Gender and classifiers in concurrent systems: Refining the typology of nominal classification

Abstract

Some languages have both gender and classifiers, contrary to what was once believed possible. We use these interesting languages as a unique window onto nominal classification. They provide the impetus for a new typology, based on the degree of orthogonality of the semantic systems and the degree of difference of the forms realizing them. This nine-way typology integrates traditional gender, traditional classifiers and -importantly -the many recently attested phenomena lying between. Besides progress specifically in understanding nominal classification, our approach provides clarity on the wider theoretical issue of single versus concurrent featural systems.

The coalescence of grammatical gender and numeral classifiers in the general classifier wota in Nepali

“…With regard to the typology of nominal classification systems, the complex system in Nepali is typologically rare due to not only the cooccurrence of two distinct types of systems, i.e., gender and numeral classifiers, but also the fusion of both types of classification markers in the general classifier. The unique status of Nepali is illustrated by the typology of complex systems proposed by Fedden & Corbett (2017) (see Table 3). (Fedden & Corbett 2017:37) Within this typology Nepali thus represents the most complex configuration in Type 5, i.e., "exactly at the mid-point between canonically one system and canonically two systems" (2017:14).…”

“…relatively little is known about cross-linguistically rare complex systems combining different types of nominal classification. For example, recent work on co-occurring systems of gender and classifiers has dealt with their areal distribution (Sinnemäki in press) and the possible semantic and formal configurations (Fedden & Corbett 2017). Our aim is to examine the general classifier wota in Nepali (Indo-European, Indic) as an example of the co-occurrence of gender and numeral classifiers.…”

Single versus concurrent systems: Nominal classification in Mian

“…In Fedden & Corbett (2017) we present a typology of single and concurrent systems of nominal classification. The essential ideas behind this typology are: (i) the degree to which the SEMANTICS of the two (candidate) systems are orthogonal to each other, i.e., the extent to which their sets of grammatical meanings cross-cut each other, 4 and (ii) the degree to which their MEANS OF REALIZATION are different.…”

“…It is not easy to determine whether we have a single system here or more than one. Indeed, the study of Mian was the initial stimulus that led eventually to a typology of single versus concurrent systems (Fedden & Corbett 2017), and yet ironically Mian seems to escape from the typology built around it. In particular, as we shall see, we devised a measure to help in such cases, and the score for Mian was somewhat inconclusive.…”

“…This article goes substantially beyond these previous papers. Mian is discussed in much more detail here than in Fedden & Corbett (2017) and we use the interaction of the candidate systems with a third feature (number) as a new criterion in the analysis of Mian. In the present article we also develop a new "two systems computation tool", which allows us to calculate how close any set of candidate systems comes to canonically concurrent systems.…”