Proc. Natl. Sci, Counc. ROC(C) Vol. 10, No. 1, 2000. pp. 142-155

The Unity of Nominal Linking Devices

JOHN TRUSCOTT

Department of Foreign Languages and Literature National Tsing Hua University Hsin-Chu, Taiwan

(Received March 6, 1999; Accepted October 13, 1999)

ABSTRACT

The paper examines four general types of nominal linking devices: gender agreement, such as that commonly found in European languages; the noun class phenomenon, typical of African and Aus- tralian languages; classifiers, such as those of East and Southeast Asian languages; and semantically null linking particles, found throughout the world's languages. I argue that these seemingly disparate devices are all expressions of one common underlying entity (Link). The superficial differences among gender, noun classes, and classifiers are due to the different language types in which they appear. Link- ing particles simply represent one natural instantiation of Link, that in which the number of nominal classes is at its logical minimum of one.

Key Words: linking; classifiers; linking particles; gender; noun classes; universals

not interesting; it means, rather, that they should be I. Introduction studied as more or less predictable variations on a uni- versal theme. Devices used for linking nouns to their modifiers Section 2 provides a brief survey of the four are ubiquitous in the languages of the world. They major forms of nominal linking: linking particles come in a variety of forms, differing from one another (LPs), classifiers (Cls), gender markers (GMs), and in seemingly fundamental ways. On the standard view, noun class markers (NCMs). I will not deal with two this appearance of diversity is genuine--the forms rep- phenomena that are commonly grouped with these resent several distinct phenomena. Explicit distinctions four (Aikhenvald, 1994; Craig, 1992, 1994): class among them are sometimes made and defended (at markers found on verbs, because I wish to limit the least for some of the phenomena). More often, though, discussion to nominal linking; and noun classifiers, this view is simply taken for granted. because they do not depend on the presence of modi- I wish to present an alternative view of nominal fiers and therefore do not represent a linking phenome- linking phenomena, to show that there is an underlying non. In the following three sections I argue that the unity which had not been previously recognized. More diversity among the four forms is only superficial. specifically, I will argue that all the major forms of Section 3 makes the case for the unity of GMs and nominal linking are realizations of a single underlying NCMs. Section 4 then shows that a similar case can be element, which I will call Link. Its varying surface made for the unity of this GM/NCM entity with Cls. forms are largely the product of the differing contexts Finally, in Section 5, I argue that LPs are simply one in which it appears, not of any inherent distinctions. form of GM/NCM/Cl--that form which has no classi- This does not mean that the superficial contrasts are fying function.

142 The Unity of Nominal Linking Devices

(1) The English possessive marker 's also has these II. Linking Across Languages characteristics. Despite its standard name, it does not specifically mark possession, in any semantic sense. It 1. Linking Particles is associated, rather, with a number of relations, one of which is ownership. (This fact was first observed, to The prototypical linking relation is found in Aus- my knowledge, by Fries (1938), and has since been tronesian languages, in which a semantically null par- noted by many others.) Consider, for example, the ticle often appears between the noun and its modifiers, phrase Mary's movie. Mary could be the owner of the as in the following examples from Tagalog, Palauan, movie, as in the person who holds legal rights over it and Indonesian. or the owner of the studio that makes it, or the person (1) a. tabmaputik na sahig who owns a copy of the video, or rented or borrowed muddy LP floor one. She could also be the star, or a lesser actor. She b. kikiongel el delmera could be one of the people responsible for creating the dirty LP room movie: producer, writer, director, or even camera oper- c. anjing yang putih ator or any of a host of others. She could be the subject dog LP white of the movie--the person it was written about--or Linking particles appear in a number of locations, someone who likes to watch the movie, or even some- varying somewhat across languages. Tagalog illus- one who simply referred to it recently. In this phrase, 's trates their most general use, with the link connecting can express essentially any relationship that can be nouns to adjectives, demonstratives, possessive pro- imagined between Mary and the movie. Its function is nouns, numerals, quantifiers, interrogative pronouns, simply to indicate that there is a relation. and relative clauses. In general, one LP accompanies The limitations of "ownership" are especially each modifier in Tagalog, regardless of the number or apparent in such cases as my mother/boss/country, or type of modifiers which appear, as illustrated by (2). Jill Dando's murderer, meaning the person who mur- (2) ang aki-ng tatlo-ng maliliit na anak dered Jill Dando. The notion of possession, if it is to my-LP three-LP small LP child accommodate all these meanings, must be stretched "my three small children" beyond all recognition. Thus -s has no semantic con- The Tagalog LP is -ng when the preceding word ends tent. The term "possessive" is an old misnomer that in -n or a vowel and is na otherwise. remains in use only as a matter of tradition. The mark- Such structures are found quite generally among er's function is simply to link prenominal NPs to the Philippine languages and in many Austronesian lan- N, making its status as an LP clear. guages outside the Philippines, such as Palauan and A final example of a linking particle occurs in Chamorro. An LP accompanies each of the noun's Chinese, as shown in the following example: modifiers in these languages, although Chamorro is (4) hen hao-de ren slightly different from the others in that it lacks an LP very good-LP person in possessive constructions. In contrast, LP uses in the The semantically null particle de serves to connect the Formosan language Atayal include possessive head noun to its modifiers, and therefore qualifies as a constructions but exclude some of those found in linking particle.(2) Tagalog, Palauan, and Chamorro. In some other Aus- tronesian languages, such as Indonesian, the use of 2. Classifiers LPs is relatively limited. Elements quite similar to the Austronesian LP Chinese also illustrates the second major type of occur in some Indo-European languages. An example nominal linking--the use of classifiers, shown in the is the Ezafe construction of Persian and some related following examples: languages, illustrated in (3) (Elwell-Sutton, 1941). (5) a. nei-tiao lu (3) dokhtar-e-bozorg-e-ahmad that-Cl road daughter big Ahmad b. san-zhang zhuozi "Ahmad's eldest daughter" three-Cl table The particle -e- has the two characteristics I take as c. ji-ge ren definitional for LPs: It functions as a link between the several-Cl people noun and its modifiers, and it has no semantic content. The Cls tiao, zhang, and ge obligatorily appear in the

143 J. Truscott positions shown above--between nouns and demon- illustrates the phenomenon. stratives,(3) numerals, and certain quantifiers. Recall (6) ki-kapu ki-kubwa ki-moja that these are three of the positions filled by LPs in basket large one Tagalog and Palauan. Like LPs, they serve to link "one large basket" modifier and noun. The difference is that the Cls agree The NCM ki- appears on the head noun and, more with their noun. That which appears with lu (and with importantly, on each of its modifiers. This affix clearly other nouns that refer, inter alia, to long, thin things) serves the function of linking the noun to its modifiers, must be tiao, while that which accompanies zhuozi and is therefore comparable to LPs and Cls. (and other nouns which refer to flat objects) must be Australian languages contain noun class systems zhang. Thus, switching the Cls in (5) produces strikingly similar to those of Bantu. Each noun ungrammaticality in each case. Chinese has a large belongs to one of several classes, loosely based on number of Cls, each associated with a particular class semantic criteria. Which class a noun belongs to is of nouns. These classes generally have a semantic indicated by an affix that appears on each of its modi- basis, though there is no rigid adherence to any seman- fiers, as shown in the following example from Forrest tic principles. River: The use of Cls is common in the languages of (7) amba a-njinga a-newur East and Southeast Asia; examples are Chinese, kangaroo(s) this/these big Burmese, Thai, and Khmer. It is also common in Aus- "this/these big kangaroo(s)" tronesian, especially among Oceanic languages. The prefix a-, appearing on the determiner and the Chamorro, for instance, uses Cls (exclusively) with adjective, is the class marker. The linking here does possessives, while Mokilese, Ponapean, Trukese, and not differ in any interesting respect from that found in Woleaian use them with numerals, as in the Chinese Bantu. NCMs are also found in the North-East and example (5b), and also with possessives. Indonesian North-Central Caucasian families. has only numeral classifiers. Several Mesoamerican families also contain Cl- 4. Gender Markers languages.(4) These include the Mayan languages (Chontal, Yucatec, and Tzeltal, for instance), as well as Interestingly, noun class systems are often called Tarascan and the Totonac languages of the Totonac- gender systems. The usage is appropriate, as it brings Tepehua family. A form of possessive classifier occurs out the impressive similarities between the latter, as it in some Otomanguean languages. Numeral classifiers appears in Bantu, and the agreement phenomena uni- also occur in the isolated Siberian language Nivkh. In versally referred to as "gender" agreement. These lat- addition, classifiers appear in a variety of constructions ter, found throughout the Indo-European family, are in certain Australian languages. shown in the following examples from Spanish: Even some Indo-European languages contain (8) a. un libro rojo simple classifier systems. Persian, for instance, has a a book red few nouns that are commonly inserted after numerals. "a red book" While relatively little of the classifying function b. una casa roja remains in Persian (such constructions are a relic of an a house red older, richer system), the similarity to other Cl-systems "a red house" is clear. The final o on libro is a gender marker (GM), indicat- ing that the noun is masculine, while the final a of 3. Noun Class Markers casa shows it to be feminine. These endings are thus comparable to the NCMs that appear on Bantu nouns. A closely related phenomenon is common among In many other gender languages (German, for the languages of Africa and Australia. This is the use instance) the noun itself usually does not bear any of noun class markers (NCMs), for which Bantu (of indication of its gender, making these languages less the Niger-Kordofanian family) is especially well- like Bantu, but more like Australian noun-class lan- known. In the Bantu languages nouns are divided into guages. Most importantly, in each of the examples of a number of classes, marked by affixes that appear (8) there is gender agreement between the noun and its both on the head noun and on its modifiers. The fol- modifiers. This agreement closely resembles that lowing Swahili example, taken from Welmers (1973), which occurs in noun-class languages.

144 The Unity of Nominal Linking Devices

Gender systems like those of Indo-European also have two or three classes; NCM-languages usually occur throughout the Afro-Asiatic family and in a few (though certainly not always) have more than this, but Australian languages (e.g., Tiwi, Kitja, and Mitiwang). usually not a great many. This limited difference can Each of these languages shows a two-class system, be readily explained by the general morphological based on masculine vs. feminine (or a three-class sys- character of the languages. Those that have GMs tend tem, adding neuter), in which modifiers agree with to be fusional, while those having NCMs are more nouns with respect to the class marking. agglutinative. The result is that GM-languages have a multiplier effect, not found in NCM-languages. 5. Conclusion This effect is best seen by means of a comparison between a (fusional) GM-language, German in this In this section, I have identified four types of case, and an (agglutinative) NCM-language, such as links: linking particles (LPs), classifiers (Cls), noun- Swahili. If Swahili had one more class than it actually class markers (NCMs), and gender markers (GMs). has, it could simply add one affix to represent that Each occurs in a wide variety of languages, in striking- class, with no additional complications. If German, on ly similar forms. This survey is far from complete. It the other hand, had four genders, rather than three, sig- has omitted, for instance, languages in which links fall nificant complications would occur. In German (and between two of the standard types. Examples are the fusional languages in general) gender affixes fuse with Andean-Equatorial and Ge-Pano-Carib families of other affixes, representing number and Case. In other South America, which have links that combine proper- words, German requires three-dimensional nominal ties of Cls with those of NCMs. In the following sec- paradigms, representing all the possible combinations tions I will argue that there is in reality only one nomi- of gender, number, and Case. If the language acquires nal linking phenomenon, not four; in other words, that an additional gender--one that represents plants, for there is a single entity--Link--which appears universal- instance--then the paradigm will necessarily expand, ly, its form varying in a more or less predictable man- to include eight new slots: singular-plant-nominative, ner with the type of language in which it appears. plural-plant-nominative, singular-plant-genitive, etc. In a fusional language, then, a small increase in the number of classes entails a large expansion of the III. The Unity of Gender and Noun nominal paradigms. This, in turn, entails an added bur- den for learners (they must fill each slot), as well as for Class Markers the processing and production systems, which must take all the slots into consideration.(5) So languages that To many researchers, the unity of gender and show this multiplier effect should restrict themselves noun class is a fact, requiring little argument (e.g., to very small numbers of classes; languages lacking Corbett, 1991). This acceptance is not universal, the effect (i.e., agglutinative languages) should be less though (see especially Allan, 1977), so I will proceed restricted. These expectations match the facts. Thus on the assumption that the unity must be demonstrat- the difference between GM-languages and NCM-lan- ed. guages in the number of classes they distinguish is due The most obvious reason for considering GMs to independent characteristics of the particular lan- and NCMs a unified phenomenon is that they serve guages, and provides no evidence for a principled dis- exactly the same functions. Each acts as a link tinction between GMs and NCMs. between the noun and its modifiers, and each classifies Further support for unity can be found in the the noun according to some rough semantic criteria. A semantics of the classes. It has often been said that second reason is their morphological similarity. Both gender classes have essentially no semantic basis, and are bound morphemes and both attach to the noun's it is for this reason that Allan (1977) considers GMs modifiers. GMs sometimes appear on the head noun and NCMs distinct. Lang (1976) and Zubin and also, as in Spanish, and sometimes do not, as is the Köpcke (1986) showed, however, that semantic factors case in German. The same is true of NCMs; in the actually play a significant role in the assignment of Bantu languages they appear on the noun, while in nouns to gender classes. GMs do have somewhat loos- Australian NCM-languages they do not. er semantics than NCMs, but this difference is readily GMs and NCMs are also similar in that both tend explained by the fact, noted above, that the latter dis- to pick out a small number of classes. GM-languages tinguish a larger number of classes than the former. A

145 J. Truscott language that splits its nouns into (say) ten classes can first describe evidence for this unity, in the form of naturally make more precise classifications than one striking similarities between the phenomena and the that must place each of its nouns in one of two or three consistent complementarity in their distributions. I will categories. then point out problems that arise in attempts to parti- A great deal of similarity also exists in the tion the world's languages into Cl- and GM/NCM-lan- semantic details. Many NCM-languages, for instance, guages, indicating that no clear boundary, even a include masculine and feminine classes; examples can superficial one, can be drawn between them. Finally, I be found among North-East and North-Central Cau- will discuss in detail a number of superficial distinc- casian languages. In Australian languages, the typical tions that have been observed, and show that, to the classes are masculine, feminine, vegetable, and other extent that they are valid, they can be explained as the (Sands, 1995). In other words, these NCM languages interaction of a single underlying entity (Link) with simply divide the neuter class of GM languages into some independent features of the various languages in two finer categories. Furthermore, some GM-lan- which it appears. guages do not distinguish masculine vs. feminine, but rather human vs. nonhuman, a distinction common in 1. Similarities between GM/NCMs and Cls NCM-languages. Examples are Dutch and Danish, in which masculine and feminine have been collapsed GM/NCMs and Cls are most clearly similar in into a single common gender, opposed to neuter. In their functions, linking a noun and its modifiers and addition, the standard NCM animacy feature occurs in classifying nouns on the basis of loose semantic crite- the links of some GM-languages, such as Slovene. ria. In addition, both are normally bound to the modifi- Thus it is quite difficult to find any principled semantic er they accompany, although certain Cls appear free distinctions between NCMs and GMs, pointing once (see below). more to their unity. Perhaps the most striking similarities can be The inseparability of GMs and NCMs is especial- found in the semantics of the classes they distinguish. ly apparent in the North-East and North-Central Cau- These similarities led Allan (1977) and Denny (1976) casian languages. The number of classes in these lan- to treat Cls and NCMs as a unified phenomenon, at guages ranges from two to eight. In those that have least in terms of their semantics. Shape, for instance, is only two, the distinction is consistently between a nearly universal criterion, both in GM/NCM-lan- human and non-human. Those that add a third class do guages and in Cl-languages. Each commonly includes so by dividing human into masculine and feminine, a class of long, thin objects, for instance. Perhaps while retaining non-human as a distinct class. These equally common are the flat class and the round class. are, in other words, typical gender-languages. When In addition to shape, both types very often make use of more than three classes occur, the masculine-feminine the features human, animate, animal, tree, and edible. distinction is generally maintained, and various dis- The GM features masculine and feminine can also be tinctions are made among non-human nouns. Thus it is found in some Cl-languages, the Mayan language clear in these families that gender-languages are sim- Acatec being an example. Similarly, the GM-feature ply one type of noun-class language, that type in neuter can be found in all types of classifying lan- which the classes happen to be limited to masculine, guages, in the form of nonhuman, nonrational, or inan- feminine, and (sometimes) other. imate classes, although systems that include a large There is, then, substantial evidence pointing to number of classes (as Cl-systems generally do) are the unity of GMs and NCMs. Since there is no appar- unlikely to have such general categories. ent evidence to the contrary, I will henceforth treat The distribution of GM/NCMs and Cls also GM/NCM as a single entity. points to a common underlying identity. The two do not co-occur; patterns like the following are not, to my knowledge, attested in any language:(6) IV. The Unity of GM/NCMs and (9) a. Modifier-GM/NCM-Cl N b. Modifier-Cl-GM/NCM N Classifiers If GM/NCM and Cl are the same entity, then this absence is expected. An equally strong case can be made for the unity In view of these facts, it is not surprising that of this GM/NCM entity with Cls. In this section I will attempts to draw clear distinctions between the phe-

146 The Unity of Nominal Linking Devices nomena have encountered difficulties. Greenberg languages (1978) includes one such attempt. Dixon (1982, 1986) b. Generally syllabic Often not syllabic and Allan (1977) offer more detailed proposals for c. Often double as Do not double as separating Cl-languages from the others (noun-class nouns nouns languages for Dixon and concordial languages for d. Relatively many Relatively few classes Allan, the latter including NCM- but not GM-lan- classes guages). e. Relatively strong Relatively weak sema- Payne (1986, 1987) showed that Andean-Equato- semantic basis ntic basis rial and Ge-Pano-Carib languages exhibit some char- f. A single noun often Each noun belongs to acteristics of one group and some of the other. The belongs to more only one class same is true of the Mesoamerican languages surveyed than one class by Suarez (1983). Dixon (1982) observed that some I will take (a) to be the fundamental property, Oceanic languages, especially Kusaiean, also fall from which the others, to the extent that they are valid, between the two types. Aikhenvald (1994), looking at will follow. Link can appear in either isolating or Amazonian languages, described the Cl-GM/NCM fusional/agglutinative languages, and this general mor- distinction as simplistic. The line separating the two phological distinction largely determines its surface types of languages is thus quite blurred, arguing form. against any fundamental distinction between If Link appears in an isolating language then (by GM/NCMs and Cls. definition) it is likely to be realized as a distinct entity Despite the blurred lines, these proposals have in itself, rather than as an affix. This ensures that such some validity, in that certain characteristics do tend to a link will generally be syllabic, in contrast to its coun- cluster together. A language will tend to have the set terpart in fusional/agglutinative languages, which of GM/NCM properties or the set of Cl properties, would naturally occur as an affix and would therefore rather than a random mixture. This is the apparent jus- be under no constraint as to its syllabicity. Thus (b) tification for distinguishing GM/NCMs and Cls, so a follows straightforwardly from (a). close examination of the sets of properties and the way The same can be said for (c), which Lyons (1977) they fit together is necessary here. Such an examina- considered the major motivation for the distinction tion will show that the clusters are exactly what one between Cl-languages and NCM-languages. If Link is would expect to find if there is just one common ele- an affix, as expected in a fusional/agglutinative lan- ment, Link, appearing in two different types of lan- guage, then it would be quite surprising to find it also guages. This is the business of the following section. serving as a free noun. On the other hand, it would be It should be noted, though, that the sets of ele- natural for an isolating language to use some of its ments Dixon (1982, 1986) and Allan (1977) take to be existing lexical items to fill the linking role; it would, GM/NCMs or Cls are not identical to those sets that in fact, be quite surprising if such a language took the are relevant to this paper. I am only interested in ele- trouble of creating an entirely separate set of elements ments that link modifiers and nouns, while they are when existing words would adequately serve the pur- concerned with a somewhat broader class, including pose. Since the classifying function of Link is clearly elements that have no association with modifiers and nominal, nouns would be the most natural choice for therefore are not links. This point will be considered this role. Thus, (c) is fully consistent with the view further below. that Cls and GM/NCMs are both representations of a single underlying entity. 2. Superficial Distinctions between Cls and The tendency for Cl-languages to distinguish GM/NCMs: Part 1 more classes than GM/NCM-languages (property d) is, first of all, only a tendency. In each type of language I will consider nine properties used by Dixon the number of classes varies considerably. Cl-lan- (1982, 1986) and Allan (1977) to distinguish classi- guages sometimes have only a few, and NCM-lan- fiers from other link types (see also Corbett (1991)). guages can have a great many (Dixon, 1982), for Six of these characteristics are given in (10): example). The tendency follows from (c), and there- (10) Cl Properties GM/NCM Properties fore indirectly from (a). A language that can freely use a. Found in isolating Found in fusional/ existing lexical items to create new classes should do languages agglutinative so more often than one that must produce a new bound

147 J. Truscott form (or set of bound forms) for each new class. The ers have a significant amount of choice in the Cl they result is that isolating languages tend to have more use with a given noun in a given instance. The great classes than fusional/agglutinative languages. majority of the options appear to involve reference to Property (e), again, represents only a limited ten- groups or arrangements of objects, containers holding dency. Semantic factors play a very large role in them, or other portions of substances or objects. A typ- GM/NCM classes, as shown by Corbett's (1991) ical GM/NCM language, with its limited number of extensive discussion. The tendency follows directly classes, cannot offer speakers the option of expressing from (d), as was pointed out above with respect to the such specific ideas by means of class changes. Thus GM-NCM comparison. If a language has only a small the difference in options can be naturally explained by number of classes then some (or all) of them will nec- differences in numbers of classes, which in turn are a essarily contain many nouns that do not fit well with natural product of the morphological types of the lan- other members of the class. If the number of classes is guages. increased then the number of mismatches can be Thus, properties (10a-f) are tied together by reduced. implicational relations, albeit probabilistic and often It is also worth noting that the GM/NCM side of weak ones. Link typically has one set of characteristics (e) is based at least in part on markers that appear on when it appears in an isolating language, and the other nouns themselves rather than on their modifiers. The set when it appears in a fusional/agglutinative lan- result is an underestimation of the semantics of guage. The existence of one underlying entity is com- GM/NCMs as links. In Swahili, human and animal pletely compatible with the existence of these clusters. nouns are scattered across several classes, if classes are identified by affixes on nouns, as they usually are. 3. Superficial Distinctions between Cls and However, the agreement affixes found on modifiers of GM/NCMs: Part 2 such nouns all belong to the same class. Thus when the classes are viewed in terms of links, a strong In addition to (10a-f), a few related properties semantic basis emerges. have been claimed to distinguish GM/NCMs from Cls. Property (f) is based on the fact that speakers can These are as follows: sometimes choose between two or more possible Cls (11) Cl Properties GM/NCM Properties when using a particular noun, the choice often being a. Some nouns Every noun belongs determined by the meaning they wish to convey (e.g., belong to no class to a class Adams (1986)). But this fact only weakly distinguish- b. Relatively constra- Relatively free distri- es Cls and GM/NCMs. Benton (1968), the only source ined distribution bution to provide any precise numbers, found that 70% of c. Only appear once Can appear several classified nouns in Trukese normally appear with only per NP times per NP a single Cl. So in this language (and, I believe, a great None of these, I will argue, constitutes any evidence many more), the distinction represents only a tenden- against the unity of GM/NCMs and Cls. cy, and not a very strong one. Furthermore, it is not The distinction given in (a) rests on the assump- difficult to find cases in which more than one tion that GM/NCMs can be non-overt and that Cls GM/NCM is associated with a given noun. Dixon cannot. Discussions of noun classes commonly claim (1982) provided some examples. Sands (1995) pointed that certain classes are represented by null affixes; out that such cases are quite common in Australian without such an assumption it would simply be false to languages. One might also include in this category the say that all nouns are classified in GM/NCM-lan- many cases in which the addition of a feminine affix guages. One might ask why Cls should not receive a transforms a masculine noun into a feminine noun, parallel treatment: Why not hypothesize null Cls in which then takes the appropriate feminine GMs. Thus those cases in which it appears that a noun is not clas- (f) represents only a limited tendency, with consider- sified? If this natural step is taken, the apparent con- able variation across languages. trast given in (a) vanishes. This tendency can then be explained by the fact Prior to discussion of (11b,c), one clarification is that the number of GM/NCM classes is more limited necessary. Certain of the languages used in establish- than that of Cl-classes. The latter thus provide more ing these characteristics are not relevant to this paper. opportunities than the former for class-based meaning These are languages in which the classifiers are clearly shifts. Consider Chinese, for example, in which speak- not links, since their appearance in an NP is entirely

148 The Unity of Nominal Linking Devices unrelated to the appearance of modifiers. This seems particles. Such verbal properties are found, with to be the case for nearly all the Australian classifier- impressive frequency, in other Cl-languages as well. languages. In Yidiny, for example, a head noun is pre- This situation contrasts with that commonly ceded by a generic noun, which assigns it to a particu- found in GM/NCM-languages, in which adjectives lar class. The generic nouns resemble Cls, but are not tend either to exist as a class in their own right or to links, because they are not associated with modifiers. merge with the class of nouns. Given this contrast, Thus for the purposes of this paper languages like there is no basis for comparing the occurrence in these Yidiny must be excluded from the discussion of Cls. languages of A-link-N constructions with the general Their removal greatly weakens (11b,c), since non-occurrence of "A"-link-N constructions in Cl-lan- these languages are the perfect embodiments of these guages. two characteristics. As a result, I cannot be certain that It follows from this discussion that in a language proponents of (11) would wish to retain (b) and (c) if that has a distinct class of adjectives and also (for languages like Yidiny are removed from consideration. some reason) a set of Cls, the two could well appear I will proceed on the assumption that they would. together. Mawng precisely fits this description: It is First, the two properties are only limited tenden- exceptional in that it is a Cl-language with a distinct cies. Cls and GM/NCMs each exhibit a great deal of class of adjectives. These adjectives are accompanied variation across languages in these respects. In some by Cls when they modify nouns. Thus Mawng shows languages the GM/NCM appears only with one type of that Cls are associated with adjectives, when the two modifier. In others it appears with virtually every vari- occur in the same language. Their apparent lack of ety, while in still others it falls between these association is due to the fact that they normally do not extremes. Similarly, Cls are often found with only one appear in the same language. type of modifier, often with two or three types, and in In light of this discussion, (c) also becomes much some cases in a wide variety of constructions. Thai less impressive. The occurrence of multiple and Mawng are examples of the latter situation; they GM/NCMs in an NP generally involves a series of are exceptional in that they have Cls appearing with adjectives, each with a link, or a combination of adjec- adjectives, as well as with the more usual modifier tive+link and another modifier+link. Since such com- types. Thus, again, even the superficial distinction binations cannot appear in a normal Cl-language, there between GM/NCMs and Cls involves only tendencies. is again no basis for comparison. In terms of the specific modifier types they occur The cross-linguistic distribution of LPs is also with, Cls and GM/NCMs are again difficult to distin- relevant to (c). LPs tend to occur in the same lan- guish. Cls often appear in demonstrative, quantifier, guages as Cls, not surprisingly in view of the fact that and possessive constructions, for instance, and often an invariable, semantically null particle is most natural do not. The same is true for GM/NCMs. But for two in an isolating language. If some of the link positions types of modifiers GM/NCMs and Cls do appear to in these languages are filled by LPs, then the positions differ. These are adjectives and numerals. available for other link types, Cls in this case, will be GM/NCMs commonly accompany adjectives; Cls correspondingly reduced in number. Thus one should rarely do so. A closer look at the relevant construc- expect the number of link positions filled by non-LPs tions suggests, however, that the difference is not in to be smaller in Cl-languages than in GM/NCM-lan- the type of modifier the link can occur with, but rather guages. in the types of modifiers that the relevant languages The other type of modifier with respect to which contain. the two link types allegedly differ is numerals. It is The typical Cl-language does not, in fact, contain often said that there is a special association between a distinct class of adjectives. Those modifiers that numerals and Cls, an association not found between would be adjectives in a language like English are nor- numerals and GM/NCMs. The limits of this claim are mally a subclass of verbs. This can be seen in Chinese clear: Cls often appear outside of numeral construc- (see, especially, Chao (1968)), where "adjectives" tions and GM/NCMs often appear in numeral show verbal properties and do not show substantive constructions (in Bantu languages, for instance). Many properties. These verbal properties include acting as Cl-languages in fact lack numeral-Cls. Those that have predicates (without the use of a copula), being directly them very often have Cls in other constructions as negatable, being modified by intensifiers, appearing in well. Finally, there are also languages (e.g., Sinhalese) V-not-V questions, and appearing with certain verbal in which a GM/NCM is found exclusively in numeral

149 J. Truscott constructions. underlying distinction between the two link types. Thus the association between numerals and clas- Since there is good reason to believe that they are the sifiers can be reduced to a tendency for the two to same element, I will henceforth assume this to be the appear together. This tendency, I will argue, is in part case. illusory and in part the product of extraneous factors, unrelated to the underlying character of links. 4. A Note on Types of Classifiers The extraneous factors are areal influences and genetic relations among languages. Numeral classifier In this discussion I have assumed that classifiers languages are concentrated in East and Southeast Asia; themselves represent a unified phenomenon. Some if this area is removed from consideration, the tenden- authors, however, have distinguished between two cy for numerals and Cls to appear together becomes types: those that appear predominantly in numeral unimpressive. Most of the relevant languages within constructions and those that appear in possessive this region are genetically related to one another, constructions (Aikhenvald, 1994; Craig, 1992, 1994). largely explaining resemblances in their uses of Cls. The limits of this distinction are immediately apparent These resemblances probably owe a great deal to the in the fact that both are called classifiers. The main existence of areal influences as well. General similari- contrast between them is simply the constructions in ties among the languages of the region are strong, even which they appear, and this distinction is largely arbi- across family boundaries. To the extent that the Cl- trary. I pointed out above that Cls are also commonly numeral association is a product of these factors, it is found with quantifiers and demonstratives, and some- not evidence of any inherent connection. times with adjectives (Craig, 1994). In these uses they Once the effects of these factors have been are typically referred to as numeral classifiers. The removed, what remains of the association can be seen previous discussion also provided good reasons for to be illusory. One source of the illusion is the fact that skepticism about the concept of "numeral classifier" in Cls are rarely found in the presence of adjectives, as general. described above. If it were possible for Link to appear Another contrast observed between numeral and with adjectives in Cl-languages, as it does in possessive Cls is in their semantics (Craig, 1992). The GM/NCM-languages, its occurrence with numerals former are most closely associated with the shape of would not be impressive; under such circumstances, it the noun's referent (e.g., length, flatness, roundness), is unlikely that the popular term "numeral classifier" while the latter tend to classify nouns by the function would even exist. of their referents (e.g., edible, drinkable, vehicle). But The existence of this term is probably a second these distinctions are only tendencies and, as noted by factor in the appearance that there is a connection Craig (1992), follow naturally from real-world condi- between numerals and classifiers. In many cases tions in which the elements are used. Numeral Cls tend (among Mesoamerican languages in particular) a link to be used in market conditions, in which handling of that appears specifically with numerals looks at least the counted objects plays a central role; shape is there- as much like a GM/NCM as it does like a Cl, and yet fore highly salient. Possessive constructions, on the is commonly referred to as a numeral classifier, simply other hand, tend to be used with objects that are valued because of its association with numerals. An accurate by their possessor, typically for the function they view of classifiers requires the removal of such cases serve, such as eating and drinking; so in these cases from consideration (or perhaps their treatment as the function of the object is naturally more salient than numeral-GM/NCMs). All of these factors taken its shape. The semantic distinctions therefore fit well together provide an adequate account for the apparent with the idea that there is only one type of Cl, appear- tendency for numerals and classifiers to co-occur. Thus ing in two different contexts. there is no reason to think that Cls have any special Craig (1992) also noted that possessive Cls tend association with numerals; i.e., no reason to think they to be more a grammatical phenomenon and numeral differ from GM/NCMs in respect to numeral construc- Cls more lexical, meaning that numeral classifiers tend tions. to be more numerous, to be open class items, and to It can be concluded, then, that GM/NCMs and allow speakers a choice between two or more Cls for a Cls cannot be distinguished in terms of their distribu- given noun. But again this tendency can be explained tions. Thus (11b,c) are without force. More generally, by the differing contexts in which they appear. The there is no apparent reason to think that there is any Asian languages that represent prototypical uses of

150 The Unity of Nominal Linking Devices numeral Cls are in general more analytic than the would serve no purpose. Oceanic languages in which possessive Cls are com- In a one-class system, the type of modifier with monly found, so they naturally represent a more lexi- which the particle appears should vary across lan- cal phenomenon. guages, as it does with multi-class systems. This is the Thus the only contrasts between the two types of case for LPs. Like GM/NCM/Cls, they appear with a Cls fit well with the view that there is only one funda- wide variety of modifier types, showing considerable mental type, the variations following from the differ- cross-linguistic variation. ent contexts of its use. So I will continue to treat clas- Links in multi-class systems generally attach to sifiers as a single phenomenon. the modifier with which they appear, with occasional exceptions (e.g., Mawng and Tzeltal, in which Cls appear to be free). The same should be expected for V. The Unity of GM/NCM/Cls and the particle in a one-class system. Again, this is the case for LPs. The overwhelming majority are clitic- Linking Particles like, attaching to the modifier (or, occasionally, to the noun). The uncommon exceptions include Tagalog na A GM/NCM/Cl linking system can have a great and perhaps Indonesian yang. many classes, or it can have as few as two. The logical Within any given language, the distribution of the minimum, though, is not two categories, but one. A one-class link should be complementary to that of any one-class linking system would not be classificatory, multi-class system found in the language, in the sense of course, but it could still serve its linking function. that two links should not co-occur in a given position. Since noun classification is not obligatory, one would I am aware of no clear cases in which this principle expect to find such systems among the world's lan- fails to hold for LPs. Persian provides an illustration of guages, possibly a great many of them. In this section I the complementarity. As was pointed out above, it has will identify the natural characteristics of one-class a simple system of Cls (which double as nouns) GM/NCM/Cl systems and show that they exactly accompanying numerals. It also has an LP, used exten- match those of LPs, as presented above. Thus LPs are sively to connect nouns and their modifiers. The one best seen as simply one type of GM/NCM/Cl--that case in which the LP is notably lacking is that of type in which the number of classes has been reduced numeral constructions. Thus in (13), to its logical minimum. (13) char ta bil A one-class system would consist of one invari- four unit spade able particle (with the possibility of phonologically- "four spades" governed alternation). This particle would have no the LP cannot be inserted either after the numeral or semantic content, since any semantic feature it had after ta. Considering its very general use in other mod- would have to hold of all nouns in the language, and it ifier constructions, its absence here is striking, espe- would serve (only) the function of linking the noun to cially in view of the fact that ta is a noun, and that the its modifiers. These definitional characteristics precise- LP does appear in other N-N structures. But if ta and ly describe LPs. the LP are both instances of Link, the facts are exactly Because of the narrow function of the one-class as expected. link--connecting nouns to modifiers--its presence In multi-class systems, the head noun associated would be entirely dependent on the presence of a mod- with the link is sometimes non-overt, as in the follow- ifier; there would not be an additional copy of the par- ing Spanish example: ticle appearing as part of the noun (as is often the case (14) No quiero la pelota blanca; quiero la roj-a. in multi-class systems). This property also character- not want the ball white; want the red-GM izes LPs. They are never, to my knowledge, found on "I don't want the white ball; I want the red the noun itself, independently of modifiers. Thus, one." while GM/NCM/Cls sometimes appear on nouns, The noun, pelota, is missing in the NP la roj-a (the showing their class, there are no constructions like red-GM). This N-drop construction routinely occurs those of (12), involving LPs. with Mod-GM, Mod-NCM, and Mod-Cl combina- (12) a. [ N-LP ] tions. The same should be true for one-class systems; b. Mod-Link N-LP and it is true for LPs, as illustrated by the following This is as expected, since the LP in these phrases examples from English, Chinese, and Indonesian:

151 J. Truscott

(15) a. Fred's book is more interesting than VI. Conclusion Ethel's. (-s = LP) b. Wo bu xihuan bai-de chiu; xihuan hong- In this paper, I have argued that the four major de. types of nominal linking are actually a single phenom- I not like white-LP ball; like red-LP enon. The central arguments are based on the striking "I don't like white balls; I like red ones." similarities among them, their consistent complemen- c. Yang kecil tidak baik. tarity, and the lack of any distinctions that cannot be LP small not good accounted for by the differing contexts in which they "The small one is not good." appear. These factors provide good reason to see Link In each of these examples N-drop has occurred with as a universal element in natural languages. the LP in exactly the way it occurs with This does not mean that contrasts among the vari- GM/NCM/Cls. ous link types are not real, or not interesting. Different Finally, the position of a one-class link should be languages do have somewhat different linking phe- more tightly constrained than that of its multi-class nomena, and properties do tend to cluster, as noted counterparts. GM/NCM/Cls do not always appear above. Studies of these differences are interesting and between noun and modifier (the most natural position important. The point is that the differing forms are best for any link). This flexibility is possible because they seen not as inherently distinct categories, but as con- agree with the noun and can therefore be readily iden- text-dependent variations on a single universal theme. tified as links to that noun. One-class links, lacking Nor should my proposal be taken as a denial of this agreement, should be restricted to the natural link- the inherent interest of nominal classification, as a ing position between noun and modifier. This is an semantic phenomenon. Class distinctions clearly con- accurate description of LPs. I know of no cases in tribute to linking, and this is in all likelihood one of which an LP appears anywhere other than between the reasons why they are so common in the world's modifier and noun. languages. But one cannot reasonably conclude that Thus, LPs have exactly those characteristics one classification can be reduced to a linking phenomenon. would expect in a one-class GM/NCM/Cl-system. I The existence of classification outside of linking con- conclude, then, that this is exactly what they are--one texts (as in pronouns and non-linking noun class mark- type of GM/NCM/Cl. This unity is nicely illustrated ers) strongly suggests that there is much more to clas- by a comparison between the Persian Ezafe construc- tion and the analogous construction in a closely related sification than the role it plays in linking. Studies of language, Kurdish. The former, as described above, linking and semantic classification complement one involves a fairly typical example of a linking particle. another. In Kurdish one finds analogous elements appearing in One issue left open by this discussion is the the same type of construction, but with one difference: source of Link's universality. The facts fit nicely with a They are marked for gender; i.e., they are gender Universal Grammar (UG) view, in which Link is built markers. The natural conclusion is that the Persian LP into the grammar and is therefore available in all lan- is simply a GM that does not separate nouns into class- guages. It would be too much, though, to claim that es (or that the Kurdish GM is simply an LP that has this discussion has made a conclusive case for such a taken on the additional function of classifying nouns). view; alternative accounts cannot be ruled out. The The treatment I have proposed for LPs also sug- question of how exactly Link would fit into UG gests a resolution for a possible paradox in the idea of depends of course on the specific assumptions one Link. It might appear odd that a semantically empty makes about the details of UG. These issues go far element can be in essence identical with a Cl, which beyond the scope of this paper. The conclusion here is clearly is meaningful. But the semantic contrast is best simply that Link fits well with the spirit of the seen not as a yes or no matter, but rather in terms of approach. two points on a continuum, defined by the degree to Another issue that remains open is how exactly which each point has clear meaning. LPs are located at Link should be incorporated in formal analyses of spe- one extreme, Cls typically toward the other end, with cific languages. My proposal does not, for example, GMs relatively close to LPs and NCMs usually falling force any particular analysis of the Chinese LP de. between Cls and GMs. Given this perspective, the Cl- Huang's (1989) treatment of de as a head marker is LP identity becomes quite natural. compatible with the proposal: If the particle marks

152 The Unity of Nominal Linking Devices heads, it does so only in the presence of modifiers, so ceding modifier. The modification only occurs in there is no apparent conflict between the head-marking attribute-N and direct object-V contexts, so its apparent view and the idea that de is an LP. A more focussed function is to connect a head to its modifier. (3) But one could argue that Dem-Cl-N constructions are analysis of linking in Chinese would use Huang's work actually Dem-Num-Cl-N constructions. to help determine the constraints the language places (4) In referring to the links in these languages as classifiers I on the position of its LPs, and how these constraints am simply following conventional usage. In many cases, relate to the use of Cls in Chinese and of all the link the elements most likely belong to another type, the noun types in other languages. class marker (see below). (5) The alternative treatment of de as a relativizer can In fusional languages, a single form is very often used for probably be accommodated in the linking view as several gender-number-Case combinations. But this redundancy does not reduce the burden on learners, or on well. Its compatibility with my proposal will of course processing and production. If anything, the resulting depend on a treatment of relativizers as links. I am ambiguity should add to the problems. aware of no problems of principle in such an analysis, (6) The lack of co-occurrence means that only one of the though the issues are large and prejudging them would link types can appear per modifier. I am not making the be hazardous. I leave such issues for future research. (false) claim that two types cannot both appear in a sin- gle NP. Notes References (1) For data regarding the various languages, language fami- lies, and areal groups used in this paper I have made use Adams, K.L. (1986) Numeral classifiers in Austroasiatic. In: of the following sources: Acatec - Penalosa (1987); Afro- C. Craig (Ed.), Noun classification and categorization Asiatic (general) - Welmers (1973); Andean-Equatorial - (pp. 241-262). Amsterdam: Benjamins. Payne (1987); Atayal - Egerod (1966); Australian (gener- Aikhenvald, A. Y. (1994) Classifiers in Tariana. Anthropo- al) - Capell and Coate (1984), Dixon (1980), Yallop logical Linguistics, 36: 407-465. (1982); Burmese - Becker (1975), Burling (1970), Pe Allan, K. (1977) Classifiers. Language, 53: 285-311. (1965); Caucasian - Comrie (1981); Chamorro - Topping Becker, A.L. (1975) A linguistic image of nature: The (1973); Chinese - Chao (1968), Henne, Rongen, and Burmese numerative classifier system. International Hansen (1977), Li and Thompson (1981); Danish - Jones Journal of the Sociology of Language, 5: 109-121. and Gade (1981); Dutch - Smit and Meijer (1958); For- Benton, R.A. (1968) Numeral and attributive classifiers in rest River - Capell and Coate (1984); Ge-Pano-Carib - Trukese. Oceanic Linguistics, 7: 104-146. Payne (1987); German - Greenfield (1968); Indonesian - Berlin, B. (1968) Tzeltal numeral classifiers: A study in Dardjowidjojo (1978); Khmer - Jacob (1965); Kitja - ethnographic semantics. The Hague: Mouton. Yallop (1982); Kurdish - Comrie (1981); Mawng - Capell Burling, R. (1970) Man's many voices: Language in its cul- and Coate (1984); Mesoamerican (general) - Suarez tural context. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. (1983); Mayan (general) - Suarez (1983); Mitiwang - Capell, A. and Coate, H.H.J. (1984) Comparative studies in Yallop (1982); Mokilese - Harrison (1976); Niger-Kordo- northern Kimberley languages. Canberra: Department fanian (general) - Welmers (1973); Nivkh - Comrie of Linguistics, Research School of Pacific Studies, The (1981); Oceanic (general) - Lichtenberk (1983); Australian National University. Otomanguean - Suarez (1983); Palauan - Josephs (1975); Chao, Y.R. (1968) A grammar of spoken Chinese. Berkeley: Persian - Elwell-Sutton (1941), Windfuhr (1979); Philip- University of California Press. pine (general) - Lopez (1965); Ponapean - Rehg (1981); Comrie, B. (1981) The languages of the Soviet Union. Cam- Sinhalese - Gair (1970); Slovene - Lencek (1982); bridge: Cambridge University Press. Swahili - Perrott (1950), Welmers (1973); Tagalog - Corbett, G.G. (1991) Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni- Ramos (1971), Schachter and Otanes (1972); Tarascan - versity Press. Suarez (1983); Thai - Haas (1942), Hundius and Kolver Craig, C.G. (1992) Classifiers in a functional perspective. In: (1983); Tiwi - Yallop (1982); Totonac-Tepehua - Suarez M. Fortescue, P. Harder, and L. Kristoffersen (Eds.), (1983); Trukese - Benton (1968); Tzeltal - Berlin (1968), Layered structure and reference in functional perspec- Suarez (1983); Woleaian - Sohn (1975); Yidiny - Dixon tive: Papers from the functional grammar conference in (1977). Copenhagen 1990 (pp. 277-301). Amsterdam: Ben- (2) Two related phenomena should be noted. In the construct jamins. state, common in Semitic languages, nouns undergo a Craig, C.A. (1994) Classifier languages. In: R. E. Asher phonetic alteration in the presence of certain modifiers. It (Ed.), The encyclopedia of language and linguistics (pp. would stretch the definition to call this an LP, but it does 565-569). Oxford: Pergamon. share the features of linking modifier to noun and lacking Dardjowidjojo, S. (1978) Sentence patterns of Indonesian. semantic content. Similarly, in Nivkh the initial conso- Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. nant of a noun is affected by the final consonant of a pre- Denny, J.P. (1976) What are noun classifiers good for? In: S.

153 J. Truscott

S. Mufwene, C.A. Walker and S.B. Steever (Eds.), Lencek, R.L. (1982) The structure and history of the Slovene Papers from the twelfth regional meeting of the Chicago language. Columbus, OH: Slavica. Linguistic Society (pp. 122-132). Chicago: Chicago Lin- Li, C., and Thompson, S. (1981) Mandarin Chinese: A func- guistic Society. tional reference grammar. Berkeley: University of Cali- Dixon, R.M.W. (1977) A grammar of Yidiny. Cambridge: fornia Press. Cambridge University Press. Lichtenberk, F. (1983) Relational classifiers. Lingua, 60: Dixon, R.M.W. (1980) The languages of Australia. Cam- 147-176. bridge: Cambridge University Press. Lopez, C. (1965) Contributions to a comparative Philippine Dixon, R.M.W. (1982) Where have all the adjectives gone? syntax. Lingua, 15: 3-16. And other essays in semantics and syntax. Berlin: Mou- Lyons, J. (1977) Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge Univer- ton. sity Press. Dixon, R.M.W. (1986) Noun classes and noun classification Payne, D.L. (1986) Noun classification in Yagua. In: C. in typological perspective. In: C.Craig (Ed.), Noun clas- Craig (Ed.), Noun classification and categorization (pp. sification and categorization (pp. 105-112). Amsterdam: 113-131). Amsterdam: Benjamins. Benjamins. Payne, D.L. (1987) Noun classification in the western Ama- Egerod, S. (1966) Word order and word classes in Atayal. zon. Language Sciences, 9: 21-44. Language, 42: 346-369. Pe, H. (1965) A re-examination of Burmese classifiers. Lin- Elwell-Sutton, L.P. (1941) Colloquial Persian. London: gua, 15: 163-185. Routledge and Kegan Paul. Penalosa, F. (1987) Major syntactic structures of Acatec Fries, C.C. (1938) Some notes on the inflected genitive in (dialect of San Miguel Acatan). International Journal of present-day English. Language, 14: 121-133. American Linguistics, 53: 281-310. Gair, J.W. (1970) Colloquial Sinhalese clause structures. The Perrott, D.V. (1950) Swahili. Sevenoaks, Kent: Hodder and Hague: Mouton. Stoughton. Greenberg, J.E. (1978) How does a language acquire gender Ramos, T. (1971) Tagalog structures. Honolulu: University markers? In: J. Greenberg (Ed.), Universals of human of Hawaii Press. language (Vol. 3, pp. 47-82). Stanford: Stanford Univer- Rehg, K.L. (1981) Ponapean reference grammar. Honolulu: sity Press. University of Hawaii Press. Greenfield, E.V. (1968) German grammar (3rd ed.). New Sands, K. (1995) Nominal classification in Australia. Anthro- York: Barnes and Noble. pological Linguistics, 37: 247-346. Haas, M. (1942) The use of numeral classifiers in Thai. Lan- Schachter, P. and Otanes, F.T. (1972) Tagalog reference guage, 18: 201-205. grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press. Harrison, S.P. (1976) Mokilese reference grammar. Honolu- Smit, J. and Meijer, R.P. (1958) Dutch grammar and reader. lu: University Press of Hawaii. Victoria, Australia: Melbourne University Press. Henne, H., Rongen, O.B. and Hansen, L.J. (1977) A hand- Sohn, H.-M. (1975) Woleaian reference grammar. Honolulu: book on Chinese language structure. Oslo: Universitets- University of Hawaii Press. forlaget. Suarez, J.A. (1983) The Mesoamerican Indian languages. Huang, C.-R. (1989) Cliticization and type-lifting: A unified Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. account of Mandarin NP de. Bloomington, IN: Indiana Topping, D.M. (1973) Chamorro reference grammar. Hon- University Linguistics Club. olulu: University Press of Hawaii. Hundius, H. and Kolver, U. (1983) Syntax and semantics of Welmers, W.E. (1973) African language structures. Berke- numeral classifiers in Thai. Studies in Language, 7: 165- ley: University of California Press. 214. Windfuhr, G.L. (1979) Persian grammar: History and state Jacob, J.M. (1965) Notes on the numerals and numeral coef- of its study. The Hague: Mouton. ficients in Old, Middle and Modern Khmer. Lingua, 15: Yallop, C. (1982) Australian aboriginal languages. London: 143-162. Andre Deutsch. Jones, W.G. and Gade, K. (1981) Danish: A grammar. Zubin, D. and Köpcke, K.M. (1986) Gender and folk taxono- Copenhagen: Gyldendal. my: The indexical relation between grammatical and Josephs, L.S. (1975) Palauan reference grammar. Honolulu: lexical categorization. In: C.Craig (Ed.), Noun classifi- The University Press of Hawaii. cation and categorization (pp. 139-180). Amsterdam: Lang, A. (1976) The semantic base of gender in German. Benjamins. Lingua, 40: 55-68.

154 The Unity of Nominal Linking Devices

( )

155