The paper aims to criticize the monotonicity universal theory of quantifiers to question the universal applicability of the monotonicity theory. A qualitative analysis method was employed, focusing on counterexamples of monomorphemic quantifiers from English, Japanese, and French to critically evaluate the monotonicity universal theory by analyzing these quantifiers behavior and examining the implications of findings on the theorys validity. The significant finding was that not all monomorphemic quantifiers, such as few in English, peu in French, and in Japanese, are monotonic. Therefore, this result contradicted the existing claim that all monomorphemic natural language quantifiers are monotonic (upward monotonic, downward monotonic, or non-monotonic), challenging the universal of the monotonicity theory of quantifiers. The research concludes that the monotonicity universal theory of quantifiers does not universally apply to all monomorphemic natural language quantifiers and underscores the theorys one-sidedness and imperfections. Hence, this work highlights the need for a broader approach to understanding semantic universal and quantifiers behavior in natural languages.