Mass Expressions

  • Francis Jeffry Pelletier
  • Lenhart K. Schubert
Part of the Handbook of Philosophical Logic book series (HALO, volume 10)


Problems associated with mass expressions1 can be divided into the following general areas:
  1. 1.

    distinguishing a class of mass expressions;

  2. 2.

    describing the syntax of this class;

  3. 3.

    describing the formal semantics of this class;

  4. 4.

    explicating the ontology such a class of expressions presupposes, and

  5. 5.

    accounting for various epistemological issues involving our perception of the ontology.



Mass Term Noun Phrase Semantic Representation Syntactic Feature Mass Noun 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [Allen, 1977]
    K. Allen. Classifiers. Language, 53, 285–311, 1977.Google Scholar
  2. [Allen, 1980]
    K. Allen. Nouns and countability. Language, 56, 451–467, 1980.Google Scholar
  3. [Allen, 1981]
    K. Allen. Review of U. Weinreich’s ‘On Semantics’. Language, 57, 941–948 (esp. 947), 1981.Google Scholar
  4. [Åqvist and Guenthner, 1978]
    L. Åqvist and F. Guenthner. Fundamentals of a theory of verb aspect and events within the setting of an improved tense-logic. In F. Guenthner and C. Rohrer, eds. Studies in Formal Semantics, pp. 167–199, North Holland, Amsterdam, 1978.Google Scholar
  5. [Bach, 1981]
    E. Bach. On time, tense, and aspect: an essay in English metaphysics. In Radical Pragmatics, P. Cole, ed., pp. 63–81. New York, Academic Press, 1981.Google Scholar
  6. [Bach, 1986a]
    E. Bach. The algebra of events. Linguistics and Philosophy 9, 5–16, 1986.Google Scholar
  7. [Bach, 1986b]
    E. Bach. Natural language metaphysics. In Logic, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science VII: Proceedings of the Seventh International Congress, Salzburg 1983. R. Marcus, G. Dorn, and P. Weingartner, eds., pp. 63–81. Amsterdam, North-Holland, 1986.Google Scholar
  8. [Bach, 1994]
    E. Bach. The semantics of syntactic categories. In The Logical Foundations of Cognition, J. Macnamara and G. Reyes, eds. pp. 264–281. Oxford, Oxford UP, 1994.Google Scholar
  9. [Bacon, 1973]
    J. Bacon. Do generic descriptions denote? Mind, 82, 331–347, 1973.Google Scholar
  10. [Bahm, 1976]
    A. Bahm. Degrees and Scales. ITA Humanidades, 12, 67–73, 1976.Google Scholar
  11. [Baldwin and Bond, 2003a]
    T. Baldwin and F. Bond. Learning the countability of English nouns from unannotated corpora. Proceedings of Association for Computational Linguistics, Sapporo, Japan, pp. 463–470, 2003.Google Scholar
  12. [Baldwin and Bond, 2003b]
    T. Baldwin and F. Bond. A plethora of method for learning English countability. In Proceedings of the Conference on Emirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, Sapporo, Japan, pp. 73–80, 2003.Google Scholar
  13. [van der Beek and Baldwin, 2003]
    L. van der Beek and T. Baldwin. Crossligual count-ability classification: English meets Dutch. LinGO Working Paper, No 2003–03, 2003.Google Scholar
  14. [Barwise and Cooper, 1981]
    J. Barwise and R. Cooper. Generalised quantifiers and natural language. Linguistics and Philosophy, 4, 159–219, 1981.Google Scholar
  15. [Bennett, 1977]
    M. Bennett. Mass nouns and mass terms in Montague grammar. In S. Davis and M. Mithun, eds. Linguistics, Philosophy and Montague Grammar, pp. 263–285. University of Texas Press, Austin, 1977.Google Scholar
  16. [Bloom, 1994a]
    P. Bloom. Generativity within language and other cognitive domains. Cognition, 51, 177–189, 1994.Google Scholar
  17. [Bloom, 1994b]
    P. Bloom. Possible names: The role of syntax-semantics mappings in the acquisition of nominals. Lingua, 92, 297–329, 1994.Google Scholar
  18. [Bloom, 1994c]
    P. Bloom. Controversies in language acquisition: Word learning and the part of speech. In Handbook of Perceptual and Cognitive Development R. Gelman & T. Au, eds., pp. 151–184. New York: Academic Press, 1994.Google Scholar
  19. [Bloom, 1999]
    P. Bloom. The role of semantics in solving the bootstrapping problem. In Language, Logic, and Concepts: Essays in Honor of John Macnamara. R. Jackendoff, P. Bloom, and K. Wynn, eds. pp. 285–309. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  20. [Bloom, 2000]
    P. Bloom. How Children Learn the Meanings of Words. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2000. (Especially pp. 198–211).Google Scholar
  21. [Bloom and Kelemen, 1995]
    P. Bloom and D. Keleman. Syntactic cues in the acquisition of collective nouns. Cognition, 56, 1–30, 1995.Google Scholar
  22. [Bond et al., 1994]
    F. Bond, K. Ogura, and S. Ikehara. Countability and number in Japanese-to-English machine translation. Fifteenth International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING-94) pp. 32–38, 1994.Google Scholar
  23. [Bond and Vatikiotis-Bateson, 2002]
    F. Bond and C. Vatikiotis-Bateson. Using an ontology to determine English countability. Nineteenth International Conference on Computational Linguistics (COLING-2002), vol. 1: pp. 99–105, 2002.Google Scholar
  24. [Bricker, 1988]
    P. Bricker. Review of [Bunt, 1985]. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 53, 653–656, 1988.Google Scholar
  25. [Briscoe et al., 1995]
    T. Briscoe, A. Copestake, and A. Lascarides. Blocking. In Computational Lexical Semantics, P. Saint-Dizier and E. Viegas, eds. pp. 273–312. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1995Google Scholar
  26. [Bunt, 1976]
    H. C. Bunt. The formal semantics of mass terms. Papers from the 3rd Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics, Helsinki, 1976.Google Scholar
  27. [Bunt, 1978]
    H. C. Bunt. A formal semantic analysis of mas terms and amount terms. In J. Groenendijk and M. Stokhof, eds. Amsterdam Papers in Formal Grammar, Vol II, 1978.Google Scholar
  28. [Bunt, 1979]
    H. C. Bunt. Ensembles and the formal semantic properties of mass terms. In [Pelletier, 1979, pp. 249–27].Google Scholar
  29. [Bunt, 1980]
    H. C. Bunt. On the why, the how, and the whether of a count-mass distinction among adjectives. In J. Groenendijk and M. Stokhof, eds. Formal Methods in the Study of Language, pp. 51–77. Mathematical Centre, Amsterdam, 1980.Google Scholar
  30. [Bunt, 1981]
    H. C. Bunt. The Formal Semantics of Mass Terms. Dissertation, University of Amsterdam, 1981.Google Scholar
  31. [Bunt, 1985]
    H. C. Bunt. Mass Terms and Model Theoretic Semantics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1985.Google Scholar
  32. [Burge, 1972]
    T. Burge. Truth and mass terms. Journal of Philosophy, 69, 263–282, 1972.Google Scholar
  33. [Burge, 1975]
    T. Burge. Mass terms, count nouns and change. Synthese, 31, 459–478, 1975. Reprinted in [Pelletier, 1979, pp. 199–218].Google Scholar
  34. [Burke, 1994]
    M. Burke. Preserving the principle of one object to a place: a novel account of the relations among objects, sorts, sortais, and persistence conditions. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 54, 591–624, 1994.Google Scholar
  35. [Burke, 1997]
    M. Burke. Coinciding objects: a reply to Lowe and Denkel. Analysis, 57, 11–18, 1997.Google Scholar
  36. [Carlson, 1977]
    G. Carlson. A unified analysis of the English bare plural. Linguistics and Philosophy, 1, 413–456, 1977.Google Scholar
  37. [Carlson, 1982]
    G. Carlson. Generic terms and generic sentences. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 11, 163–182, 1982.Google Scholar
  38. [Cartwright, 1965]
    H. M. R. Cartwright. Heraclitus and the bath water. Philosophical Review, 74, 466–485, 1965.Google Scholar
  39. [Cartwright, 1970]
    H. M. R. Cartwright. Quantities. Philosophical Review, 79, 25–42, 1970.Google Scholar
  40. [Cartwright, 1975]
    H. M. R. Cartwright. Amounts and measures of amounts. Nous, 9, 143–164, 1975. Reprinted in [Pelletier, 1979, pp. 179–198].Google Scholar
  41. [Cartwright, 1984]
    H. Cartwright. Parts and partitives: notes on what things are made of. Synthese 58, 251–277, 1984.Google Scholar
  42. [Cheng, 1973]
    C.-Y. Cheng. Response to Moravcsik. In [Hintikka et al., 1973, pp. 286–288.Google Scholar
  43. [Cheng, 1983]
    C.-Y. Cheng. Kung-sun Lung: white horse and other issues. Philosophy East and West, 33, 341–354, 1983.Google Scholar
  44. [Chierchia, 1982a]
    G. Chierchia. Bare plurals, mass nouns and nominalisation. In D. Flickinger, M. Macken and N. Wiegand, eds. Proceedings of the First West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, pp. 243–255, 1973.Google Scholar
  45. [Chierchia, 1982b]
    G. Chierchia. Nominalisation and Montague grammar. A semantics without types for natural language. Linguistics and Philosophy, 5, 303–354, 1982.Google Scholar
  46. [Chierchia, 1983]
    G. Chierchia. On plural and mass nominals and the structure of the world. In T. Borowsky and D. Finer, eds. Univ. of Massachusetts Occasional Papers, VIII, GLSA, Amherst, 1983.Google Scholar
  47. [Chierchia, 1998]
    G. Chierchia. Reference to kinds across languages. Natural Language Semantics, 6, 339–405, 1998.Google Scholar
  48. [Clark and Clark, 1979]
    H. Clark and E. Clark. When nouns surface as verbs. Language, 55, 767–811, 1979.Google Scholar
  49. [Clarke, 1970]
    D. S. Clarke. Mass terms as subjects. Philosophical Studies, 21, 25–29, 1970.Google Scholar
  50. [Cocchiarella, 1976]
    N. Cocchiarella. On the logic of natural kinds. Philosophy of Science, 43, 202–222, 1976.Google Scholar
  51. [Cocchiarella, 1977]
    N. Cocchiarella. Sortais, natural kinds and re-identification. Logique et analyse, pp. 439–474, 1977.Google Scholar
  52. [Cocchiarella, 1978]
    N. Cocchiarella. On the logic of nominalised predicates and its philosophical interpretations. Erkenninis, 13, 339–369, 1978.Google Scholar
  53. [Cohen, 1996]
    S. M. Cohen. Aristotle on Nature and Incomplete Substance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.Google Scholar
  54. [Cook, 1975]
    K. Cook. On the usefulness of quantities. Synthese, 31, 443–457, 1975. Reprinted in [Pelletier, 1979, pp. 121–135].Google Scholar
  55. [Cresswell, 1992]
    M. Cresswell. The ontological status of matter in Aristotle. Theoria, 58, 116–130, 1992.Google Scholar
  56. [Davidson, 1967]
    D. Davidson. Truth and meaning. Synthese, 17, 304–323, 1967.Google Scholar
  57. [Dickinson, 1988]
    D. K. Dickinson. Learning names for materials: Factors limiting and constraining hypotheses about word meaning. Cognitive Development, 3, 15–35, 1988.Google Scholar
  58. [Elder, 1996]
    C. Elder. Contrariety and ‘carving up reality’. American Philosophical Quarterly, 96, 277–289, 1996.Google Scholar
  59. [Elder, 1998]
    C. Elder. Essential properties and coinciding objects. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 58, 317–331, 1998.Google Scholar
  60. [Factor, 1975]
    R. L. Factor. A note on the analysis of mass terms. Southern Journal of Philosophy, 13, 247–249, 1975.Google Scholar
  61. [Feldman, 1973]
    F. Feldman. Sortal predicates. Nous, 7, 268–282, 1973.Google Scholar
  62. [Furley, 1976]
    D. Furley. Anaxagoras in response to Parmenides. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, Sup. Vol. 2, 61–85, 1976.Google Scholar
  63. [Furley, 1987]
    D. Furley. The Greek Cosmologists, Vol. 1: The Formation of the Atomic Theory and its Earliest Critics. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1987.Google Scholar
  64. [Furth, 1988]
    M. Furth. Substance, Form, and Psyche: An Aristotelean Metaphysics. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1988.Google Scholar
  65. [Gabbay and Moravcsik, 1979]
    D. M. Gabbay and J. M. E. Moravcsik. Verbs, events and the flow of time. In C. Rohrer, ed. Time, Tense and Quantifiers, pp. 59–84. Niemeyer, Stuttgart, 1979.Google Scholar
  66. [Gathercole, 1985]
    V. C. Gathercole. ‘He has too much hard questions’: the acquisition of the linguistic mass-count distinction in ‘much’ and ‘many’. Journal of Child Language, 12, 395–415, 1985.Google Scholar
  67. [Gathercole, 1986]
    V. C. Gathercole. Evaluating competing linguistic theories with child language data: The case of the mass-count distinction. Linguistics and Philosophy, 9, 151–190, 1986.Google Scholar
  68. [Gazdar et al., 1985]
    G. Gazdar, E. Klein, G. Pullum and I. Sag. Generalised Phrase Structure Grammar, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 1985.Google Scholar
  69. [Geach, 1962]
    P. Geach. Reference and Generality, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 1962.Google Scholar
  70. [Gillon, 1992]
    B. Gillon. Towards a common semantics for English count and mass nouns. Linguistics and Philosophy, 15, 597–640, 1992.Google Scholar
  71. [Gillon, 1999]
    B. Gillon. The lexical semantics of English count and mass nouns. In The Breadth and Depth of Semantic Lexicons, E. Viegas, ed. pp. 19–37. Dordrecht: Kluwer, 1999.Google Scholar
  72. [Gillon et al., 1999]
    B. Gillon, E. Kehayia, and V. Taler. The mass/count distinction: evidence from on-line psycholinguistic performance. Brain and Language, 68, 205–211, 1999.Google Scholar
  73. [Gleason, 1965]
    H. A. Gleason. Linguistics and English Grammar, Holt, Rinhart and Winston, New York, 1965. (Esp. pp. 134–137.)Google Scholar
  74. [Glouberman, 1975]
    M. Glouberman. Strawson’s hidden realism. Journal of Critical Analysis 5, 135–145, 1975.Google Scholar
  75. [Gordon, 1988]
    P. Gordon. Count-mass category acquisition: distributional distinctions in children’s speech. Journal of Child Language, 15, 109–128, 1988.Google Scholar
  76. [Graff, 2001]
    D. Graff. Descriptions as predicates. Philosophical Studies, 102, 1–42, 2001.Google Scholar
  77. [Graham, 1986]
    A. Graham. The disputation of Kung-sun Lung as argument about whole and part. Philosophy East and West, 36, 89–106, 1986.Google Scholar
  78. [Grandy, 1973]
    R. Grandy. Reply to Moravcsik. In [Hintikka et al., 1973, pp. 295–300].Google Scholar
  79. [Grandy, 1975]
    R. Grandy. Stuff and things. Synthese, 31, 479–485, 1975. Reprinted in [Pelletier, 1979, pp. 219–225].Google Scholar
  80. [Hall et al., 1993]
    D. G. Hall, S. R. Waxman, and W. M. Hurwitz. How two- and four-year-old children interpret adjectives and count nouns. Child Development, 64, 1651–1664, 1993.Google Scholar
  81. [Hansen, 1976]
    C. D. Hansen. Mass nouns and ‘A white horse is not a horse’. Philosophy East and West, 26, 189–209, 1976.Google Scholar
  82. [Hansen, 1983]
    C. D. Hansen. Language and Logic in Ancient China. Ann Arbor, MI: Univ. Michigan Press, 1983.Google Scholar
  83. [Harbsmeier, 1991]
    C. Harbsmeier. The mass noun hypothesis and the part-whole analysis of the white horse dialogue. In Chinese Texts and Philosophical Contexts. H. Rosemont. ed. pp. 49–66. LaSalle, IL: Open Court, 1991.Google Scholar
  84. [Heintz, 1985]
    J. Heintz. Do lambs have fur? Paper read at Canadian Philosophical association meetings, Montreal, 1985.Google Scholar
  85. [Hendry, 1982]
    H. Hendry. Complete extensions of the calculus of individuals. Nous, 16, 453–460, 1982.Google Scholar
  86. [Hestevold, 1978]
    H. S. Hestevold. A Metaphysical Study of Aggregates and Continuous Wholes, PhD dissertation, Brown University, 1978.Google Scholar
  87. [Higginbotham, 1994]
    J. Higginbotham. Mass and count quantifiers. Linguistics and Philosophy, 17, 447–480, 1994.Google Scholar
  88. [Hintikka et al., 1973]
    J. Hintikka, J. M. E. Moravcsik and P. Suppes. Approaches to Natural Language, D. Reidel, Dordrecht, 1973.Google Scholar
  89. [Hoeksema, 1983]
    J. Hoeksema. Plurality and conjunction. In A. ter Meulen, ed. Studies in Model-theoretic Semantics, pp. 63–83. Foris, Dordrecht, 1983.Google Scholar
  90. [Hoepelman, 1976]
    J. Hoepelman. Mass nouns and aspects, or: Why we can’t eat gin-gercake in an hour. In J. Groenendijk and M. Stokhof, eds. Amsterdam Papers in Formal Grammar, Vol I, Math. Centrum, Amsterdam, 1976.Google Scholar
  91. [Hoepelman, 1978]
    J. Hoepelman. The treatment of activity verbs in a Montague-type grammar, a first approximation. In F. Guenthner and C. Rohrer, eds. Studies in Formal Semantics, pp. 121–165. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1978.Google Scholar
  92. [Hoepelman and Rohrer, 1976]
    J. Hoepelman and C. Rohrer. On the mass-count distinction and the French imparfait and passé simple. In C. Rohrer, ed. Time, Tense and Quantifiers, pp. 85–112. Niemeyer, Tübingen, 1976.Google Scholar
  93. [Huddleston and Pullum, 2002]
    R. Huddleston and G. Pullum. The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2002. (See esp. pp. 334–340).Google Scholar
  94. [Kamp, 1975]
    H. Kamp. Two theories about adjectives. In E. Keenen, ed. Formal Semantics of Natural Language, pp. 123–155. Cambridge University Press, 1975.Google Scholar
  95. [Kaplan, 1973]
    D. Kaplan. Bob and Carol and Ted and Alice. In [Hintikka et al., rd, pp. 490–518].Google Scholar
  96. [Klooster, 1972]
    W. Klooster. The Structure Underlying Measure Phrase Sentences. D. Reidel, Dordrecht, 1972.Google Scholar
  97. [Koslicki, 1999]
    K. Koslicki. The semantics of mass predicates. Nous, 33, 46–91, 1999.Google Scholar
  98. [Lai, 1995]
    W. Lai. White Horse not horse: making sense of a negative logic. Asian Philosophy, 5, 59–74, 1995.Google Scholar
  99. [Laycock, 1972]
    H. Laycock. Some questions of ontology. Philosophical Review, 81, 3–42, 1972.Google Scholar
  100. [Laycock, 1975]
    H. Laycock. Theories of matter. Synthese, 31, 411–442, 1975. Reprinted in [Pelletier, 1979, pp. 89–120].Google Scholar
  101. [Laycock, 1985]
    H. Laycock. Mass terms again. Paper read at Canadian Philosophical Association meetings, Montreal, 1985.Google Scholar
  102. [Leech, 1969]
    G. N. Leech. Towards a Semantic Description of English, Longman, London, 1969.Google Scholar
  103. [Link, 1981]
    G. Link. The logical analysis plurals and mass terms: a lattice-theoretical approach. In R. Bäuerle, C. Schwartz and A. von Stechow, eds. Meaning, Use and Interpretation of Language, pp. 302–323, de Gruyter, Berlin, 1981.Google Scholar
  104. [Löbner, 1985]
    S. Löbner. Definites. Journal of Semantics.4, 279–326, 1985.Google Scholar
  105. [Lønning, 1987]
    J. Lønning. Mass terms and quantification. Linguistics and Philosophy, 10, 1–52, 1987.Google Scholar
  106. [Lønning, 1989]
    J. Lønning. Computational semantics of mass terms. Proceedings of the Fourth European ACL Manchester, UK, pp. 205–211, 1989.Google Scholar
  107. [Lowe, 1989]
    E. Lowe. Kinds of Being: A Study of Individuation, Identity, and the Logic of Sortal Terms. Oxford, Blackwells, 1989.Google Scholar
  108. [McCawley, 1975]
    J. McCawley. Lexicography and the count-mass distinction. Proceedings of the First Annual Meeting of Berkeley Linguistics Society, pp. 314–321, 1975.Google Scholar
  109. [McCawley, 1981]
    J. McCawley. Everything the Linguists Always Wanted to Know About Logic. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1981.Google Scholar
  110. [Macnamara and Reyes, 1994]
    J. Macnamara and G. E. Reyes. Foundational issues in the learning of proper names, count nouns and mass nouns. In The Logical Foundations of cognition. J. Macnamara & G.E. Reyes, eds. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994.Google Scholar
  111. [McPherson, 1991]
    L. McPherson. ‘A little’ goes a long way: Evidence for a perceptual basis of learning for the noun categories COUNT and MASS. Journal of Child Language, 18, 315–338, 1991.Google Scholar
  112. [Madanes, 1989]
    L. Madanes. ‘Nature’, ‘Substance’, and ‘God’ as mass terms in Spinoza’s Theologico-Political Treatise. History of Philosophy Quarterly, 6, 295–302, 1989.Google Scholar
  113. [Malotki, 1983]
    E. Malotki. Hopi Time: A Linguistic Analysis of the Temporal Concepts in the Hopi Language. Mouton, Berlin, 1983.Google Scholar
  114. [Mann, 1980]
    W. Mann. Anaxagoras and the Homoiomere” Phronesis 25, 228–249, 1980.Google Scholar
  115. [Markman and Wachtel, 1988]
    E. M. Markman and G. F. Wachtel. Children’s use of mutual exclusivity to constrain the meaning of words. Cognitive Psychology, 20, 121–157, 1988.Google Scholar
  116. [Massey, 1976]
    G. J. Massey. Tom, Dick and Harry and all the king’s men. American Philosophical Quarterly, 13, 89–107, 1976.Google Scholar
  117. [Mellema, 1981]
    G. Mellema. On quantifiers and mass terms. American Philosophical Quarterly, 18, 165–170, 1981.Google Scholar
  118. [Moltmann, 1997]
    F. Moltmann. Parts and Wholes in Semantics. New York, Oxford UP, 1997.Google Scholar
  119. [Moltmann, 1998]
    F. Moltmann. Part structures, integrity, and the mass-count distinction. Synthese, 116, 75–111, 1998.Google Scholar
  120. [Montague, 1973]
    R. Montague. Reply to Moravcisk. In [Hintikka et al., 1973, pp. 289–294]. Reprinted in [Pelletier, 1979, pp. 173–178] as The proper treatment of mass terms in English.Google Scholar
  121. [Montague, 1973a]
    R. Montague. Reply to Moravcsik. The proper treatment of quantifiers in English. In [Hintikka et al., 1973, pp. 221–242].Google Scholar
  122. [Moravcsik, 1973]
    J. M. E. Moravcsik. Mass terms in English. In [Hintikka et al., 1973, 263–285].Google Scholar
  123. [Mou, 1999]
    Bo Mou. The structure of the Chinese language and ontological insights: a collective-noun hypothesis. Philosophy East and West, 49, 45–62, 1999.Google Scholar
  124. [Mourelatos, 1978]
    A. P. D. Mourelatos. Events, processes and states. Linguistics and Philosophy, 2, pp. 415–434, 1978.Google Scholar
  125. [Mufwene, 1980]
    S. S. Mufwene. Number, countability and markedness in Lingala LI-/MA- noun class. Linguistics, 18, 1019–1052, 1980.Google Scholar
  126. [Mufwene, 1981]
    S. S. Mufwene. Non-individuation and the count/mass distinction. Chicago Linguistic Society Papers, 20, 221–238, 1981.Google Scholar
  127. [Mufwene, 1983]
    S. S. Mufwene. The proper name/common noun distinction. Paper presented at Winter Meeting of Linguistic Society of America, Minneapolis, 1983.Google Scholar
  128. [Mufwene, 1984]
    S. S. Mufwene. The count mass/distinction and the English lexicon. In D. Testen, V. Mishra and J. Drogo, eds. Papers from the Parasession on Lexical Semantics, pp. 200–221. Chicago Linguistic Society, 1984.Google Scholar
  129. [Nelson et al., 1993]
    K. Nelson, J. Hampson, and L. K. Shaw. Nouns in early lexicons: Evidence, explanations, and implications. Journal of Child Language, 20, 61–84, 1993.Google Scholar
  130. [Nola, 1980]
    R. Nola. ‘Paradigms lost, or, the world regained’—an excursion into realism and idealism in science. Synthèse, 45, 317–350, 1980.Google Scholar
  131. [Noonan, 1978]
    H. Noonan. Count nouns and mass nouns. Analysis, 38, 167–172, 1978.Google Scholar
  132. [O’Hara et al., 2003]
    T. O’Hara, N. Salay, M. Witbrock, D. Schneider, B. Aldag, S. Bertolo, K. Panton, F. Lehmann, J. Curtis, M. Smith, D. Baxter, and P. Wagner. Introducing criteria for mass noun lexical mappings using the Cyc KB, and its extension to Word Net. In Proceedings of the Fifth International Workshop on Computational Semantics Tilburg, Netherlands, 2003.Google Scholar
  133. [Ojeda, 1993]
    A. Ojeda. Linguistic Individuals Stanford, CSLI Publications, 1993.Google Scholar
  134. [Parsons, 1970]
    T. Parsons. An analysis of mass and amount terms. Foundations of Language, 6, 363–388. Reprinted in [Pelletier, 1979, pp. 137–166].Google Scholar
  135. [Parsons, 1975]
    T. Parsons. Afterthoughts on mass terms. Synthese, 31, 517–521, 1975. Reprinted in [Pelletier, 1979, pp. 167–171].Google Scholar
  136. [Paxson, 1983]
    T. Paxson. The Holism of Anaxagoras. Apeiron 17, 85–91, 1983.Google Scholar
  137. [Pelletier, 1974]
    F. J. Pelletier. On some proposals for the semantics of mass terms. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 3, 87–108, 1974.Google Scholar
  138. [Pelletier, 1975]
    F. J. Pelletier. Non-singular reference: some preliminaries. Philosophia, 5, 1975. Reprinted in [Pelletier, 1979, pp. 1–14].Google Scholar
  139. [Pelletier, 1977]
    F. J. Pelletier. Locke’s doctrine of substance. Canadian Journal of Philosophy. Sup. Vol. 3, 121–140, 1977.Google Scholar
  140. [Pelletier, 1979]
    F. J. Pelletier, ed. Mass Terms: Some Philosophical Problems, D. Reidel, Dordrecht, 1979.Google Scholar
  141. [Pelletier, 1979a]
    F. J. Pelletier. A bibliography of recent work on mass terms. In [Pelletier, 1979, pp. 295–298].Google Scholar
  142. [Pelletier, 1991]
    F. J. Pelletier. Mass terms. In Handbook of Metaphysics and Ontology, B. Smith, ed. pp. 495–499. Philosophia Press: Munich, 1991.Google Scholar
  143. [Pelletier, 1998]
    F. J. Pelletier. Mass terms. In The Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 1998.Google Scholar
  144. [Pelletier and Thomason, 2002]
    F. J. Pelletier and R. Thomason. Twenty-five years of linguistics and philosophy. Linguistics and Philosophy, 25, 507–529, 2002.Google Scholar
  145. [Pfeifer, 1997]
    K. Pfeifer. Pantheism as Panpsychism. Conceptus, 30, 181–190, 1997.Google Scholar
  146. [Pólos, 1985]
    L. Pólos. Mass nouns: a semantic representation. Tertium non Datur, 2, 1985. In Hungarian.Google Scholar
  147. [Pólos, 1987a]
    L. Pólos. Mass nouns, plurals, events. Tertium non Datur, 4, 1987. In Hungarian.Google Scholar
  148. [Pólos, 1987b]
    L. Pólos. Mass terms: a found key to Parmenides. Tertium non Datur, 4, 1987. In Hungarian.Google Scholar
  149. [Prasada, 1993]
    S. Prasada. Learning names for solid substances: Quantifying solid entitles in terms of portions. Cognitive Development, 8, 83–104, 1993.Google Scholar
  150. [Prasada, 1999]
    S. Prasada. Names for things and stuff: An Aristotelian perspective. In Language, Logic, and Concepts: Essays in Honor of John Macnamara, R. Jackendoff, P. Bloom, and K. Wynn, eds., pp. 119–146. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1999.Google Scholar
  151. [Prior, 1967]
    A. Prior. Things and stuff. In Papers in Logic and Ethics, A. Prior, ed. pp 181–186. London: Duckworth, 1967.Google Scholar
  152. [Quine, 1960]
    W. V. Quine. Word and Object, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1960.Google Scholar
  153. [Quine, 1964]
    W. V. Quine. Review of [Geach 1962]. Philosophical Review, 73, 100–105, 1964.Google Scholar
  154. [Quirk et al., 1972]
    R. Quirk, S. Greenbaum, G. Leech and J. Svartvik. A Grammar of Contemporary English, Longman, London, 1972.Google Scholar
  155. [Rea, 1997]
    M. Rea. Supervenience and co-location. American Philosophical Quarterly, 34, 367–375, 1977.Google Scholar
  156. [Reeve, 1980]
    C. D. Reeve. Mass, Quantity and Amount. PhD dissertation, Cornell University, 1980.Google Scholar
  157. [Reiman, 1981]
    F. Reiman. Kung-sun, white horses and logic. Philosophy East and West, 31, 417–447, 1981.Google Scholar
  158. [Reyes et al., 1999]
    M. Reyes, J. Macnamara, G. E. Reyes, and H. Zolfaghari. Count nouns, mass nouns, and their transformations: A unified category-theoretic semantics. In Language, Logic and Concepts: Essays in Honour of John Macnamara. R. Jackendoff, P. Bloom and K. Wynn, eds., pp. 427–452. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1999.Google Scholar
  159. [Roeper, 1983]
    P. Roeper. Semantics for mass terms with quantifiers. Nous, 17, 251–265, 1983.Google Scholar
  160. [Sampson, 1975]
    G. Sampson. Review of Hintikka et al. (1973). Foundations of Language$112, especially pp. 546–547 (review of Moravcsik 1973), 1975.Google Scholar
  161. [Scha, 1980]
    R. Scha. Distributive, collective and cumulative quantification. In J. Groenendijk, T. Janssen and M. Stokhof, eds. Formal Methods in the Study of Language, Vol. II, pp. 483–512, 1980.Google Scholar
  162. [Schubert and Pelletier, 1982]
    L. K. Schubert and F. J. Pelletier. From English to logic: context-free computation of ‘conventional’ logical translation. American Journal of Computational Linguistics, 8, 26–44, 1982.Google Scholar
  163. [Sellars, 1967a]
    W. Sellars. Aristotle’s Metaphysics: an interpretation. In Philosophical Perspectives: History of Philosophy, W. Sellars, pp. 73–124. Reseda, CA: Ridgeview Pub. Co., 1967.Google Scholar
  164. [Sellars, 1967b]
    W. Sellars. Substance and form in Aristotle. In Philosophical Perspectives: History of Philosophy. W. Sellars, pp. 125–136. Reseda, CA: Ridgeview Pub. Co. 1967.Google Scholar
  165. [Sellars, 1967c]
    W. Sellars. Raw materials, subjects, and substrata. In Philosophical Perspectives: History of Philosophy. W. Sellars, pp. 137–152. Reseda, CA: Ridgeview Pub. Co. 1967.Google Scholar
  166. [Semenza et al., 2000]
    C. Semenza, S. Mondini, and K. Marinelli. Count and mass nouns: semantic and syntax in aphasia and Alzheimer’s disease. Brain and Language, 74, 428–431, 2000.Google Scholar
  167. [Sharpies, 1999]
    B. Sharpies. On being a ‘Tode Ti’ in Aristotle and Alexander. Methexis, 12, 77–87, 1999.Google Scholar
  168. [Sharvy, 1975]
    R. Sharvy. The indeterminacy of mass prediction. In [Pelletier, 1979, pp. 47–54].Google Scholar
  169. [Sharvy, 1978]
    R. Sharvy. Maybe English has no count nouns: notes on Chinese semantics. Studies in Language, 2, 345–365, 1978.Google Scholar
  170. [Sharvy, 1983a]
    R. Sharvy. Mixtures. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 44, 227–240, 1983.Google Scholar
  171. [Sharvy, 1983b]
    R. Sharvy. Aristotle on mixtures. Journal of Philosophy, 80, 439–457, 1983.Google Scholar
  172. [Sharvy, 1985]
    R. Sharvy. Compound mass terms: a reply to Pelletier. Logique et Analyse, 28, 105–108, 1985.Google Scholar
  173. [Shipley and Shepperson, 1990]
    E. F. Shipley and B. Shepperson. Countable entities: developmental changes. Cognition, 34, 109–136, 1990.Google Scholar
  174. [Siegel, 1977]
    M. Siegel. Measure adjectives in Montague grammar. In S. Davis and M. Mithun, eds. Linguistics, Philosophy and Montague Grammar, pp. 223–262. University of Texas Press, Austin, 1977.Google Scholar
  175. [Simons, 1981]
    P. Simons. Plural reference and set theory. In B. Smith, ed. Parts and Moments, pp. 199–260. Philosophia, Munich, 1981.Google Scholar
  176. [Simons, 1994]
    P. Simons. New categories for formal ontology. Grazer Philosophische Studien, 49, 77–99, 1994.Google Scholar
  177. [Smith et al., 1992]
    L. B. Smith, S. S. Jones and B. Landau. Count nouns, adjectives, and perceptual properties in children’s novel word interpretations. Developmental Psychology, 28, 273–286, 1992.Google Scholar
  178. [Smith, 1978]
    R. Smith. Mass terms, generic expressions, and Plato’s theory of forms. Journal of the History of Philosophy, 16, 141–153, 1978.Google Scholar
  179. [Soja, 1992]
    N. N. Soja. Inferences about the meanings of nouns: The relationship between perception and syntax. Cognitive Development, 7, 29–45, 1992.Google Scholar
  180. [Soja, 1994]
    N. N. Soja. Evidence for a distinct kind of noun. Cognition, 51, 267–284, 1994.Google Scholar
  181. [Soja et al., 1991]
    N. N. Soja, S. Carey and E. S. Spelke. Ontological categories guide young children’s inductions of word meaning: Object terms and substance terms. Cognition, 38, 179–211, 1991.Google Scholar
  182. [Soja et al., 1992]
    N. N. Soja, S. Carey, and E. S. Spelke. Perception, ontology, and word meaning. Cognition, 45, 101–107, 1992.Google Scholar
  183. [Stanley, 2002]
    J. Stanley. Nominal restriction. In Logical Form and Language, G. Preyer, ed. pp. 365–388. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 2002.Google Scholar
  184. [Stewart, 1987]
    R. Stewart. Intent ionality and the semantics of ‘Dasein’. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 58, 93–106, 1987.Google Scholar
  185. [Strawson, 1959]
    P. Strawson. Individuals, Methuen, London, 1959.Google Scholar
  186. [Taylor, 1977]
    B. Taylor. Tense and continuity. Linguistics and Philosophy, 1, 199–220, 1977. (A revised version of this paper is in B. Taylor (1985) Modes of Occurrence: Verbs, Adverbs and Events. Oxford, Blackwells, Chapter 3: ‘Tenses and Verbs’, pp. 51–82.)Google Scholar
  187. [ter Meulen, 1980]
    A. ter Meulen. Substances, Quantities and Individuals, PhD Dissertation, Stanford, 1980.Google Scholar
  188. [ter Meulen, 1981]
    A. ter Meulen. An intensional logic for mass terms. Philosophical Studies, 40, 105–125, 1981.Google Scholar
  189. [Thomson, 1998]
    J. Thomson. The statue and the clay. Nous, 32, 149–173, 1998.Google Scholar
  190. [Thompson, 1995]
    K. Thompson. When a white horse is not a horse. Philosophy East and West, 45, 481–499, 1995.Google Scholar
  191. [van Benthem, 1994]
    J. van Benthem. Determiners and logic. Linguistics and Philosophy, 6, 447–478, 1994.Google Scholar
  192. [van Brakel, 1986]
    J. van Brakel. The chemistry of substances and the philosophy of mass terms. Synthese, 69, 291–324, 1986.Google Scholar
  193. [Vendler, 1967]
    Z. Vendler. Linguistics in Philosophy (Chapter 4), Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 1967.Google Scholar
  194. [Verkuyl, 1972]
    H. Verkuyl. On the compositional nature of the aspects. Dordrecht: Reidel, 1972. (Especially pp. 54–61).Google Scholar
  195. [Wandinger, 1998]
    N. Wandinger. Masses of stuffand identity. Erkenntnis, 48, 303–307, 1998.Google Scholar
  196. [Ware, 1975]
    R. X. Ware. Some bits and pieces. Synthese, 31, 379–393, 1975. Reprinted in [Pelletier, 1979, pp. 15–29].Google Scholar
  197. [Whorf, 1939]
    B. Whorf. The relation of habitual thought and behaviour to language. In J. Carroll, ed. Language, Thought and Reality: Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf, pp. 134–159. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1956.Google Scholar
  198. [Xu, 1997]
    F. Xu. Prom Lot’s wife to a pillar of salt: evidence that physical object is a sortal concept. Mind and Language, 12, 365–392, 1997.Google Scholar
  199. [Zemach, 1970]
    E. Zemach. Four ontologies. Journal of Philosophy, 67, 231–247, 1970.Google Scholar
  200. [Zembaty, 1983]
    J. Zembaty. Plato’s Timeaus: mass terms, sortal terms, and identity through time in the phenomenal world. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, Sup. Vol. 9, 101–122, 1983.Google Scholar
  201. [Zimmerman, 1995]
    D. Zimmerman. Theories of masses and problems of constitution. Philosophical Review, 104, 53–110, 1995.Google Scholar
  202. [Zimmerman, 1996]
    D. Zimmerman. Could extended objects be made out of simple parts?: an argument for ‘Atomless Gunk’. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 56, 1–29, 1996.Google Scholar
  203. [Zimmerman, 1997]
    D. Zimmerman. Coincident objects: could a stuff ontology help? Analysis, 57, 19–27, 1997.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Francis Jeffry Pelletier
    • 1
  • Lenhart K. Schubert
    • 2
  1. 1.University of AlbertaCanada
  2. 2.University of RochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations