Advertisement

Synthese

, Volume 174, Issue 1, pp 99–149 | Cite as

Mass nouns, vagueness and semantic variation

  • Gennaro ChierchiaEmail author
Article

Abstract

The mass/count distinction attracts a lot of attention among cognitive scientists, possibly because it involves in fundamental ways the relation between language (i.e. grammar), thought (i.e. extralinguistic conceptual systems) and reality (i.e. the physical world). In the present paper, I explore the view that the mass/count distinction is a matter of vagueness. While every noun/concept may in a sense be vague, mass nouns/concepts are vague in a way that systematically impairs their use in counting. This idea has never been systematically pursued, to the best of my knowledge. I make it precise relying on supervaluations (more specifically, ‘data semantics’) to model it. I identify a number of universals pertaining to how the mass/count contrast is encoded in the languages of the world, along with some of the major dimensions along which languages may vary on this score. I argue that the vagueness based model developed here provides a useful perspective on both. The outcome (besides shedding light on semantic variation) seems to suggest that vagueness is not just an interface phenomenon that arises in the interaction of Universal Grammar (UG) with the Conceptual/Intentional System (to adopt Chomsky’s terminology), but it is actually part of the architecture of UG.

Keywords

Atomicity Classifiers Mass/count Parameters Singular/plural Supervaluations 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Barker C. (1992) Group terms in English: Representing groups as atoms. Journal of Semantics 9: 69–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barner D., Snedeker J. (2005) Quantity judgments and individuation: Evidence that mass nouns count. Cognition 97: 41–66CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Borer H. (2005) Structuring sense. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bunt H. (1979) Ensembles and the formal semantic properties of mass terms. In: Pelletier F. J. (eds) Mass terms: Some philosophical problems. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  5. Carlson, G. (1997). Reference to kinds in English. Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst. Published in 1980 by Garland, NY.Google Scholar
  6. Cheng L., Sybesma R. (1998) Yi-wang Tang, yi-ge Tang: Classifiers and massifiers. Tsing Hua Journal of Chinese Studies XXVIII(3): 385–412Google Scholar
  7. Chierchia, G. (1984). Topics in the syntax and semantic of infinitives and gerunds. Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst. Published in 1989 by Garland, NY.Google Scholar
  8. Chierchia G. (1998a) Plurality of mass nouns and the notion of ‘semantic parameter’. In: Rothstein S. (eds) Events and grammar. Kluwer, DordrecthGoogle Scholar
  9. Chierchia G. (1998b) Reference to kinds across languages. Natural Language Semantics 6: 339–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chierchia G. (2004) Scalar implicature polarity phenomena and the syntax/pragmatics interface. In: Belletti A. (eds) Structures and beyond. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  11. Chierchia G. (2005) Definites, locality, and intentional identity. In: Carlson G., Pelletier J. (eds) Reference and quantification. CSLI, StanfordGoogle Scholar
  12. Chierchia G., Turner R. (1988) Semantics and property theory. Linguistics and Philosophy 11: 261–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Chierchia, G., Fox, D., & Spector, B. (2008). The grammatical theory of scalar implicatures. In C. Maierborn, K. von Heusinger, & P. Portner (Eds.), Semantics: An international handbook of natural language meaning. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  14. Dayal V. (2004) Number marking and (in)definiteness in kind terms. Linguistics and Philosophy 27(4): 393–450CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fine K. (1975) Truth, vagueness and logic. Synthese 30: 265–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fox C. (1998) Plurals and mass terms in property theory. In: Hamm F., Hinrichs E. (eds) Plurality and quantification. Kluwer, DordrecthGoogle Scholar
  17. Gajewski, J. (2002). L-analyticity and natural language. Manuscript, University of Connecticut at Storrs.Google Scholar
  18. Gallin D. (1975) Intensional and higher order logic. North Holland, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  19. Gillon B. (1992) Towards a common semantics for English count and mass nouns. Linguistics and Philosophy 15: 597–640CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gillon, C. (2009). Mass, count and plurality in Innu-aimun. Paper presented at SULA V, Harvard/MIT, May 2009.Google Scholar
  21. Grimshaw J. (2000) Extended projection and locality. In: Coopmans P., Everaert M., Grimshaw J. (eds) Lexical specification and insertion. J. Benjamins, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  22. Hauser, M., & Spaulding, B. (2006). Wild rhesus monkeys generate causal inferences about possible and impossible physical transformations in the absence of experience. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 103, 18.Google Scholar
  23. Heim, I. (1982). The semantics of definite and indefinite noun phrases. Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst. Published in 1989 by Garland, NY.Google Scholar
  24. Higginbotham J. (1994) Mass and count quantifiers. Linguistics and Philosophy 17: 447–480CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Horn L. (1989) A natural history of negation. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  26. Huang, J. (2006). Analyticity, variation and change. In International conference of East Asian Linguistics, University of Toronto.Google Scholar
  27. Ionin T., Matushansky O. (2006) The composition of complex cardinals. Journal of Semantics 23: 315–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kamp H. (1975) Two theories about adjectives. In: Keenan E. (eds) Formal semantics of natural language. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  29. Kennedy C. (2007) Vagueness and grammar: The semantics of relative and absolute gradable adjectives. Linguistics and Philosophy 30: 1–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kiparsky P. (1982) From cyclic phonolophy to lexical phonology. In: van der Hulst H., Smith N. (eds) The structure of phonological representation. Foris, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  31. Klein E. (1980) A semantics for positive and comparative adjectives. Linguistics and Philosophy 4: 1–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kratzer A. (1989) An investigation into the lumps of thought. Linguistics and Philosophy 12: 607–653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Krifka, M. (2008). Masses and countables. Paper presented and the workshop “The Syntax and Semantics of Measurement”, University of Tromsø.Google Scholar
  34. Kurafuji, T. (2003). Plural morphemes, definiteness and the notion of semantic parameter. In The proceedings of the third GLOW in Asia.Google Scholar
  35. Landman F. (1989) Groups I. Linguistics and Philosophy 12: 559–605CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Landman F. (1991) Structures for semantics. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  37. Landman F. (2004) Indefinites and the type of sets. Blackwell, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lasersohn P. (1999) Pragmatic halos. Language 75: 522–551CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Levinson S. (2000) Presumptive meaning. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  40. Li Y.-H. A. (1999) Plurality in a classifier language. Journal of East Asian Language 8: 75–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Link, G. (1983). The logical analysis of plural and mass terms: A lattice theoretic approach. In R. Bäuerle, C. Schwarze, & A. von Stechow (Eds.), Meaning, use and interpretation of language (pp. 302–323). Berlin: de Gruyer.Google Scholar
  42. Lonning J.-T. (1987) Mass terms and quantifiers. Linguistics and Philosophy 10: 1–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Longobardi G. (1994) Reference and proper names: A theory of N-movement in syntax and logical form. Linguistic Inquiry 25: 609–665Google Scholar
  44. Mathieu, E. (2009). On the count/mass distinction in Ojibwe. Paper presented at the workshop on parts and quantities, University of British Columbia, November 2007.Google Scholar
  45. McGee V., McLaughlin B. (1998) Vagueness by Timothy Williamson. Linguistics and Philosophy 21: 221–235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Moro A. (2008) The boundaries of Babel. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  47. Pelletier J., Schubert L. (1989) Mass expressions. In: Gabbay D., Guenthner F. (eds) Handbook of philsophical logic. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  48. Pinkal M. (1989) Imprecise concepts and quantification. In: Bartsch R., van Benthem J., Emde Boas P. (eds) Semantics and contextual expressions. Foris, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  49. Quine W. (1960) Word and object. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  50. Quine W. (1969) Ontological relativity and other essays. Columbia University Press, NYGoogle Scholar
  51. Rothstein, S. (2008). Counting and the mass/count distinction, ms. Bar Ilan University, Tel Aviv.Google Scholar
  52. Sauerland, U. (2003). A new semantics for number. In R. Young & Y. Zhou (Eds.), Proceedings of SALT 13. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications, Cornell UniversityGoogle Scholar
  53. Schwarzschild R. (1996) Pluralities. Kluwer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  54. Schwarzschild, R. (2007). Mass nouns and stubbornly distributive predicates. Paper presented at the Harvard Colloquium Series, September 2007, STUBs/ PluralitiesGoogle Scholar
  55. Soja N., Carey S., Spelke E. (1991) Ontological categories guide young children’s inductions of word meanings: Object terms and substance terms. Cognition 38: 179–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Spector B. (2007) Aspects of the pragmatics of plural morphology: On higher-order implicatures. In: Sauerland U., Stateva P. (eds) Presuppositions and implicatures in compositional semantics. Palgrave-Macmillan, Hampshire, UKGoogle Scholar
  57. Steriade D. (2008) A pseudo-cyclic effect in romanian morphophonology. In: Bachrach A., Nevins A. (eds) Inflectional identity. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  58. Tsoulas, G. (2006). Plurality of mass nouns and the grammar of number. Paper presented at the 29th glow meeting, Barcelona.Google Scholar
  59. Van Fraassen B. (1971) Formal semantics and logic. McMillan, NYGoogle Scholar
  60. Veltman, F. (1985). Logics for conditional. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  61. Wilhelm A. (2008) Bare Nouns in Dëne Sułine. Natural Language Semantics 16: 39–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Williamson T. (1994) Vagueness. Routledge, LondonGoogle Scholar
  63. Zamparelli, R. (2008). Bare predicate nominals in romance languages. In H. Høeg Müller & A. Klinge (Eds.), Essays on nominal determination. John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of LinguisticsHarvard UniversityCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations