Universal 571:
- Original
- Hierarchy of syntactic bondedness (stronger > weaker): article+noun > deictic+noun < interrogative+noun < quantifier/indefinite+noun < adjective+noun >
> participle+noun > relative clause+noun.As soon as an adjunct category has an obligatory overt marker of its subordination to the head noun (such as ligature morphemes), all weaker bound categories of adjuncts also require an overt marker.
But bondedness hierarchy is claimed to be valid for other morphosyntactic differences between various kinds of adjuncts as well. - Standardized
- Hierarchy of syntactic bondedness (stronger > weaker): article+noun > deictic+noun < interrogative+noun < quantifier/indefinite+noun < adjective+noun >
> participle+noun > relative clause+noun.As soon as an adjunct category has an obligatory overt marker of its subordination to the head noun (such as ligature morphemes), all weaker bound categories of adjuncts also require an overt marker.
But bondedness hierarchy is claimed to be valid for other morphosyntactic differences between various kinds of adjuncts as well. - Keywords
- article, noun, interrogative, deictic, quantifier, indefinite, adjective, participle, relative clause, boundeness, hierarchy, ligative
- Domain
- syntax
- Type
- implicational hierarchy
- Status
- achronic
- Quality
- absolute
- Basis
- Austronesian languages
- Source
- Foley 1980: 174
- Counterexamples
It is not required that every language have each of these as separate grammatical categories, but they will have most of them as semantically differentiable entities.