Universal 1617: Animate/Human: ?Kin/Status > Sex;
Inanimate/Nonhuman: Shape > Orientation, Rigidity > Nature/Function.
- Original
- The implicational hierarchy of semantic distinctions for numeral classifier systems:
Animate/Human: ?Kin/Status > Sex;
Inanimate/Nonhuman: Shape* > Orientation, Rigidity > Nature/Function. - Standardized
- IF there are numeral classifiers distinguishing anything else, THEN there are numeral classifiers distinguishing animate/human and inanimate/nonhuman.
For animate/human class:
IF a numeral classifier system distinguishes objects by their sex, THEN it also distinguishes them by social status (including kinship relations).For inanimate/nonhuman class:
IF a numeral classifier system distinguishes objects by orientation, THEN it also distinguishes them by shape.
IF a numeral classifier system distinguishes objects by their rigidity, THEN it also distinguishes them by shape.
IF a numeral classifier system distinguishes objects by their nature/function, THEN it also distinguishes them by shape. - Keywords
- numeral classifier, animacy
- Domain
- inflection, syntax, semantics
- Type
- implicational hierarchy
- Status
- achronic
- Quality
- absolute?
- Basis
- classifier languages and relevant literature analyzed by Croft 1994
- Source
- Croft 1994: 152-153
- Counterexamples
1. The claim that all classifier systems distinguish an animate or human class was made by Adams & Conklin (1973: 3), based on a study of Asian and Oceanic classifiers; but Croft has seen no counterexamples to this claim in numeral classifier systems in other parts of the world. This is contrary to assumptions in the secondary literature, which imply that shape is primary determinant of numeral classifier semantics (Croft 1994: 153).2. All numeral classifier systems that utilize shape distinctions make at least a three-way distinction: one-dimensional (long or ‘stick-like’), two-dimensional (flat), and three-dimensional (round). Cf. shape distinctions with predicate classifiers (#1623).