Abstract
One and ones are complex determiners whose relation to their antecedent, when they have one, is mediated by a silent noun. They are never themselves nouns taking an antecedent directly. All instances of non-numeral one are associated with a classifier, plus an indefinite article. Numeral one is in addition associated with an element akin to single. The analysis proposed unifies prenominal one with the one of a blue one and blue ones. The syntax of one and ones is best understood if all nonlocal syntactic relations necessarily involve internal merge.
Keywords
Notes
- 1.
Cf. Stirling and Huddleston (2002: 1515), Payne et al. (2013: 798, 812).
Payne et al. (2013: 812) suggest that bare *ones is “preempted by …some”. This does not seem descriptively correct (quite apart from the absence of a clear notion of preemption). Consider, for example:
-
(i)
Bicycles have wheels and unicycles have wheels/*ones, too.
Here, ones is bad, as usual, but some is inappropriate:
-
(ii)
?…and unicycles have some, too
with (ii) rather having the status of:
-
(iii)
?…and unicycles have some wheels, too.
-
(i)
- 2.
In standard English as opposed to the dialects discussed in McDonald and Beal (1987: 48) and Beal et al. (2012: 57). Stirling and Huddleston (2002: 1513n) give You’re a one! as idiomatic. (It would be of interest if these exceptions had no counterpart with plural ones.) The general impossibility of bare *a one was noted by Perlmutter (1970: 236).
- 3.
As noted by Perlmutter (1970: 236) and Lakoff (1970: 630). Halliday and Hasan (1976: 97) say that one hears two ones especially in children’s speech; this needs to be looked into. As does the fact that a Google search yields a number of examples with completely bare ones, which may point to the existence of an as yet unstudied variety of English.
- 4.
Llombart-Huesca’s arguments were not taken into account by Payne et al. (2013).
- 5.
Cf. also the multiple definite articles of Greek, as discussed by Alexiadou and Wilder (1998) among others.
- 6.
- 7.
Left open by this emphasis on phonology is the fact that English sometimes allows a stressed indefinite article, as in:
-
(i)
I can’t give you the book, but I can give you a book,
in which a rhymes with say. This stressed a does not license NP-ellipsis:
-
(ii)
*…but I can give you a.
suggesting that Borer’s (2005: 111n) primarily phonological account of the impossibility of (ii) with unstressed a is not general enough.
-
(i)
- 8.
He suggests generic a might perhaps derive from any one, but note:
-
(i)
Any/*A spider whatsoever would be able to eat that insect.
-
(ii)
Hardly any/*a spider would eat that insect.
-
(iii)
Not just any/*a spider could have done that.
-
(i)
- 9.
- 10.
An alternative that I will not pursue might be to take one to be monomorphemic and to cooccur with a silent classifier.
- 11.
Cf. Leu (2015: 116) on German ein being moved across.
- 12.
- 13.
Why one acts differently here from demonstratives remains to be understood. Relevant to the formulation of the prohibition in question is:
-
(i)
two (beautiful) (*the) seventh inning home runs
versus
-
(ii)
?two (beautiful) top of the seventh inning home runs.
-
(i)
- 14.
On the complexity of (most) determiners, see Leu (2015).
- 15.
As noted by Jespersen (1961, Sect. 10.12).
- 16.
- 17.
In students that age, there is probably a silent preposition intervening between students and that age.
- 18.
- 19.
This differs in part from Kayne (2008a, Sect. 7).
- 20.
There might also be a link here to Kayne’s (2002b) idea that antecedents need to be reached via movement.
- 21.
Why lesquels acts differently in nonrestrictive relatives remains to be understood. Cf. Grevisse and Goosse (2011: §619).
- 22.
A remaining question is why French does not then allow:
-
(i)
*Quels les linguistes as-tu invités?
-
(i)
- 23.
Cf. Greenberg (1966), Cinque (2005) though neither attempted to integrate articles. A separate question is whether their “Dem Num Adj N” reflects external merge alone, or whether internal merge is also involved. See also Shlonsky (2004).
Barbiers (2005: 172) has the idea that DP moves, triggered by focus, to spec of one in Northern Brabantish, in a partially similar way.
- 24.
With a possible link to:
-
(i)
A group of three/?two students is waiting in your office.
-
(ii)
*A group of one student is waiting in your office.
and/or to:
-
(iii)
all three of Mary’s three children.
-
(iv)
*every single one of Mary’s (one) child.
-
(i)
- 25.
Cf. Tat (2011) for a similar proposal on Turkic languages.
- 26.
Many acts like few here, as opposed to numerous: (i) We’ve bought?numerous/*many ones. The reason is that numerous is not a modifier of NUMBER in the way that few and many are. For more details, see Kayne (2002a).
- 27.
- 28.
Cf. Pollock (1998, note 24).
- 29.
In French, this de can also be licensed by a following determiner, as in:
-
(i)
Vous avez acheté des (bons) vins. (“you have bought of-the (good) wines”) in which case an adjective is no longer necessary.
-
(i)
- 30.
For recent discussion of this kind of French de, see Ihsane (2008).
- 31.
An example of licensing by a pre-ones reduced relative in English is: (i) There are a few old letters on the chair and a few recently arrived ones on the table.
On adjectives and reduced relatives more generally, see Cinque (2010). The text cases are to be distinguished from cases in which the licensing modifier need not be prenominal; see Longobardi (1994, note 12) on determinerless nouns in preverbal subject position.
- 32.
The indefinite article requires licensing by an adjective in:
-
(i)
You must have spent a *(good, beautiful) three weeks in Italy.
-
(ii)
You should invite a*(n other) four people.
-
(i)
- 33.
And similarly for: (i) too long (of) a book
In the cases he discusses, Leu (2015: 92) has the determiner and adjective forming a constituent. Extended to ones, this would mean that (at the point of licensing) ones + adjective is a constituent.
- 34.
Cf. note 2.
- 35.
As opposed to:
-
(i)
We bought a recently published one
with a reduced relative that is prenominal.
-
(i)
- 36.
For another case of a silent adjective with no antecedent, see Kayne (2005a, Sect. 7) on GOOD. Possibly the English that accepts not a one has it as:
-
(i)
…not SINGLE a one
with SINGLE preceding, rather than following, the indefinite article, with this position for SINGLE licensed by the presence of not (via movement of the phrase “not SINGLE” from postnominal position directly to pre-a position)—cf. Troseth (2009) on not very good of a book.
-
(i)
- 37.
With 1000, French has:
-
(i)
(*un) mille linguistes (“a thousand linguists”)
Possible, with a complex numeral containing one as a subpart, is:
-
(ii)
trente-et-un mille linguistes (“thirty and one thousand linguists”).
-
(i)
- 38.
Though there may be a silent one present, to judge by the obligatory pronunciation of the final consonant of vingt in 22, 23…
- 39.
There is a point of similarity here with Borer’s (2005: 196) proposal that Hebrew ‘exád (“one”) is an adjective interpreted as “single”.
- 40.
As mentioned in an earlier footnote, this view of one faces a challenge dealing with stressed a, as in:
-
(i)
We don’t need some chocolates, we need a chocolate
with a pronounced to rhyme with say.
-
(i)
- 41.
On once, see Kayne (2014).
- 42.
- 43.
As noted by Halliday and Hasan (1976: 97).
- 44.
As noted by Halliday and Hasan (1976, 96).
- 45.
Cf. Leu (2005).
- 46.
The first example has a DP apparently case-licensed by wonder, in contrast to Pesetsky (1991: 6) Note the contrast with adjectives, for example:
-
(i)
*We’re sure it’s time to leave and they’re sure the same thing.
It may be that the property of thing at issue is (to some extent) limited to abstract, as opposed to object, thing, a distinction that some languages make explicit; cf. Zepeda (1983: 53, 55) on double counterparts of nothing and what.
-
(i)
- 47.
Though “thing” seems to be compatible with various classifiers in Cantonese, see Matthews and Yip (1994: 106).
- 48.
On “immediately,” note:
-
(i)
They spent a beautiful three weeks/*ones in France last year.
-
(i)
- 49.
Conceivably there is a point of contact here with:
-
(i)
Someone(*s) else called.
-
(i)
- 50.
Cf. especially Leu (2015: 32) on Norwegian.
- 51.
Another kind of example with something adjectival, but not strictly speaking an adjective is:
-
(i)
John makes lots of remarks, including lots of over-the-top ones.
Note also:
-
(ii)
*I’ve read neither John’s papers nor Mary’s ones
versus
-
(iii)
?I’ve read neither yesterday’s newspapers nor today’s ones
-
(i)
- 52.
There may or may not be a link to:
-
(i)
The plates were piled one on top of the other.
-
(ii)
*The plates were piled ones on top of the other(s).
-
(i)
- 53.
- 54.
- 55.
Cf. the nonequivalence of somewhere and someplace discussed in Kayne (2007a) Also:
-
(i)
He’s living in the middle of nowhere/*noplace.
-
(i)
- 56.
This way of looking at things makes sense of nobodies vs. *noones, while leaving open the contrast between They’re nobodies and
-
(i)
*They have nobodies else.
-
(i)
- 57.
Note that the “head” of the relative here contains not just ones but also at least one silent NOUN.
- 58.
- 59.
Possibly via a silent prenominal THERE that might be relevant to the contrast between English and Dutch concerning “the…one…” noted by Barbiers (2005: 163). Jespersen (1961, Sect. 10.12) notes that some Jutland dialects allow a counterpart of definite that abominable one, as opposed to standard Danish.
- 60.
As opposed to adding some in:
-
(i)
Mary has published some twenty papers/*ones in the last five years.
-
(i)
- 61.
- 62.
Cf Kayne (2003).
- 63.
The impossibility of this kind of example was noted by Stirling and Huddleston (2002: 1524), who did not, however, draw the conclusion that other is always an adjective. Their reason was that the others is possible, combined with the belief that adjectives never take plural -s in English.
British and American English seem to differ in that only British English has, with a simple numeral:
-
(i)
Mary has three millions in the bank,
in which the -s is likely associated with silent POUND. In (my) American English, this -s does not appear:
-
(ii)
Mary has three million in the bank.
though DOLLAR(S) is presumably present. Her and Tsai (2015: 592) note the existence of doublets like:
-
(iii)
There are three grand pianos/grands in the storeroom,
which they interpret as showing that grand in (iii) is a noun. Alternatively, it is an adjective occurring with either piano or PIANO. The monetary grands (possible for some speakers) that they discuss in their Sect. One is not a noun is compatible with monetary grand being an adjective, in the same way. The question whether the specific analysis of monetary grand proposed in Kayne (2012) is on the right track is beyond the scope of this chapter.
-
(i)
- 64.
With the indefinite article in place of one, we get the impossible:
-
(i)
*…but you prefer blue a’s
Presumably, this is the same fact as:
-
(ii)
*John has a car and you have a, too.
in turn akin to:
-
(iii)
John likes the *(car), too.
-
(i)
- 65.
One here is associated with plural “CAR s,” contrary to:
-
(i)
We have one car(*s).
Thinking of Heim (1987), van Riemsdijk (2005), and Leu (2008), this might suggest:
-
(ii)
… blue one KIND CAR -s.
in which one goes with silent KIND (or some other additional NOUN) and -s with silent CAR. Pursuing this possibility would be beyond the scope of this chapter.
-
(i)
- 66.
Cf. Stirling and Huddleston (2002: 1515) for judgments like Baker’s.
- 67.
Cf. Kayne (2008b).
- 68.
Payne et al. (2014) gave me the impression, perhaps wrongly, that they believe that there is one “English.” For a sharply opposing view, see Kayne (1996; 2013). On the richness of syntactic variation within what we call English, see Algeo (2006), Kortmann et al. (2005), Zanuttini and Horn (2014), and many other such works.
- 69.
With a point of similarity to:
-
(i)
*their explanation away of the problem
which must also involve noncontrastive scrambling, if Kayne (2008b) is on the right track.
-
(i)
- 70.
- 71.
In the following:
-
(i)
John is a self-promoting scoundrel,
the antecedent of self must not be John, but rather the silent subject of promote. The relation between that subject and scoundrel needs looking into.
In:
-
(ii)
We’re having a three-wine dinner tonight,
there may well be a silent KIND, as in Kayne (2003, note 26), but that KIND has no compound-external antecedent, just as SINGLE does not in the text discussion.
-
(i)
- 72.
Cf. Kayne (2010b). As formulated, the text statement, which has implications for the derivation of relative clauses and tough-movement, also prohibits instances of Agree that do not also involve internal merge—cf. Koopman (2003; 2005), Kayne and Pollock (2012; 2014).
On NPI-licensing as involving movement, see Chomsky (1973: 242) (for the particular case of not…many) and especially Collins and Postal (2014). On topicalization and (a certain kind of) left-dislocation, note the reconstruction effects that hold (for me) in:
-
(i)
His youngest daughter every man is especially fond of.
-
(ii)
As for his youngest daughter, every man is bound to think she’s a genius.
Similarly:
-
(iii)
His youngest daughter is easy for a man to admire.
-
(i)
References
Algeo, J. 2006. British or American English?. A Handbook of Word and Grammar Patterns: Cambridge University Press.
Alexiadou, A., and C. Wilder. 1998. Adjectival modification and multiple determiners. In Possessors, predicates and movement in the determiner phrase, ed. A. Alexiadou, and C. Wilder, 305–332. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Baker, C.L. 1978. Introduction to generative-transformational syntax. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.
Barbiers, S. 2007. Indefinite numerals one and many and the cause of ordinal suppletion. Lingua 117: 859–880.
Barbiers, S. 2005. Variation in the morphosyntax of one. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 8: 159–183.
Beal, J.C., L. Burbano-Elizondo, and C. Llamas. 2012. Urban north-eastern English: Tyneside to Teesside. Edinburgh University Press.
Bernstein, J. 2015. The expression of case across English demonstrative forms, talk presented at New York University.
Borer, H. 2005. In name only. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Cardinaletti, A., and M. Starke. 1999. The typology of structural deficiency: a case study of the three classes of pronouns. In Clitics in the languages of Europe, ed. H. van Riemsdijk, 145–233. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Cheng, L.L.-S., and R. Sybesma. 1999. Bare and not-so-bare nouns and the structure of NP. Linguistic Inquiry 30: 509–542.
Cheng, L.L.-S., and R. Sybesma. 2012. Classifiers and DP. Linguistic Inquiry 43: 634–650.
Cinque, G. 2010. The syntax of adjectives. A comparative study. Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press.
Cinque, G. 2005. Deriving Greenberg’s universal 20 and its exceptions. Linguistic Inquiry 36: 315–332.
Cinque, G. 1988. On Si constructions and the theory of Arb. Linguistic Inquiry 19: 521–581.
Collins, C. 2014. Relative clause deletion. New York: New York University.
Ghosh, R. 2001. Some aspects of determiner phrase in Bangla and Asamiya. Doctoral dissertation, Tezpur University, Assam.
Greenberg, J.H. 1966. Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In Universals of language, 2nd ed, ed. J.H. Greenberg, 73–113. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.
Grevisse, M. & Goosse, A. 2011. Le Bon Usage. 75 Ans, De Boeck Duculot, Brussels.
Halliday, M.A.K., and R. Hasan. 1976. Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
Harris, A.C. 2006. Revisiting anaphoric islands. Language 82: 114–130.
Heim, I. 1987. Where does the definiteness restriction apply? Evidence from the definiteness of variables. In The representation of (in)definiteness, ed. E.J. Reuland, and A.G.B. ter Meulen, 21–42. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.
Hendrick, R. 1990. Operator binding in NP. In A. Halperin (ed.) Proceedings of the Ninth West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Her, O.-S., and H.-C. Tsai. 2015. On silent elements: a case study of grand and its silent entourage. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 33: 575–605.
Ihsane, T. 2008. The layered DP. Form and meaning of French indefinites. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Jespersen, O. 1961. A modern English grammar on historical principles. Part II. Syntax. First Volume. London and Ejnar Munksgaard, Copenhagen: George Allen & Unwin.
Julien, M. 2002. Syntactic heads and word formation. New York: Oxford University Press.
Kayne, R.S. 2014. Once and twice. In Inquiries into linguistic theory and language acquisition. Papers offered to Adriana Belletti, ed. C. Contemori and L. Dal Pozzo. CISCL Press: Siena (also in Studies in Chinese Linguistics (2015) 36, 1–20).
Kayne, R.S. 2013. Comparative syntax. Lingua 130: 132–151.
Kayne, R.S. 2012. A note on grand and its silent entourage. Studies in Chinese Linguistics 33: 71–85.
Kayne, R.S. 2010a. Why isn’t this a complementizer? In Comparisons and contrasts (also in Functional structure from top to toe: A Festschrift for Tarald Taraldsen, ed. P. Svenonius. New York: Oxford University Press.
Kayne, R.S. 2010b. The DP-internal origin of datives, talk given at the 4th European Dialect Syntax Workshop in Donostia/San Sebastián.
Kayne, R.S. 2010c. Comparisons and contrasts. New York: Oxford University Press.
Kayne, R.S. 2008a. Some preliminary comparative remarks on French and Italian definite articles. In Foundational issues in linguistic theory. Essays in Honor of Jean-Roger Vergnaud, ed. R. Freidin, C.P. Otero and M.L. Zubizarreta, 291–321. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press (reprinted in (2010c) Comparisons and Contrasts).
Kayne, R.S. 2008b. Antisymmetry and the lexicon. Linguistic Variation Yearbook 8: 1–31 (also in The Biolinguistic enterprise: New perspectives on the evolution and nature of the human language faculty, ed. A.M. di Sciullo and C. Boeckx, 329–353. London: Oxford University Press (2011)) (reprinted in Comparisons and Contrasts).
Kayne, R.S. 2007a. A short note on where verses place. In Miscellanea di Studi Linguistici offerti a Laura Vanelli da amici e allievi padovani, ed. R. Maschi, N. Penello and P. Rizzolatti, 245–257. Forum, Udine (reprinted in Comparisons and Contrasts).
Kayne, R.S. 2006. On parameters and on principles of pronunciation. In Organizing grammar. Linguistic studies in Honor of Henk van Riemsdijk, ed. H. Broekhuis, N. Corver, R. Huybregts, U. Kleinhenz and J. Koster, 289–299. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter (reprinted in (2010c) Comparisons and Contrasts).
Kayne, R.S. 2005a. On the syntax of quantity in English. In Movement and silence (also in Linguistic theory and South-Asian languages. Essays in Honour of K.A. Jayaseelan, ed. J. Bayer, T. Bhattacharya and M. T. Hany Babu, John Benjamins, Amsterdam.
Kayne, R.S. 2005b. Movement and silence. New York: Oxford University Press.
Kayne, R.S. 2004. Here and there. In Syntax, lexis & lexicon-grammar, ed. C. Leclère, E. Laporte, M. Piot, and M. Silberztein, 253–273. Papers in Honour of Maurice Gross, John Benjamins, Amsterdam (reprinted in (2005b) Movement and Silence).
Kayne, R.S. 2003. Silent years, silent hours. In Grammar in focus. Festschrift for Christer Platzack, ed. L.-O. Delsing et al., vol 2, 209–226. Lund: Wallin and Dalholm (reprinted in Kayne (2005)).
Kayne, R.S. 2002a. On some prepositions that look DP-internal: English of and French de. Catalan Journal of Linguistics 1: 71–115 (reprinted in Movement and Silence).
Kayne, R.S. 2002b. Pronouns and their antecedents. In Derivation and explanation in the minimalist program, ed. S. Epstein and D. Seely, 133–166. Malden, Mass.: Blackwell (reprinted in (2005b) Movement and Silence).
Kayne, R.S. 1996. Microparametric syntax. Some introductory remarks. In Microparametric syntax and dialect variation, ed. J.R. Black and V. Motapanyaneix–xviii. Benjamins, Amsterdam (reprinted in Parameters and Universals).
Koopman, H., and A. Szabolcsi. 2000. Verbal complexes. Cambridge, Mass: The MIT Press.
Kornfilt, J. 1997. Turkish. London: Routledge.
Kortmann, B., T. Herrmann, L. Pietsch, and S. Wagner (eds.). 2005. A comparative grammar of British English dialects. Agreement, gender, relative clauses. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Lakoff, G. 1970. Global rules. Language 46: 627–639.
Leu, T. 2015. The architecture of determiners. New York: Oxford University Press.
Leu, T. 2008. What for internally. Syntax 11: 1–25.
Leu, T. 2007. These HERE demonstratives. In Proceedings of the 30th Annual Penn Linguistics Colloquium, Penn Working Papers in Linguistics, ed. T. Scheffler, J. Tauberer, A. Eilam and L. Mayol, vol 13(1), 141–154.
Leu, T. 2005. Something invisible in English. UPenn Working Papers in Linguistics 11(1): 143–155 (Proceedings of PLC 28).
Liao, W.-W.R. 2015. Once upon an Invisible TIME: On frequentative phrases in Chinese. Studies in Chinese Linguistics 36: 21–33.
Llombart-Huesca, A. 2002. Anaphoric one and NP-ellipsis. Studia Linguistica 56: 59–89.
Longobardi, G. 1994. Reference and proper names. Linguistic Inquiry 25: 609–665.
Malamud, S.A. 2013. (In)definiteness-driven typology of arbitrary items. Lingua 126: 1–31.
Marušič, F., and R. Žaucer. 2006. The ‘definite article’ TA in colloquial Slovenian. Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics 14: 189–204.
Matthews, S., and V. Yip. 1994. Cantonese: A comprehensive grammar. London: Routledge.
McDonald, C., and J.C. Beal. 1987. Modal verbs in Tyneside English. Journal of the Atlantic Provinces Linguistic Association 9: 43–55.
Payne, J., G.K. Pullum, B.C. Scholz, and E. Berlage. 2013. Anaphoric one and its implications. Language 89: 794–829.
Perlmutter, D.M. 1970. On the Article in English. In Progress in linguistics, ed. M. Bierwisch, and K.E. Heidolph, 233–248. The Hague: Mouton.
Pesetsky, D. 1991. Zero syntax, vol 2. Infinitives. MIT: Mass.
Pollock, J.-Y. 1998. On the syntax of subnominal clitics: Cliticization and ellipsis. Syntax 1: 300–330.
Postal, P.M. 1966. On so-called ‘pronouns’ in English. In Report of the seventeenth annual roundtable meeting on linguistics and language studies, ed. F.P. Dineen, 177–206. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press (reprinted in Modern studies in English (1969), ed. D.A. Reibel and S.A. Schane. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Prentice-Hall).
Postal, P. 1969. Anaphoric Islands. Chicago Linguistic Society 5: 205–239.
Riemsdijk, H. Van. 2005. Silent nouns and the spurious indefinite article in Dutch, in M. Vulchanova and T. Åfarli, Grammar & Beyond: Essays in honour of Lars Hellan, 163–178, Novus Press, Oslo.
Schibsbye, K. 1970. A modern English grammar, 2nd ed. London: Oxford University Press.
Shlonsky, U. 2004. The form of Semitic noun phrases. Lingua 114: 1465–1526.
Simpson, A., and Biswas, P. 2015. Bare nominals, classifiers and the representation of definiteness in Bangla, handout of talk presented at FASAL-5, Yale University.
Simpson, A., H.L. Soh, and H. Nomoto. 2011. Bare classifiers and definiteness. A cross-linguistic investigation. Studies in Language 35: 168–193.
Stirling, L., and R. Huddleston. 2002. Deixis and Anaphora. In The Cambridge grammar of the English language, ed. R. Huddleston, and G.K. Pullum, 1449–1564. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Tat, D. 2011. APs as reduced relatives: The case of Bir in some varieties of Turkic. In Proceedings of WAFL7. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics, 62.
Troseth, E. 2009. Degree inversion and negative intensifier inversion in the English DP. The Linguistic Review 26: 37–65.
Wood, J.L. 2002. Much about Such. Studia Linguistica 56: 91–115.
Wood, J.L. 2013. Indefinite determiner doubling. Abstract of talk presented at the Germanic Linguistics Annual Conference, 19, SUNY Buffalo.
Zanuttini, R., and L.R. Horn. 2014. Micro-syntactic variation in North American English. New York: Oxford University Press.
Zepeda, O. 1983. A Papago grammar. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.
Acknowledgements
Earlier versions of this chapter were presented at the University of Cambridge, England, in June 2009; at the Workshop on Bare Nouns, Paris VII, in November 2009; at the Giornata di Dialettologia, University of Padua, in June 2010; at the Chinese University of Hong Kong, at the National Chiao Tung University, Taiwan, and at the University of Rome 3 in April 2013. I am grateful to all those audiences for useful comments and questions.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2017 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kayne, R.S. (2017). English One and Ones as Complex Determiners. In: Sengupta, G., Sircar, S., Raman, M., Balusu, R. (eds) Perspectives on the Architecture and Acquisition of Syntax. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4295-9_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-4295-9_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-10-4294-2
Online ISBN: 978-981-10-4295-9
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)