier as in [n×base], e.g., san-bai ‘three hundred’ in Mandarin. However, the base may also precede the multiplier in some languages, thus [base×n]. Interestingly, base and C/M seem to harmonize in word order, i.e., [n×base] numerals appear with a [Num C/M] alignment, and [base×n] numerals, with [C/M Num]. This paper follows up on the explanation of the base-C/M harmonization based on the multiplicative theory of classifiers and verifies it empirically within six language groups in the world’s foremost hotbed of classifier languages: Sinitic, Miao-Yao, Austro-Asiatic, Tai-Kadai, Tibeto-Burman, and Indo-Aryan. Our survey further reveals two interesting facts: base-initial ([base×n]) and C/M-initial ([C/M Num]) orders exist only in Tibeto-Burman (TB) within our dataset. Moreover, the few scarce violations to the base-C/M harmonization are also all in TB and are mostly languages having maintained their original base-initial numerals but borrowed from their base-final and C/M-final neighbors. We thus offer an explanation based on Proto-TB’s base-initial numerals and language contact with neighboring base-final, C/M-final languages.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43533,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"STUF-Language Typology and Universals\",\"volume\":\"15 1\",\"pages\":\"421 - 452\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"STUF-Language Typology and Universals\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/stuf-2019-0017\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"STUF-Language Typology and Universals","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/stuf-2019-0017","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7
摘要
摘要在数词分类语言中,名词被数词(Num)量化时,既需要排序分类器(C),也需要计量分类器(M)。Num和C/M在跨语言上是相邻的,要么是[Num C/M]顺序,要么是[C/M Num]顺序。同样地,在一个具有乘法组成的复数中,基数可以跟随乘数,如[n×base],例如,普通话中的“三百”。然而,在某些语言中,基数也可能在乘数之前,例如[base×n]。有趣的是,base和C/M似乎在词序上是协调的,即[n×base]数字以[Num C/M]排列,[base×n]数字以[C/M Num]排列。本文在基于分类器乘法理论的基础上进一步解释了基- c /M协调,并在世界上最重要的分类器语言温床——汉语、苗瑶语、南亚语、台-加代语、藏-缅语和印度-雅利安六个语群中进行了实证验证。我们的调查进一步揭示了两个有趣的事实:在我们的数据集中,base-initial ([base×n])和C/M-initial ([C/M Num])顺序只存在于藏缅语(TB)中。此外,对基本C/M协调的少数罕见违反也都在TB中,并且大多数语言都保留了原始的基本首字母数字,但借用了基本尾和C/M-尾相邻的语言。因此,我们基于Proto-TB的基本首字母数字以及与邻近的基本韵母、C/ m -韵母语言的语言接触提供了一种解释。
Word order of numeral classifiers and numeral bases
Abstract In a numeral classifier language, a sortal classifier (C) or a mensural classifier (M) is needed when a noun is quantified by a numeral (Num). Num and C/M are adjacent cross-linguistically, either in a [Num C/M] order or [C/M Num]. Likewise, in a complex numeral with a multiplicative composition, the base may follow the multiplier as in [n×base], e.g., san-bai ‘three hundred’ in Mandarin. However, the base may also precede the multiplier in some languages, thus [base×n]. Interestingly, base and C/M seem to harmonize in word order, i.e., [n×base] numerals appear with a [Num C/M] alignment, and [base×n] numerals, with [C/M Num]. This paper follows up on the explanation of the base-C/M harmonization based on the multiplicative theory of classifiers and verifies it empirically within six language groups in the world’s foremost hotbed of classifier languages: Sinitic, Miao-Yao, Austro-Asiatic, Tai-Kadai, Tibeto-Burman, and Indo-Aryan. Our survey further reveals two interesting facts: base-initial ([base×n]) and C/M-initial ([C/M Num]) orders exist only in Tibeto-Burman (TB) within our dataset. Moreover, the few scarce violations to the base-C/M harmonization are also all in TB and are mostly languages having maintained their original base-initial numerals but borrowed from their base-final and C/M-final neighbors. We thus offer an explanation based on Proto-TB’s base-initial numerals and language contact with neighboring base-final, C/M-final languages.