Variation in Countability Properties and Noun Classes

Abstract

This paper establishes that Sorani Kurdish has a mass/count distinction that can be distinguished by looking at, which nouns occur with plural moprhology (-an), optional classifiers (e.g. dane, CLinainmate), unit denumerators (yek, ‘one’), fuzzy denumerators (nsikay panja ‘about fifty’), and other denumerators (herdû ‘both’). Moreover, properties of countability in Sorani Kurdish can be used to distinguish six classes of nouns that differ with respect to their acceptability with the aforementioned properties, examples of nouns in each class being setyare (‘car’), polîs (‘police’), miqes (‘scissors’), manga (‘cattle’), çiyakanî Himalaya (‘Himalayas’), and xîn (‘blood’). This data was gathered by comparing Sorani Kurdish near equivalents to English countability properties found in previous studies, and asking five speakers of Sorani Kurdish for their judgments, following semantic fieldwork methodology. This research expands what is found about countability in Sorani Kurdish grammar books. This paper shows that Sorani Kurdish has both a rich classifier system and mass/count distinction, a combination that has not yet been documented. Knowing these characteristics of Sorani Kurdish helps to create a clearer picture of the linguistic variation regarding countability and suggests a relationship between the number of countability properties and countability classes in a given language.

Keywords

• Sorani Kurdish
• countability
• mass nouns
• Kurdish Grammer

References

1. Allan, K. (1980). Nouns and countability. Language 56, 541–567. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.2307/414449.
2. Barner, D. & Snedeker, J. (2005). Quantity judgments and individuation: Evidence that mass nouns count. Cognition 97, 41–66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.cognition.2004.06.009.
3. Borer, H. (2005). Structuring sense: Volume 1: In name only (Vol. 1). Oxford University Press.
4. Cheng, L. L. S., & Sybesma, R. (1998). Yi-wan tang, yi-ge tang: Classifiers and massifiers. Tsing Hua journal of Chinese studies, 28(3), 385-412.
5. Chierchia, Gennaro. 1998. Plurality of mass nouns and the notion of ‘semantic parameter’. In S. Rothstein (ed.), Events and grammar (pp. 55-103). Kluwer.
6. Dryer, M. S. & Haspelmath, M. (Eds.) (2013). The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. Accessed on 2021-03-09. http://wals.info
7. Doetjes, J. (2012). Count/mass distinctions across languages. In C. Maienborn, K. von Heusinger, & P. Portner (Eds.), Semantics: An International Handbook of Natural Language Meaning, Vol. 3, 2559-2580. de Gruyter.
8. Eberhard, D. M., Simons, G. F., & Fennig, C. D. (Eds.). (2021). Ethnologue: Languages of the World. Twenty-fourth edition. Dallas, Texas: SIL International. Online version: http://www.ethnologue.com

9. Grimm, S. (2012). Number and individuation (Doctoral dissertation, Stanford University).
10. Krifka, M. (1995). Common nouns: A contrastive analysis of English and Chinese. In G. Carlson & F. J. Pelletier (Eds.), The Generic Book (pp. 398–411). Chicago University Press.
11. Kim, D. H. (2010). A Basic Guide to Kurdish Grammar. The Ministry of Culture of KRG.
12. Kiss, T., Pelletier, F. J., & Husic, H. (2021). Things and Stuff: The Semantics of the Count-Mass Distinction, 377. Cambridge University Press.
13. Lima, S. (2010). About the mass-count distinction in Yudja: A description. In B. Rogers & A. Szakay (Eds.), Proceedings of WSCLA 15, 157-176. University of British Columbia.
14. Lima, S. & Rothstein, S. (Eds.). (2020). Special Issue: A typology of the mass/count distinction in Brazil and its relevance for mass/count theories. Linguistic Variation 20:2. John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/lv.20.2.
15. Link, G. (1983). The logical analysis of plurals and mass terms: A lattice-theoretical approach. Formal semantics: The essential readings (pp. 127-147).
16. Matthewson, L. (2004). On the methodology of semantic fieldwork. International journal of American linguistics 70, 369-415. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/429207
17. McCawley, J. D. (1975). Lexicography and the count-mass distinction. In Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 1, pp. 314–321.
18. Moltmann, F. (Ed.). (2020). Mass and Count in Linguistics, Philosophy, and Cognitive Science. John Benjamins. doi.org/10.1075/lfab.16.
19. Quine, W. (1960). Word and object: An inquiry into the linguistic mechanisms of objective reference. John Wiley.
20. Rothstein, S. (2010). Counting and the mass/count distinction. Journal of Semantics 27(3), 343–397. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/ffq007.
21. Schvarcz, B. & Rothstein, S. (2017). Hungarian classifier constructions, plurality and the mass–count distinction. In H. van der Hulst and A. Lipták (Eds.), Approaches to Hungarian: Papers from the 2017 Leiden Conference (pp. 183-208). John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/atoh.15.07sch
22. Sudo, Y. (2015). Countable nouns in Japanese. Proceedings of WAFL 11, 1–11. Available at www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucjtudo/pdf/wafl11.pdf.
23. Thackston, W. M. (2006). Sorani Kurdish: A reference grammar with selected readings. Lecture Notes, Iranian Studies, Harvard University. Retrieved from http://bit. ly/ 2aQxBs6.
24. Tsoulas, G. (2008). On the grammar of number and mass terms in Greek. In C. Halpert, J. Hartman, & D. Hill (Eds.), MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 57, 131–46.