The interpretation of Bare Singular count nouns (henceforth BS nouns) has been at the center of much debate in the literature on countability in Brazilian Portuguese. In this paper, we ad- dress the question whether BS nouns may only be interpreted as mass nouns or as names of kinds, or whether they may also be interpreted as object denoting nouns. It is generally agreed that BS nouns can be interpreted as names of kinds. Furthermore, Beviláqua and Pires de Oliveira (2014) show that BS nouns are interpreted as mass nouns in contexts that favor a mass interpretation. However, the preferred interpretation of BS nouns in neutral contexts (i.e. contexts that favor neither a count nor a mass interpretation) has never been investigated experimentally. We present the results of two experiments, which show that speakers tend to interpret BS nouns as count nouns in neutral contexts.
Much literature has explored the interpretation of the bare singular (BS) in Brazilian Portuguese. Pires de Oliveira & Rothstein (2011) claim that BS nouns are mass because they denote kinds and argue that this explains why only the BS in Brazilian Portuguese can have a non-cardinal interpretation. In this paper, based on an experimental task with Brazilian Portuguese adult speakers, we explore one of their predictions, namely that the 'volume interpretation' of the BS cannot be explained as a case of Grinding. Our results show that Grinding and Volume readings of a BS noun are not equivalent (in favor of their hypothesis). We also show that a volume interpretation of a noun is never preferred when a cardinal interpretation is available, but that this can be explained by other lexical and pragmatic factors. We conclude by suggesting that Rothstein's (in press) distinction between counting and measuring accounts for the fact that non-cardinal readings are not grinding.
This paper investigates the linguistic expression of individuation and counting in Yudja (Juruna family), a Tupi language spoken in Brazil. Relying on the principles of mereotopology (Casati and Varzi 1999, Varzi 2007), the main claim of this paper is that in Yudja all nouns can be used as count nouns. That is, in Yudja maximal self-connected concrete portions of a kind can be considered atoms and can be counted. This claim is based on two fundamental properties of Yudja. First, all notional mass nouns can be directly combined with numerals. Second, the results of quantity judgements studies with Yudja children and adults suggest that all nouns can be directly combined with count-quantifiers and that count-quantifiers are necessarily interpreted as referring to the number of concrete portions. These properties together suggest that all nouns in Yudja are interpreted as count nouns.
The possible interpretations of container phrases (such as 'cups of sugar') has been long debated in the formal semantics literature because container phrases can be associated with a variety of possible readings that go from individuation to measure. In this paper we explore the interpretation of container phrases in Yudja (Tupi stock, Brazil), a language where container phrases are optional in construction with numerals and are morphosyntactically identical to locative phrases. Based on experimental studies with Yudja children and adults we intend to show that these expressions are ambiguous in at least three ways (locative, individuation and measure) and that a locative reading might emerge even in scenarios where the verb and the context favor a measure interpretation. Furthermore, this paper provides evidence that there is no hidden container phrase when numerals are combined with notional mass nouns and that, supporting Partee & Borschev (2012), the results of the studies show that, indeed, the individuation reading is more "primitive", i.e. it precedes measuring in language acquisition.
This paper explores the acquisition path and interpretation of substance and object nouns in Yudja, a Brazilian indigenous language. Based on quantity judgment tasks (Barner & Snedeker 2005), we show that children accept both cardinal and non-cardinal interpretations for all nouns (object and substance denoting nouns), while adults strongly favor a cardinal interpretation for all nouns, including substance nouns. We will use the results from these studies to support three theoretical claims from the literature. First, that the pattern observed for adults corroborates previous analyses of Yudja according to which maximal self-connected concrete portions of a kind can be considered as atoms and can be counted (Lima 2014). Second, that counting does not require natural atomicity (cf. Rothstein 2010). Third, that the definition of atoms for counting is the result of lexical, syntactic and pragmatic factors and does not depend solely on the lexical meaning of a noun (cf. Srinivasan & Barner 2016).
While much work has been done on the description of the mass/count distinction in different geographical areas, Brazilian Indigenous languages are still highly underrepresented in the field. This paper presents the results of a project that involved researchers describing the mass/count distinction in 15 Brazilian Indigenous languages, based on a questionnaire we prepared in 2016 in order to explore the distribution of bare nouns, plurals, numerals, and quantifiers (see Appendix). Three main observations will be drawn. First, number marking and countability are independent. Second, counting is not restricted to natural atoms. Third, since there seems to be no systematic symmetry in the distribution of plurals, numerals, and quantifiers, we argue that the standard diagnostics for countable vs. non-countable nouns are highly language-specific.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.