Re: When is plural applied?

That's all quite interesting; especially about
singulative and collective (apparently some kinds of
"transformers"); also about "anti-...". Seems that we
could come to a complete theory regrouping all
concepts having something to do with number. What have
we forgotten?

Maybe "infinite". For ex, the number of stars in the
sky, or the number of grains of sand on a strand. In
theory, you can count them one by one (they have their
own individual existence, not like a drop of water,
which is a temporary form), but in fact you can never
count all of them. (This is not "indefinite").

(I thought of "negative" also, but it seems that this
is more a complement to some other number concepts,
like it "it lacks a few pence, so we could buy the
bottle": there are (pence-PAUCAL)-NEG (insofar we
don't mix it with "negative" meaning "no", thus
"zero")).

I also can see a double meaning in "paucal" for ex:
Quelques animaux courent # Peu d'animaux courent
The first one would be a positive paucal, the secund
one a negative paucal (there are few, but there are
some # they are some, but they are few).

(I can see little examples where "trial" and "quadral"
could if of any help, while "dual", or to some point,
"quintal", can be).

The concept of heterogeneity seems interesting to
distinguish between both duals. In all cases, the
elements are two, and they are opposed somehow, so the
distinction seems clearly to lay in "what kind of
opposition". In the case of hands, or feet, or eyes,
the elements are opposed laterally, or topologically,
but not functionnally, which would be the case for
male and female. But not for day and night (insofar we
consider day and night as the two only possibilities,
and don't bother for dawns and evenings). I thought of
"there cannot be such thing as day if there is not
such thing as night", because day defines night and
reciprocally: day is not(night), night is not(day). In
case of hands, it's not exactly the same: left is
not(right) and right is not(left), but left hand is
not(not right hand): the concept of symetry doesn't
depend of hands, hands only are an example for that
general concept. I'm not sure of all this, I'm just
feeling there is something in it, but it's very hard
to work it out.

But there is also another "dual", like in "I got two
coins in my pocket". In this case, there is
complementarity neither opposition, it's just the
regrouping of any two units alike. So we would come to
(at least) three different "dual" concepts.

I think Whorf also alleagued that for some
Amerindians, "two" in "two days" was not the same
concept as two in "two horses" for ex, but other
linguists later said that he had understood nothing
and that it was all false. Yet I found the idea
interesting, because surely there is a difference.

This is all very fascinating, because (countable / not
countable) is one of our very fundamental everyday
concepts (even if physicists are not so sure of the
difference by now); as well as number.


--- Javier BF <uaxuctum@...> wrote:
>
> You forgot "mass". A collective noun (like
> "furniture")
> is a linguistic device that allows the speaker to
> take
> what per se is a number of discrete, countable
> entities
> (tables, beds, cupboards...) and view them together
> as
> a mass. A singulative noun is the opposite
> conceptual
> process, by which what per se is a mass, uncountable
> entity (like "water") is divided into discrete,
> countable units ("drops"). The concept of "group"
> (unit of several entities), performs both conceptual
> processes resulting in a singulative of a collective
> (plural --> mass --> unit).
>
> Note, however, that things like "singulative" refer
> to conceptualizations of countability and thus do
> not
> properly belong in the same category as number
> concepts
> like "singular" and "plural", which can be applied
> to
> singulatives: a drop, drops, two drops.
>
>
> >I also suggested thinking about the notion of
> couple
> >(as the two components of a system, like Yin and
> Yang,
> >day and night, male and female), vs the notion of
> pair
> >(eyes, feet...), but I was convinced that I was
> wrong
> >(so I shut up, but I keep thinking my own way :-)
>
> I agree with what you say, providing that "couple"
> and "pair" correspond to Spanish "pareja" and "par"
> respectively (which I'm not completely sure). But
> the
> distinction is usually blurred in actual usage. The
> parameter of homegeneity vs. complementariness
> between
> two elements that this distinction introduces is
> related
> to the parameter of homogeneity vs. heterogeneity
> within
> a plural, which could be used to distinguish between
> an unmarked or homogeneous plural from a
> heterogeneous
> plural ("various").
>
> Other distinctions in number may be between several
> kinds of plural: antisingular (> 1), antidual (> 2),
> antipaucal (> ~10). One may also have trial, even
> quadral
> and conceivably quintal; usually instead of paucal.
>
> Summarizing:
>
> - indefinite, aka 'mugagabe' (undefined as for
> quantification)
>
> COUNTABILITY
>
> Uncountable
>
> - mass (uncountable per se)
>
> - collective (plural --> mass)
>
> Countable
>
> - unit (countable per se)
>
> - singulative (mass --> unit)
> - group (collective --> unit)
>
>
> NUMBER (only applicable to countable)
>
> - nullar (n = 0)
> - singular (n = 1)
>
> Plural
>
> - dual (n = 2)
> - trial (n = 3)
> - quadral (n = 4)
> - quintal (n = 5)
>
> - paucal (~10 > n > 2)
> - antisingular (n > 1)
> - antidual (n > 2)
> - antipaucal (n > ~10)
>
> - complemental (n = 2, complementary)
> - heterogeneal (n > 1, heterogeneous)

=====
Philippe Caquant

"High thoughts must have high language." (Aristophanes, Frogs)


	
		
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - File online by April 15th
http://taxes.yahoo.com/filing.html

Reply