The status of nominal sub-categories: Exploring frequency densities of plural -s

Alexander Rauhut

doi:10.1515/gcla-2022-0004

Article

The status of nominal sub-categories: Exploring frequency densities of plural -s

Alexander Rauhut

Published/Copyright: November 11, 2022

Published by

Become an author with De Gruyter Brill

Author Information Explore this Subject

From the journal Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association Volume 10 Issue 1

Abstract

Plurale-tantum nouns (scissors, leggings, glasses) are an example of the systematic lack of an unmarked form of a lexeme. In contrast to singulare-tantum nouns, most notably mass nouns, this systematicity is mostly restricted to individual lexemes and analogously related ones (trousers, pants, knickers). It remains an open question whether there is any functionally motivated nominal subclass that goes beyond smaller lexical fields. The main goal of this paper is to estimate whether such extreme proportions in the absence or presence of inflectional markers cause distinctly high concentrations of lexemes, i.e. nominal subclasses. In a first step, the probabilities for a lemma to occur with plural -s were bootstrapped with replacement. Secondly, the bootstrapped data was equally split into 10 strata at varying inflection probabilities. Homonyms and polysemes that differ in their probability to be inflected are thus disambiguated. For each stratum, type frequencies were extrapolated by means of LNRE models. The same process was repeated for reference data sets containing verbal -ed and -ing. The bootstrapped data showed that frequency and proportion of inflection reveal clusters likely to represent different polysemes or homonyms. The type frequencies of the partially disambiguated singulare-tantum nouns turned out to be clearly distinct. However, for the plurale-tantum nouns, the extrapolated type frequencies were only marginally higher than those of the other suffixes, which are not usually thought to have a tantum-like subcategory.

Keywords: plurale tantum; singulare tantum; LNRE models; bootstrap; word class continuum

References

Alexiadou, Artemis. 2019. On plurals and plurality. In Nina Topintzy, Nikolas Lavidas & Maria Moumtzi (eds.), Selected Papers on Theoretical and Applied Linguistics from 23rd ISTAL, 3–18. https://ejournals.lib.auth.gr/thal/article/view/7317 (accessed 12 September 2022).Search in Google Scholar

Beekhuizen, Barend, Blair C. Armstrong & Suzanne Stevenson. 2021. Probing lexical ambiguity: Word vectors encode number and relatedness of senses. Cognitive Science 45(5). e12943. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/cogs.12943 (accessed 12 September 2022).10.1111/cogs.12943Search in Google Scholar

Corbett, Greville G. 2019. Pluralia tantum nouns and the theory of features: A typology of nouns with non-canonical number properties. Morphology 29(1). 51–108.10.1007/s11525-018-9336-0Search in Google Scholar

Diessel, Holger. 2016. Frequency and lexical specificity in grammar: A critical review. In Heike Behrens & Stefan Pfänder (eds.), Experience counts: Frequency effects in language, 209–238. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110346916-009 (accessed 12 September 2022).Search in Google Scholar

Dowle, Matt & Arun Srinivasan. 2021. Data.table: Extension of ‘data.frame’. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=data.table (accessed 19 Mai 2022).Search in Google Scholar

Du, Jiaju, Fanchao Qi & Maosong Sun. 2019. Using BERT for word sense disambiguation. CoRR abs/1909.08358. http://arxiv.org/abs/1909.08358 (accessed 19 Mai 2022).Search in Google Scholar

Evert, Stefan. 2004. A simple LNRE model for random character sequences. In Gérald Purnelle, Cédrick Fairon & Anne Dister (eds.), Proceedings of the 7èmes Journées Internationales d’Analyse Statistique des Données Textuelles, 411–422. Louvain-la-Neuve: UCL Presses Universitaires de Louvain.Search in Google Scholar

Evert, Stefan. 2005. The statistics of word cooccurrences: Word pairs and collocations. PhD thesis. Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg http://www.collocations.de/phd.html (accessed 12 September 2022).Search in Google Scholar

Evert, Stefan & Marco Baroni. 2007. zipfR: Word frequency distributions in R. Proceedings of the 45th Annual of the ACL on interactive poster and demonstration sessions, 29–32. Stroudsburt, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.10.3115/1557769.1557780Search in Google Scholar

Evert, Stefan & Andrew Hardie. 2011. Twenty-first century Corpus Workbench: Updating a query architecture for the new millennium. In Proceedings of the Corpus Linguistics 2011 conference. Birmingham: University of Birmingham, Center for Corpus Research. https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/research/activity/corpus/publications/conference-archives/2011-birmingham.aspx (accessed 12 September 2022).Search in Google Scholar

Gaeta, Livio. 2019. Categorial shift and morphological differentiation. Language Sciences 73. 190–199. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S038800011830281X. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2018.08.010 (accessed 12 September 2022).Search in Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald W. 1987. Nouns and verbs. Language 63(1). 53–94.10.2307/415384Search in Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald W. 1994. Concept, image, and symbol: The cognitive basis of grammar (Cognitive Linguistics Research 1). Berlin & New York: Mouton De Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Langacker, Ronald W. 1999. Grammar and conceptualization. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110800524Search in Google Scholar

Mackenzie, J. Lachlan. 2019. Is there a pluralia tantum subcategory of nominal gerunds? Developing Gaeta’s notion of morphological differentiation. Language Sciences 73. 179–189.10.1016/j.langsci.2018.08.015Search in Google Scholar

Mikolov, Tomas, Ilya Sutskever, Kai Chen, Greg S. Corrado & Jeff Dean. 2013. Distributed representations of words and phrases and their compositionality. Advances in neural information processing systems 26. 3111–3119.Search in Google Scholar

Plag, Ingo, Julia Homann & Gero Kunter. 2017. Homophony and morphology: The acoustics of word-final s in English. Journal of Linguistics 53(1). 181–216.10.1017/S0022226715000183Search in Google Scholar

R Core Team. 2021. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org/.Search in Google Scholar

Ross, John R. 1972. The category squish: Endstation Hauptwort. In Paul M. Peranteau, Judith N. Levi & Gloria C. Phares (eds.), Papers from the eighth regional meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, 316–328. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society.Search in Google Scholar

Schlechtweg, Marcel & Greville G. Corbett. 2021. The duration of word-final s in English: A comparison of regular-plural and pluralia-tantum nouns. Morphology 31(4). 383–407.10.1007/s11525-021-09381-xSearch in Google Scholar

Schmitz, Dominic, Dinah Baer-Henney & Ingo Plag. 2021. The duration of word-final /s/ differs across morphological categories in English: Evidence from pseudowords. Phonetica 78(5–6). 571–616. https://doi.org/10.1515/phon-2021-2013 (accessed 12 September 2022).Search in Google Scholar

Seyfarth, Scott, Marc Garellek, Gwendolyn Gillingham, Farrell Ackerman & Robert Malouf. 2018. Acoustic differences in morphologically-distinct homophones. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 33(1). 32–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2017.1359634 (accessed 12 September 2022).Search in Google Scholar

Stefanowitsch, Anatol & Stefan Th. Gries. 2003. Collostructions: Investigating the interaction of words and constructions. International journal of corpus linguistics 8(2). 209–243.10.1075/ijcl.8.2.03steSearch in Google Scholar

The British National Corpus, version 3 (BNC XML Edition). 2007. http://www.natcorp.ox.ac.uk/; Distributed by Bodleian Libraries, University of Oxford, on behalf of the BNC Consortium.Search in Google Scholar

Tomaschek, Fabian, Ingo Plag, Mirjam Ernestus & R. Harald Baayen. 2021. Phonetic effects of morphology and context: Modeling the duration of word-final s in English with naïve discriminative learning. Journal of Linguistics 57(1). 123–161. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226719000203 (accessed 12 September 2022).Search in Google Scholar

Wickham, Hadley. 2016. ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis. New York: Springer. https://ggplot2.tidyverse.org.10.1007/978-3-319-24277-4Search in Google Scholar

Wiedemann, Gregor, Steffen Remus, Avi Chawla & Chris Biemann. 2019. Does BERT make any sense? Interpretable word sense disambiguation with contextualized embeddings. arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.10430.Search in Google Scholar

Wisniewski, Edward J. 2010. On using count nouns, mass nouns, and pluralia tantum: What counts. In Francis Pelletier (ed.), Kinds, things, and stuff: Mass terms and generics, 1–24. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195382891.003.0009Search in Google Scholar

Yung Song, Jae, Katherine Demuth, Karen Evans & Stefanie Shattuck-Hufnagel. 2013. Durational cues to fricative codas in 2-year-olds’ American English: Voicing and morphemic factors. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 133(5). 2931–2946.10.1121/1.4795772Search in Google Scholar

Zimmermann, Julia. 2016. Morphological status and acoustic realization. In Christopher Carignan & Michael D. Tyler (eds.), Proceedings of the sixteenth Australasian International Conference on Speech Science and Technology, 201–204. Canberra City: Australasian Speech Science and Technology Association (ASSTA).Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2022-11-11

Published in Print: 2022-11-25

You are currently not able to access this content.

Articles in the same Issue

https://doi.org/10.1515/gcla-2022-0004

Keywords for this article

plurale tantum; singulare tantum; LNRE models; bootstrap; word class continuum