Gender, number and classifiers:

explaining the quirks of the

Serbo-Croatian neuter
Boban Arsenijevi, University of Potsdam and University of
Ni
Slavic Linguistics Colloquium HU, June 6th 2016

Organization of the talk

Present several awkward properties of Serbo-Croatian (SC) neuter
nouns.
Present a view of count vs. mass vs. collective semantics based
on two levels of vagueness: the atomic level (lexical semantics of
the noun) and the level of the unit of counting (classifier).
Present an analysis of gender in which gender is similar to
classifiers in languages like Chinese, and neuter is the absence of
gender.
Show how these two combine to explain the mysterious facts
presented at the beginning of the talk.
2

Mystery 1
Only collective forms productively derived from N nouns trigger
plural agreement on the verb.
(1) a. bur-e; Bur-ad je/su nova.
barrel-NSg barrel-Coll be.Sg/Pl
The barrels are new.

new.FSg/NPl

b. snop-; Snop-jeje/*su teko/*teki

beam-MSg beam-Collne.Sg/Pl heavy.NSg/MPl
The beams are heavy.
Note that collectives from M and F nouns are N, those from N are
F.
3

Mystery 2
Neuter nouns derived from other genders cannot have
plural forms.
(2 prozor-
prozor--e
*prozor--(et-)a
) window-MSg
window-Dimwindow-Dimwindow
NSg
Ext-NPl
little window
prozor--ad
prozor--i-i

window-Dimwindow-Dim-DimCollFSg
MPl
little windows
little windows
(Coll)
(Pl)
4

Mystery 2, still
Diminutives from neuter bases do not
restriction.
(3 dn-o
dan-c-e
) bottom-MSg
bottom-Dimbottom
NSg
little bottom
?dan-c-ad
?dan--i-i
bottom-Dimbottom-Dim-DimCollFSg
MPl
little bottoms
little bottoms
(Coll)

have this
dan-c-a
bottom-DimNPl
little bottoms

Mystery 3
Neuter is not compatible with person, or with deixis.
(4)

a. CHILD: *ital-o sam knjigu

read-NSg Aux1Sgbook.Acc
I was reading a book
b. Mi *(??spadal-a) smo radoznal-a.
we joker-NPl are.1Pl curious-NomNPl
We jokers are curious.
c. (pointing at three kids)#Ona su
they3NPl are tireless.NomNPl
They are tireless.

neumorna.

Mystery 4
Neuter agreement is bad with assemblies of individuated atoms.

(5) a. Knjiga i sveska su stajali/stajale pored vaze.

book.FSg and notebook.FSg AuxPl stood.M/FPl byvase
A book and a notebook were standing by the vase.
b. Selo i polje su leali/*leala u irokoj dolini.
village.NSg and field.NSg auxPl lay.M/NPl in broad valley
A village and a field lay in a broad valley.
c. *Trinaest pisama su isporuena. (OK for F and M)
13 letter.NGenPl are delivered.NPl
Eleven letters have been delivered. (M/FPl allows both)
7

Mystery 5
Wechsler & Zlati (2000, 2003) analyze the agreement of the four
idiosyncratic collective nouns braa brothers, deca children,
gospoda gentry and vlastela nobility as NPl.
(6) Braa su spaval-a.
brother.CollNomFSg AuxPl slept-NPl/FSg
slept-NPl(/FSg)
The brothers slept / were sleeping.
Why do biologically M, grammatically F nouns trigger N on the
verb?!
8

Gender and classifiers

In typological literature, one category (Dixon 1986, Corbett 1991,
Aikhenvald 2000).
They play the same role in the organization of the lexicon.
Typologically in complementary distribution (even when occurring
within a single language).
Gender is a classification system which shows agreement effects
(Corbett 1991).
Diachronically, a classifier system grammaticalizes into a gender
system (Reid 1997).
9

Gender and classifiers: one big

difference
Classifiers typically play a role in the grammatical expression of the
count semantics of the noun (makes it syntactically active/visible).
(7) san *(zhi) xiong
three
Cl.Partner bear
3 bears

(Krifka 1995)

No such role has been attributed to gender.

If the two systems are in complementary distribution and represent
the same category, how come they show such a sharp difference?
How is the count semantics expressed in gender languages?
10

Count, mass, collective: the view

argued for
Count semantics corresponds to a simple count classifier
semantic restriction, part of the lexical semantics of the noun.
Mass nouns are deffective in this respect: no classifier restriction
(they bear homogeneous semantics, as in e.g. Higginbotham 1994).
Collective nouns (furniture type) involve a paucal classifier
semantic restriction, matching 2+ atoms (Nevins, this CLS), which
is messy in the sense of Landman (2011) and subsumes atomicity.
Lexical classifier-restrictions may be overridden by overt (grain of
salt, head of cattle, bag of marbles) or contextually imposed
classifiers (three waters , four sands = containers, types).
11

Examples
Lexical semantics of the count noun window includes a restriction to
the counting unit of one individual window (in terms of the properties
of shape, size and function); symultaneously the atom.
Lexical semantics of the collective noun furniture includes a
restriction to the counting unit of a small number (2-4?) of atoms; not
equal to the atom.
Lexical semantics of the mass noun sand includes no restriction of
either type; no atom is available either.
(8)
s)

a. 3/[a truck of] windows,

b. *3/[a truck of] furniture(*-s)/sand(*-

12

Atomicity, neatness
Mass nouns: non-atomic, not specified for a classifier, messy (units of
partition may have shared parts, after Landmann 2011).
Collective nouns: atomic, specified for a classifier, messy (classifier
targets a group of atoms, units of partition may have shared parts).
Count nouns: atomic, specified for a classifier, neat (classifier targets
the atom, no part of one unit of partition can be part of another one).
Can be imposed a classifier
ALL
Can have plural reference
if SPECIFIED FOR A CLASSIFIER
Can have morphological plurals if NEAT
13

Grammatical realization of the

classifier
Both in gender and in classifier languages, classifier component
needs a syntactic realization to come to effect.
Languages like Chinese use special light nominal items,
classifiers, to grammatically realize the unit of counting (CL-value
in [PART:CL]).
(9) san zhi / qun / zhong xiong
(Krifka 1995)
three Cl.obj Cl.herd
Cl.species bear
3 bears (objects) / 3 herds of bears / 3 bears (species)
Other languages employ an abstract, grammaticalized expression
of the lexically supplied classifier component, namely gender.
14

Syntactic expression of a classifier

restriction
A partitive head which can be valued by a classifier feature
above NP (Arsenijevi 2006).
The valuation results in a restriction of partition to (sums of) units
specified by the lexical semantic classifier component.
Count partition by an atomic classifier, otherwise mass
partition.

PartP

[PART:C NP
L]
marble[C
L]

PartP

[PART]

NP

air[]
15

Syntactic expression of a classifier

restriction
A partitive head which can be valued by a classifier feature
above NP (Arsenijevi 2006).
The valuation results in a restriction of partition to (sums of) units
specified by the lexical semantic classifier component.
Count partition by an atomic classifier, otherwise mass
partition.

PartP

[PART:C NP
L]
marble[C
L]

gender/classi
fier

PartP

[PART]

NP

air[]
16

Gender in SC, a formal model

Nouns are lexically specified for a declension class and for a
semantic gender, which can be absent ([]), unspecified
([gender]), masculine ([gender:M]) or feminine ([gender:F]).
Declension classes are represented as restrictions on gender:
-o/-e:
[],
-M:
{[gender], [gender:M]} ,
-F:
{[gender], [gender:F]},
-a:
{[gender], [gender:M], [gender:F]}
Only genderlessness maps 1 to 1 to a declension class, other
values and declension classes are all ambiguous.
17

Plurals, gender, neuter

Plurals, count quantification etc. require a neat classifier (Landman
2011), overt (grain of salt, Chinese CLs), or expressed by [gender].
Neuter is the absence of [gender] (Kramer 2015) neuter fails to
generate plurals, among other consequences of genderlessness .
Collectives as surrogate plurals: traditional NPl is a collective form.
There is no NPl the targetted form is semantically collective
(paucal classifier) and morphosyntactically the -a declension class.

18

The NPl declension

But how come then N nouns take plural endings in inherent case
forms?
Collectives are ambiguous between the interpretation as a whole or as
an assembly, and trigger both Pl and Sg agreement.
NPl is a collective form restricted to plural interpretation.
Inherent case forms in Slavic are universally gender-unspecified
([gender] is required for [case]), cf. Russian (for a female referent):
xoroij/xoroaja direktor vs. xoroomu/*xorooj direktoru.
Inherent case forms are suppletive Pl-s from the - M declension class.
19

Collective and plural in SC

Plural subsumes the meaning of the collective, while being simpler
in not involving conflict between morphosyntax and semantics.
The dual has been lost in SC, and the paucal is limited to numeral
expressions.
Count bases which can derive plurals ([gender(:X)]) block the
collective forms within the paradigm, only idiosyncratically
derive ?collectives (establishing an own paradigm, Simonovi &
Arsenijevi 2015).
Only when plurals cannot be derived, collectives are allowed.
20

Support for the analysis

The NPl paradigm is identical to the paucal paradigm, and its
ending -a matches the collective suffix in nouns of the dec-a childColl type.
(10)a. tri list-a b. dec-a
3 leaf-Pauc child-Coll
All these three categories occur within the same declension class.
Borrowed count nouns fitting the shape of a -e/-o noun go to the
unfitting -M class (yielding hiatus).
(11) mal-iradio- vs. *mal-o radi-o
little-NomMSg radio-NomMSg vs.

little-NomNSg radio-NomNSg
21

More support
The overall number of N nouns in SC is two times lower than the
number of -M or -a nouns.
The average frequency of N nouns in the corpora of SC is around
three times lower than of -M or -a nouns.
There are very few N derivational suffixes in SC (5 or maximally 6
productive suffixes, vs. over 25 for -M, as well as for -a nouns).
They are all either mass (-stvo, -te, -je) or diminutive (-ce, -e).
Most morphologically simplex count N nouns denote vaguely
bounded objects: polje field, selo village, nebo sky, more sea...
22

More support
Over 90% of N nouns are mass-denoting, few classifier nouns are
N (zrno grain).
Only N nouns productively derive collective nouns.
Collective suffixes attaching to N bases, -a and -ad, attach to
count bases only and derive only collective nouns, while -je,
attaching to -a or -M nouns, goes also on non-count bases and
derives mass nouns.
(12) pri-mor-je pucan-je
istino-ljub-je
by-sea-Coll shoot-Coll truth-love-Coll
coastal area shooting
truthfulness
23

Diachronic support
A vast majority of collective nouns without an actively used
count base in SC end in -a (ivina poultry, stoka cattle,
vojska army, pastva congregation, nonja set of traditional
clothes).
Indo-European linguistics reconstructs the entire -a class as
formed around an original core of collective -a nouns (e.g.
Brugmann1925, Tichy 1993).
In most Indo-European languages, MPl and FPl stem from the
older regular (distributive) plural, while NPl stems from the
collective plural form (Brugmann 1897, 1925, a.o).
24

German
In German, articles may impose the classifier component (die Mdchen).
Hence the formation of a plural in German is not in absence of gender.
But at the level of the noun...
also very few N nominalizing affixes,
the denominal among them (-chen, -lein, ge-) form plural without any
ending: die Mdchen, die Mnnlein, die Gebirge;
very few German N nouns take the regular plural ending(s) -s (and
-n), and very few non-neuter nouns take the ending -r (Clahsen 1999,
Wunderlich 1999);
derived collective nouns in German are N (das Geflgel, das Rstzeug,
das Regelwerk).
25

Icelandic classifiers
In Icelandic, M and F classifiers can be elided under a modifier
expressing its gender (Maling and Whelpton, ongoing research).
(13) a. Get g fengi anna/annan kaffi?
can I have another.N/M
coffee.N
(presupposed: cup.M; N sort, M cup)
b. Lttu mig f
annan/*anna bjr.
let me get another.M/N
beer.M
(presupposed: glass.N; M both readings, *N)
c. Lttu mig f
anna vin.
let me get another.N
wine.N
(presupposed: glass.N; M only sort reading)
26

Mystery 1
Only collective forms productively derived from N nouns, which
are all F, trigger plural agreement on the verb.
(1)a. bur-e;
Bur-ad je/su
nova.
barrel-NSg barrel-Coll be.Sg/Pl new. FSg/NPl
The barrels are new.
b. snop-; Snop-je je/*su teko/*teki
beam-MSg beam-Coll ne.Sg/Pl heavy.NSg/MPl
The beams are heavy.

F expresses the classifier restriction in (1a) (paucal,

subsuming count), required by the Pl; N fails to do it in
(1b), hence incompatible with Pl.
27

Mystery 2
Neuter nouns derived from other genders cannot have plural forms.

(2 prozor-
) window-MSg
window

prozor--e
*prozor--(et-)a
window-Dimwindow-DimNSg
Ext-NPl
little window
prozor--ad
prozor--i-i

window-Dimwindow-Dim-DimCollFSg suffixes are transparent

MPl
Deminutive
for the gender of the base,
which
blocks
the within-paradigm
collective form, allows a derived
little
windows
little windows
one.
(Coll)
(Pl)
28

Mystery 3
Neuter is not compatible with person, or with deixis.
(4)

a. CHILD: *ital-o sam knjigu

read-NSg Aux1Sgbook.Acc
I was reading a book
b. Mi *(??spadal-a) smo radoznal-a.
we joker-NPl are.1Pl curious-NomNPl
We jokers are curious.

c. (pointing at three kids)#Ona su neumorna.

they3NPl are tireless.NomNPl
Deixis requires an expressed classifier.
29

Mystery 4
Neuter agreement is bad with assemblies of individuated atoms.

(5) b. Selo i polje su leali/*leala u irokoj dolini.

village.NSg and field.NSg auxPl lay.M/NPl in broad valley
The village and the field lay in a broad valley.
c. Trinaest pisama [je isporueno / *su isporuena].
13letter.NGenPl is delivered.NSg are delivered.NPl
Eleven letters have been delivered. (M/FPl allows both)
Conjunctions and numeral-noun expressions are incompatible
with the vague paucal classifier of the collective NPl -a.
30

Mystery 5
Wechsler & Zlati (2000, 2003) analyze the agreement of
the four idiosyncratic collective nouns braa brothers, deca
children, gospoda gentry and vlastela nobility as NPl.

(6) Braa su spaval-a.

brother.CollNomFSg AuxPl slept-CollFSg
The brothers slept / were sleeping.
The agreement ending -a is [gender:F] (in the case of
collecives expressing a paucal Cl).
31

Conclusion
Count nouns incorporate classifier restrictions: count or paucal.
This restriction remains inactive unless structurally expressed.
Gender (in SC) serves this purpose: it grammatically expresses the
classifier component.
Neuter is the absence of gender (Kramer 2015) unexpressed Cl.
Plurals require a grammatically expressed classifier *NPl.
N resorts to collectives (paucal classifier) to express plural
meanings.
This explains several otherwise mysterious properties of N in SC.

32

THANK YOU

33

References
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2000. Classifiers: a Typology of Noun Categorization Devices. Oxford: Oxford University Press
Brugmann, K. 1897. The nature and origin of the noun genders in the Indo-European languages. New York.
Brugmann, K. 1925.Die Syntax des einfachen Satzes im Indogermanischen. Berlin und Leipzig: DeGruyter.
Chierchia, G. 2010. Mass nouns, vagueness and semantic variation. Synthese 174(1): 99149.
Clahsen, H. 1999. Lexical entries and rules of language: A multidisciplinary study of German inflection. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22,
9911060.
Corbett G. G. (1991). Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Dixon, Robert M. W. 1982. Where Have All the Adjectives Gone? and other Essays in Semantics and Syntax. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Kramer, Ruth. 2015. The Morphosyntax of Gender. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Landman, F. 2011. Count Nouns Mass Nouns, Neat Nouns Mess Nouns. The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and
Communication, 6, 167.
Reid, Nicholas. 1997. Class and Classifier in Ngan'gityemerri. In Harvey, Mark and Reid, Nicholas (eds.), Nominal Classification in
Aboriginal Australia, 165-228. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Rothstein, S. 2010. Counting and the mass/count distinction. Journal of Semantics 27, no. 3: 343397.
Tichy, Eva. 1993. Kollektiva, Genus femininum und relative Chronologie im Indogermanischen. Historische Sprachforschung 106: 119.
Wechsler, S. & L. Zlati. 2000. A Theory of Agreement and its Application to Serbo-Croatian. Language 76. 799832.
Wechsler, S. &L. Zlatic. 2003. The Many Faces of Agreement. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Wunderlich, D. 1999. German noun plural reconsidered. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 1044-1045.

34

Neuter-base and non-neuter-base

collectives
Both combine with distributive modifiers.
(14) a. dugo/razbacano prue b. teka/okupana telad
long/thrown_around stickM.Coll heavy/bathed
calfN.Coll
Only neuter-based ones provide access to the units of
counting.
(15) a. *Prua je bilo devet.
stick.CollGen Aux been9
b. Teladi je bilo devet.
calf.CollGen Aux been9

35

Dual vs. Paucal as a category and as

a classifier restriction
Some linguists believe that the dual was always vague
between the dual and paucal interpretation.
It is possible that due to the cultural environment, the
respective form had a dual interpretation on inanimates,
but a paucal on animates (a couple of animals withe
their offspring).
In some languages the inanimate interpretation was
grammaticalized, in others the inanimate.
Classifiers with the dual or paucal interpretation are not
rare in classifier languages.
36