Collective Nouns Research Articles

The syntax of semantic agreement in English

This paper investigates the properties of plural agreement that is triggered by collective nouns in British English. Both singular and plural agreement are able to appear with these collective nouns, which are shown to be morphologically singular but semantically plural. Plural agreement, however, is systematically more restricted than singular agreement, appearing in a subset of the environments where singular agreement is allowed. Restrictions on plural come from the nature of agreement; semantic agreement features can only enter into agreement when the controller of agreement c-commands the target of agreement, whereas morphologically motivated agreement is not subject to the same structural restriction. This asymmetry between the two types of agreement is shown to arise from the proposal thatAgree(Chomsky 2000, 2001) is distributed over the syntactic and post-syntactic components (Arregi & Nevins 2012).

ІСТОРІЯ Й ЛЕКСИКО-СЛОВОТВІРНІ ТИПИ ПРАСЛОВ’ЯНСЬКИХ ІМЕННИКІВ ІЗ СУФІКСОМ -VA

On the material reconstructed derivates of proto-Slavic era a lexical-derivational taxonomy of feminine nouns with the suffix –VA is carried out. The origin and the typology of derivational suffix-va in such derivatives are established. It is proved that the suffix -VA demonstrates the ability to be combined mostly with verbal and nominal bases. Minor frequency of the creation of proto-Slavic nouns by attaching to the original foundations of the suffix -VA and different types of semantic-derivational specifics of such derivative testify in favor of assumptions about the variant of the semantic-derivational behavior of this formant, and the lack of primary word-formation functions in proto-Slavic era. It is found that the formant -VA had a distinct word-formation potential with the creation of protoSlavic nouns abstract-deverbative. In verbal morphology this particle was sometimes a marker of collectivity in nouns. In proto-Slavic era deadjectival, which are created from noun, are not uniquely identify the primary function of this suffix, since it was formed besubstantial for the representation of names of plants, household utensils, somatisms and collective nouns. Lexical-derivational typology derived from the adjective with suffix -VA is represented by two groups: the names of persons and names of animals.

Lexical plurals through meronymy and hyperonymy

This study uses meronymy and hyperonymy as semantic criteria applied to French collective nouns (CollNs) and lexical plural nouns (LPNs) in the issue of noun classification. After having outlined the semantic properties of CollNs and explained their links with meronymy and hyperonymy, LPNs are tested in different glosses related to these two relationships. These tests outline that CollNs and LPNs form two kinds of nouns that could hardly converge. They also enlighten the way the different subclasses of LPNs match with meronymy and hyperonymy.

Collectives, object mass nouns and individual count nouns

Mass superordinates such asclothing, clothesandfurnitureform a distinct and peculiar class of nouns in languages with an obligatory singular/plural distinction. These nouns often havepluralia-tantumvariants as well as count equivalents – both within one linguistic system as well as cross-linguistically. This study is a follow-up of my earlier analysis of Romance superordinates (Mihatsch, 2006). The data are taken from English, German, French and Spanish in order to demonstrate the striking cross-linguistic pattern. The highly variable Spanishropa(s)‘clothing/clothes’ is analysed in greater detail. I argue that in most cases the apparently unsystematic synchronic variants arise from partly unidirectional diachronic changes, namely a lexicalisation process leading from collective nouns to object mass nouns, often followed by the appearance of plural forms, which oscillate between a lexical and an inflectional plural.

Medical collective nouns.

Medical collective nouns.

A Contrastive Analysis of the Category of Number in English and Albanian Nominal System

English and Albanian as members of the Indo-European trunk of languages undoubtedly share certain characteristics, common for all members of this family of languages, but as two structurally different languages, they also show significant differences. The main aim of this paper is to highlight not only some of the differences, but also similarities in regard to the grammatical category of number in English and Albanian nominal system. The paper is based on various English and Albanian grammar books, written by prominent authors, which provide an abundance of data examined through the contrastive method. The results indicate that nouns in these two languages show differences which concern several aspects of the grammatical category of number. Some of these differences concern the way these two languages treat nouns in the singular and plural number, the ways of forming the plural number, and their usage with articles and numerals. One essential difference, however, concerns the collective and compound nouns which show an almost complete discrepancy in these two languages due to the ways they write these nouns, and the ways these nouns function in these languages. Nevertheless, in spite of the differences, there are also some similarities that concern mainly the ways of forming the plural number, but also the group of nouns used only in the singular called “singularia tantum”, and those used only in the plural “pluralia tantum”.

Counting in Context: count/mass variation and restrictions on coercion in collective artifact nouns

A major factor grounding the mass/count distinction is the (non-)resolution of overlap in context. We argue that counting presupposes that nouns be interpreted relative to counting contexts, which are contexts enforcing a resolution of overlap in noun denotations. While, in this respect, we largely follow some suggestions in Rothstein 2010 and Landman 2011, what is novel about our proposal is the role of context in the (non-) resolution of overlap. Lexical entries of mass Ns specify the null context as the context for evaluation, which makes them uncountable. The reason for this is that the null context allows for overlap in noun denotations, because it is the union of the interpretations of the predicate at all counting contexts (i.e. variants). In contrast, lexical entries of count Ns do not specify such a context, and therefore their counting context may vary from utterance to utterance. Adopting this semantics has two major benefits. First, we can predict, on semantic grounds, for a large class of nouns, when we can(not) expect to find mass/count variation cross- and intralinguistically. Second, we are able to explain why ‘collective artifact’ nouns (aka ‘object’ or ‘fake’ mass nouns) resist mass-to-count coercion.

Tristram, Anna.Variation and Change in French Morphosyntax. The Case of Collective Nouns.

Tristram, Anna.<i>Variation and Change in French Morphosyntax. The Case of Collective Nouns</i>.

Service user, patient, survivor or client … has the time come to return to 'patient'?

Recently, the Council of the UK Royal College of Psychiatrists agreed to use the term 'patient' as the preferred collective noun when referring to people accessing mental health services in its official documentation. Choices regarding terminology have the power to influence those who use such terms and here, David Christmas and Angela Sweeney debate the issue of whether such a decision is appropriate or whether we need to be more careful about the terms we use.

Roundtable: How has the profession changed since you graduated?

Roundtable provides an opportunity for librarians to reflect on their own practice and experiences related to a particular question. In light of our 10th anniversary issue, the topic for this issue’s Roundtable is “How has the profession changed since you graduated?” Three librarians share their thoughts on this topic. Roundtable fournit une opportunité aux bibliothécaires de réfléchir sur leur pratique et leurs expériences liées à une question particulière. À la lumière du numéro de notre dixième anniversaire, le sujet du Roundtable de ce numéro est «Comment la profession a-t-elle changé depuis que vous avez reçu votre diplôme? » Trois bibliothécaires partagent leurs pensées à ce sujet.

Collective Nouns in Welsh: A Noun Category or a Plural Allomorph?

AbstractA noun category in Welsh which has a shorter form for a collection/plural meaning and a suffixed singulative for a single instance has been described in the literature as both a number category and a plural allomorph, often with terminological ambiguity and blurring of boundaries between different noun types. This paper is an investigation of the features of these nouns using a number of theoretical approaches which cumulatively support the argument that collective can be considered a full number category in Welsh.

Swarms: Spatiotemporal grouping across domains

This paper presents cross-domain evidence that natural language makes use of (at least) two ways of individuating collective entities that differ in terms of how they cohere. The first kind, which I call swarm reference, picks out higher-order collective entities defined in terms of the spatial and temporal configuration of their constituent individuals. The second, which corresponds to canonical cases of group reference (e.g. committee, team, etc.), makes use of non-spatiotemporal notions. To motivate this distinction, I present systematic differences in how these two types of collective reference behave linguistically, both in the individual and event domains. These differences support two primary results. First, they are used as tests to isolate a new class of collective nouns that denote swarm individuals, both in English, as well as other languages like Romanian. I then consider a crosslinguistically common type of pluractionality, called event-internal in the previous literature (Cusic 1981, Wood 2007), and show that its properties are best explained if the relevant verbs denote swarm events. By reducing event-internal pluractionality to a type of collective reference also available for nouns, this work generates a new strong argument that pluractionality involves the same varieties of plural reference in the event domain that are seen in the individual domain.

Collective Nouns in Journalistic Arabic

---

Collective Nouns in the Qur’ān: Their Verbal, Adjectival and Pronominal Agreement

Collective Nouns in the Qur’ān: Their Verbal, Adjectival and Pronominal Agreement

“A field of crop scientists” — Twitter delivers collective nouns for researchers

The hashtag #scientistherdnames began with a blog post about the lack of group terms for scientists.

Variation and Change in French Morphosyntax: The Case of Collective Nouns by Anna Tristram

different directions. Other changes such as the spread of particular syntactic constructions are due to loanwords, particularly from French. Sayahi has shown, for example, that the analytical forms of the expression of possession in North African dialects are more widely used with borrowed French words.In addition,among the many interesting insights of this study is that the High and Low “varieties are substantially different structurally and it is not only because of their intense contact with other languages [such as French], as is often believed by speakers and policymakers” (201). With the widening differences between the Low and the High varieties, and the increased awareness of the communicative functionality of the Low varieties, diglossia could end, thus leading to the emergence of new languages. Providing its new perspective, Sayahi’s book is a welcome addition to the research within the field of multilingualism, language contact, and bilingualism in North Africa. University of Delaware Ali Alalou TRISTRAM, ANNA. Variation and Change in French Morphosyntax: The Case of Collective Nouns. Oxford: Legenda, 2014. ISBN 978-1-907975-95-0. Pp. 178. $99. While language variation and change have been the focal point for linguists on this side of the Atlantic, Tristram argues that studies on morphosyntactic variation in French studies are lacking due to a focus on phonology and dialectology as well as denial of variation and change in the French language. Tristram’s book is thus a welcome contribution. It investigates verbal agreement with collective nouns such as majorité, minorité, partie, moitié, and foule, as in “une foule de voitures de deuil encombrait les abords de l’hôtel” versus “une foule de détails ont été omis” (1). The book’s ambitious objectives and approaches encompass quantitative, qualitative, synchronic, and diachronic methods using sociolinguistic interviews, Cloze tests, analysis of a large corpus from the database Frantext, and a survey of norms taught in French grammar textbooks. Tristram points out that it is difficult to define collective nouns, since “French studies are often not explicit about which nouns are included and which are excluded in the delimitation of the class” (17). Her review of the literature confirms disagreement about how referents are conceptualized. Quite a bit of space is devoted to English collective nouns, providing a basis for a comparative study. Tristram describes the methodological challenges of gathering a satisfactory sampling and explains the reasoning behind the use of each technique. Sociolinguistic interviews, for example, offer “authentic data [...] and more control over the sociolinguistic profile of the participants” (46). The author’s consideration of the social factors influencing the use of collective nouns is uneven. Gender and education are deemed relevant (a full chapter is devoted to the impact of education) but surprisingly, ethnicity and regional factors were excluded from the study, which may undermine the author’s wide-ranging goals. As an example of her findings, Tristram’s Cloze test for 286 FRENCH REVIEW 89.3 Reviews 287 majorité reveals a tendency among young French speakers (ages fourteen and fifteen) toward plural verbs. They used a plural verb in 66.67% of cases, as compared to 56.25% for adults over sixty (87). She also found that definite and indefinite articles influence agreement: older speakers use a singular verb with la foule 100% of the time, but only 64.29% with une foule (93). Tristram’s review of the historical use of collective nouns shows variation over time. Through the eighteenth century, for example, use of plural verbs rose from 12.5% of cases to 37.31% and then declined to 31.78% (99). Her examination of twentieth-century grammar textbooks found that they approached verbal agreement with collective nouns flexibly, with no apparent change over time. This book undertakes so much that the reader sometimes feels lost in its multifaceted methodology and lengthy endnotes.A more straightforward research design and more concise writing style, along with more examples and discussions focused specifically on the results, would have helped to put the grammar in context and done greater justice to Tristram’s tremendous effort and rich data. Nonetheless, her book is an interesting invitation to learn about morphosyntactic variation in French using a variety of methodologies and corpora. Manhattan...

Jelena, the Serbian Queen

In this paper, in the Tale of Bygone Years according to the Lawrencian's Chronicle from 1377, the congruence of the Old Russian collective nouns is analysed. The analysed nouns congrue with pronouns, verbs, participles, possessives and adjectives. The research shows that semantic congruence is primarly realised with verb forms aorist, imperfect, present, future I and imperative, as well as with the contruction da + present in the sense of the imperative mood. Semantic congruence also dominates in the contruction collective noun + personal pronoun while between a collective noun and the possessive pronouns, a formal grammatical congruence is realised. Within the participle analysis, the realisation of both congruences is noted, both semantic and formal grammatical. At the same time with the consideration of the situation in the Old Russian language, a comparison is made with the contemporary Serbian language, within the appropriate translation equivalents which emphasises the importance of comparative study of the Old Russian and contemporary Serbian within their synchronal overview.

Expletive and Referential Subject Pronouns in Medieval French by Michael Zimmermann

Reviews 287 majorité reveals a tendency among young French speakers (ages fourteen and fifteen) toward plural verbs. They used a plural verb in 66.67% of cases, as compared to 56.25% for adults over sixty (87). She also found that definite and indefinite articles influence agreement: older speakers use a singular verb with la foule 100% of the time, but only 64.29% with une foule (93). Tristram’s review of the historical use of collective nouns shows variation over time. Through the eighteenth century, for example, use of plural verbs rose from 12.5% of cases to 37.31% and then declined to 31.78% (99). Her examination of twentieth-century grammar textbooks found that they approached verbal agreement with collective nouns flexibly, with no apparent change over time. This book undertakes so much that the reader sometimes feels lost in its multifaceted methodology and lengthy endnotes.A more straightforward research design and more concise writing style, along with more examples and discussions focused specifically on the results, would have helped to put the grammar in context and done greater justice to Tristram’s tremendous effort and rich data. Nonetheless, her book is an interesting invitation to learn about morphosyntactic variation in French using a variety of methodologies and corpora. Manhattan College (NY) Samira Hassa Zimmermann, Michael. Expletive and Referential Subject Pronouns in Medieval French. Berlin: De Gruyter, 2014. ISBN 978-3-11-037337-0. Pp. 246. 100 a. This monograph is a meticulous, corpus-based examination of the expression and non-expression of expletive and referential subject pronouns in Old and Middle French, which are often considered pro-drop or null-subject languages. The corpus represents a selection of 1,500 root and embedded clauses from the Chanson de Roland and twelve prose texts ranging from the mid-twelfth to mid-seventeenth centuries and chosen at roughly fifty-year intervals. The results of this well-defined diachronic database of 19,500 manually analyzed clauses are displayed throughout the book in over forty coherent, easy-to-read graphs, showing that Medieval French is clearly not a symmetrical V2 language; that the expression of subject pronouns is more frequent in embedded than in root clauses; and that even though by the end of the seventeenth century subject pronouns are consistently expressed, their increase is neither constant nor linear over the five centuries analyzed. After demonstrating how all previous approaches to the non-expression of subject pronouns (for example, V2, borrowing, disambiguation, grammaticalization) are either “highly problematic” or “empirically inadequate” (44–109), Zimmermann presents a solid argument for analyzing Old French as a non-pro-drop or non-null-subject language, which nonetheless allows the non-expression of subject pronouns in specific structural conditions, for example, the context of left-peripheral focalization (110–205). Zimmermann attributes the sudden abandonment of the non-expression of subject pronouns in Classical French to extralinguistic reasons: influential works of seventeenth-century grammarians (Maupas, Vaugelas, Chiflet) insisting upon the consistent expression of subject pronouns, along with strict SVX word order. When writers and eventually native speakers of the time followed, movement of the verb to the left periphery in the contexts of focalization was no longer allowed. Among alternative focalization strategies, Zimmermann suggests “cleft and dislocation constructions which in fact show an increase in frequency in the 17th century”(216). Like the graphs, the numerous linguistic examples throughout are remarkably accessible: each French word is accurately glossed in English, followed by an overall translation, and in several cases by a detailed contextual analysis of the preverbal constituents considered“focus elements.” Furthermore, this monograph is highly accessible to the non-French reader: the author consistently distinguishes relevant features in his linguistic examples, using italics for verbs, boldface for subject pronouns, underscore for constituents preceding the verb or pronoun, and dotted lines for preceding elements not considered relevant (clitics and coordinating conjunctions). Zimmermann even provides translations of all citations (with the original French or German quotations in footnotes), and many examples and some graphs are conveniently repeated, avoiding the need to thumb back for previous examples to follow an occasional arduous argument. The style varies from somewhat engaging in the introductory chapters to fairly dry in the...

Nierozpoznane collectivum w językach tocharskich: toch. A pratri ‘bracia’

The interpretation of Tocharian A pratri ‘brothers’ is highly controversial. Some re-searchers interpret it as the nominative dual of the East Tocharian noun pracar (m.) ‘brother’ (= Toch. B procer ), others as an irregular form of the nominative plural, and yet others suggest that the form in question should be treated as a scribal error. The present author demonstrates that the collective noun *bhrātriyā (f. coll.) ‘brotherhood’ is securely attested in the Indo-European languages, cf. Attic Greek φρᾱτρίᾱ, dial. φᾱτρίᾱ (f.) ‘brotherhood; people of kindred race, tribe, clan’; Lithuanian brotija (f.) ‘circle of the most faithful friends’; Old Slovenian bratria , Old Chakavian bratrja , Old Russian братрия (f. coll.) ‘brotherhood’, Old Polish (rarely) bratrza (f. coll.) ‘brotherhood, brothers’ (< Proto-Slavic * bratr ь ja f. coll. ‘brotherhood’). Toch. A pratri ‘brothers’ derives from the same Indo-European archetype and represents a nomen collectivum used as the nominative plural. A similar phenomenon is attested in the Slavic languages, cf. Pol. bracia (nom. pl. ← f. coll.) ‘brothers’, earlier ‘brotherhood.’

On old Irish collective and abstract nouns, the meaning of cétmuinter, and marriage in early mediaeval Ireland

This paper consists of two parts. The first concerns the use of words such as cerd to denote both an abstract concept (‘craft’) and a person who embodies it (‘craftsman’), and of words such as fine to denote both a collective (‘kin’) and an individual member of the collective (‘kinsman’). The second part consists of an examination of the meaning of cétmuinter, as well as an account of the origin and persistence of the mistranslation ‘chief wife’, which implicitly underpins the notion of polygamy in Early Christian Ireland.