Universal #1636
Legacy number: 1636
| Number | 1631 |
| Original | Polysynthetic languages should not have non-referential quantified NPs – that is, NPs comparable to ‘everyone’, ‘everything’, ‘nobody’, and ‘nothing’ in English. |
| Standardized | IF there is polysynthesis, THEN there will be no non-referential quantified NPs (quantifiers serving as NPs on their own). |
| Formula | polysynthesis ⇒ ¬ true quantifiers |
| Keywords | polysynthesis, quantifier |
| Domain | morphology, syntax |
| Type | implication |
| Status | achronic |
| Quality | statistical |
| Basis | Polysynthetic languages like Mohawk (Iroquoian), Nahuatl (Uto-Aztecan), Kiowa (Kiowa- Tanoan), Gunwinjguan (Gunwingguan, Australian), Wichita (Caddoan), Chukchi (Chukchi-Kamchatkan), Ainu (isolate). Non-polysynthetic languages like Greenlandic (Eskimo-Aleut), Lakhota (Siouan), Slave (Athabaskan), Alamblak (Sepik-Ramu), Chichewa (Bantoid, Niger-Congo), Choctaw (Muskogean) |
| Source | Baker 1996: 53 |
Discussion
Notes
Baker has no data on Wichita, Chukchi, and Ainu.[But on all other polysynthetic lgs? ]
Comment
Baker has no data on Wichita, Chukchi, and Ainu. [But on all other polysynthetic lgs? ]
Log in to join the discussion.