Article published in:
Weak Referentiality
Edited by Ana Aguilar-Guevara, Bert Le Bruyn and Joost Zwarts
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 219] 2014
► pp. 157–182

Many a plural

The aim of the present paper is to contribute to the literature on plurals by showing that, cross-linguistically, not all plurals are unmarked semantically. Focusing on Arabic, where the plural comes in many guises, and proposing different syntactic positions for its different manifestations, I show that, while classifying plurals (broken and sound plurals) allow an inclusive reading ( one or more ), counting plurals (plural of the singulative and double plurals) do not: they tolerate only exclusive readings ( more than one ). I then show that classifying plurals in Arabic allow inclusive readings in environments that favour number neutrality (modals, negation, etc.) and argue that, in these contexts, plurals denote kinds (in the sense of Carlson 1977 and following Grimm 2013 for English plurals). Such plural nominals do not presuppose the existence of any particular referents: they are weakly referential and that is why they allow inclusive readings.
Published online: 03 December 2014
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.219.07mat
References

References

Abdel-Massih, E., Abdel-Malek, Z.N., Badawi, E. M. & McCarus, E.N.
1979 A Reference Grammar of Egyptian Arabic. Ann Arbor MI: Center for Near Eastern and North African Studies.Google Scholar
Acquaviva, P.
2008 Lexical Plurals: A Morphosemantic Approach. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Anand, P., Andrews, C., Farkas, D. & Wagers, M.
2011 The exclusive interpretation of plural nominals in quantificational environments. Proceedings of SALT 21:176–196.Google Scholar
Bale, A., Gagnon, M. & Khanjian, H.
2011 On the relationship between morphological and semantic markedness: The case of plural morphology. Morphology 21:197–221. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Borer, H.
2005 In Name Only: Structuring Sense, Vol.1. Oxford: OUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Carlson, G.
1977 Reference to Kinds in English. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
2003 No lack of determination. In The Second Glot International State-of-the-article Book: The Latest in linguistics, L. Cheng & R. Sybesma (eds), 149–178. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Corbett, G.G.
2000 Number. Cambridge: CUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
de Swart, H. & Zwarts, J.
2010 Less form - more meaning: Why bare singular nouns are special. Lingua 119: 280–295 CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Doetjes, J.
1997 Quantifiers and Selection: On the Distribution of Quantifying Expressions in French, Dutch and English [HIL dissertations]. The Hague: HAG.Google Scholar
Erwin, W.M.
1963 A Short Reference Grammar of Iraqi Arabic [Arabic series]. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Farkas, D. & de Swart, H.
2010 The semantics and pragmatics of plurals. Semantics and Pragmatics 3: 1–54. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fassi Fehri, A.
2003 Nominal classes and parameters across interfaces and levels, with a particular reference to Arabic. In Linguistic Research. Rabat: IERA Publications.Google Scholar
2012 Key Features and Parameters in Arabic Grammar [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 182]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Giannakidou, A.
2006 Only, emotive factive verbs, and the dual nature of polarity dependency. Language 82: 575–603. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gil, D.
1996 Maltese 'collective nouns': A typological perspective. Rivista di Linguistica 8: 53–87.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J.H.
1966 Language Universals, With Special Reference to Feature Hierarchies [Janua Linguarum Series Minor]. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
1972 Numeral classifiers and substantival number: Problems in the genesis of a linguistic type. Working Papers on Language Universals 9: 2–39.Google Scholar
Grimm, S.
2012 Individuation and inverse number marking in Dagaare In Count and Mass across Languages, D. Massam (ed), 75–98. Oxford: OUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2013 Plurality is distinct from number-neutrality. In Proceedings of the 41st Meeting of the North East Linguistic Society, L. Fainleib, N. LaCara & Y. Park (eds). Amherst MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Harrell, R.
1962 A Short Reference Grammar of Moroccan Arabic. Washington DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Heim, I.
1991 Artikel und Definitheit. In Semantik: Ein internationales Handbuch der zeitgenössischen Forschung, A. von Stechow & D. Wunderlich (eds), 487–535. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Holes, C.
1990 Gulf Arabic [Croom Helm Descriptive Grammars]. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kihm, A.
2003 Les pluriels de l'arabe: Systèmes et conséquences pour l'architecture de la grammaire. Recherches Linguistique de Vincennes 32:109–156. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kramer, R.
2012 A split analysis of plurality: Evidence from Amharic. Proceedings of WCCFL 30: 226–236.Google Scholar
Krifka, M.
1989 Nominal reference, temporal constitution and quantification in event semantics. In Semantics and Contextual Expression, R. Bartsch, J. van Benthem & P. van Emde Boas (eds), 75–115. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
Lecarme, J.
2002 Gender 'polarity': Theoretical aspects of Somali nominal morphology. In Many Morphologies, P. Boucher & M. Plénat (eds), 109–141. Somerville MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Link, G.
1983 The logical analysis of plural and mass nouns: A lattice-theoretic approach. In Meaning, Use and Interpretation of Language, R. Bäuerle, C. Schwarze & A. von Stechow (eds), 302–323. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Longobardi, G.
1994 Reference and proper names: A theory of N movement in syntax and logical form. Linguistic Inquiry 25: 609–665.Google Scholar
Lowenstamm, J.
2008 On n, nP and √. In The Sounds of Silence: Empty Elements in Syntax and Phonology, J. Hartmann, V. Hegedus & H. van Riemsdijk (eds), 105–144. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
Mathieu, E.
2009 On the mass/count distinction in Ojibwe: Paper presented at Mass/count workshop, organized by Diane Massam, University of Toronto, February 7-8.
2012a Flavors of division. Linguistic Inquiry 43: 650–679. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
2012b The mass/count distinction in Ojibwe. In Count and Mass across Languages, D. Massam (ed.), 172–198. Oxford: OUP. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McCawley, J.
1968 Review of Current Trends in Linguistics 3. Language 44: 556–593. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
1981 Everything that Linguists have Always Wanted to Know about Logic (But were Ashamed to Ask). Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Mifsud, M.
1996 The collective in Maltese. Rivista di Linguistica 8: 29–51.Google Scholar
Mufwene, S.
1980 Number, countability, and markedness in Lingala LI/MA- noun class. Linguistics 18: 1019–1052. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ojeda, A.
1992 The semantics of number in Arabic. In SALT II: Proceedings of the Second Conference on Semantics and Linguistic Theory, C. Barker & D. Dowty (eds), 303–325. Columbus OH: Ohio State University.Google Scholar
Quirk, R., Greenbaugh, S., Leech, G. & Svartvik, J.
1985 A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Ritter, E.
1991 Two functional categories in noun phrases: evidence from Modern Hebrew. In Syntax and Semantics, Vol. 25: Perspective on Phrase Structure, S. Rothstein (ed.), 37–62. New York NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
1993 Where's gender? Linguistic Inquiry 24: 795–803.Google Scholar
Ritter, E. & Wiltschko, M.
2009 Varieties of Infl: Tense, location, and person. In Alternatives to Cartography, J. Craenenbroeck (ed.), 153–202. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, C.
1986 Modal Subordination, Anaphora and Distributivity. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
Sanches, M & Slobin, L.
1973 Numeral classifiers and plural marking: An implicational universal. Working papers in language universals (Stanford University) 11: 1–22.Google Scholar
Sauerland, U.
2003 A new semantics for number. In Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistic Theory SALT 13, R. Young & Y. Zhou (eds), 258–275. Ithaca NY: CLC publications.Google Scholar
Sauerland, U., Andersen, J. & Yatsushiro, K.
2005 The plural is semantically unmarked. In Linguistic Evidence, S. Kepser & M. Reis (eds), 413–434. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Spector, B.
2007 Aspects of the pragmatics of plural morphology: On higher-order implicatures. In Presuppositions and Implicatures in Compositional Semantics, U. Sauerland & P. Stateva (eds), 243–281. Houndmills: Palgrave-Macmillan. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Talmoudi, F.
1980 The Arabic dialect of Sûsa (Tunisia). Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.Google Scholar
van Rooij, R.
2004 Signalling games select Horn strategies. Linguistics and Philosophy 27: 493–527. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wiltschko, M.
2008 The syntax of non-inflectional plural marking. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 26: 639–694. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Wright, W.
1963 A Grammar of the Arabic Language, Vol. 1. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
Zabbal, Y.
2002 The semantics of number in the Arabic noun phrase. University of Calgary.
Zimmermann, T.E.
2006 Monotonicity in opaque verbs. Linguistics and Philosophy 29:7 15–761.Google Scholar
Zweig, E.
2009 Number-neutral bare plurals and the multiplicity implicature. Linguistics and Philosophy 32: 353–407. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 5 other publications

Cyrino, Sonia & M.Teresa Espinal
2020. On the Syntax of Number in Romance. Studia Linguistica 74:1 ► pp. 165 ff. Crossref logo
Cyrino, Sonia M. L. & M. Teresa Espinal
2020.  In Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 16 [Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory, 16], ► pp. 78 ff. Crossref logo
Dali, Myriam & Éric Mathieu
2016. Les pluriels internes féminins de l’arabe tunisien. Lingvisticae Investigationes 39:2 ► pp. 253 ff. Crossref logo
Ghomeshi, Jila & Diane Massam
2020. Number is Different in Nominal and Pronominal Phrases. Linguistic Inquiry 51:3 ► pp. 597 ff. Crossref logo
Mathieu, Eric & Gita Zareikar
2015. Measure words, plurality, and cross-linguistic variation. Linguistic Variation 15:2 ► pp. 169 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 04 june 2021. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.