Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-19T02:00:40.639Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

6 - Iceberg Semantics for Count Nouns and Mass Nouns: How Mass Counts

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2021

By
Fred Landman
Edited by
Hana Filip
Hana Filip
Affiliation:
Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf
Get access

Summary

This chapter analyses the relation between mass noun phrases and measure readings within Landman’s theory of Iceberg semantics. Landman not only applies Iceberg semantics to different noun classes, but also generalizes the theory to apply to DPs and different interpretations of measure phrases. These developments are then used to address the main puzzle in the paper: ‘when mass counts’. Based on data mostly from Dutch and German, Landman proposes an explanation for why not only neat mass nouns, such as furniture, admit of cardinality comparison readings with quantifiers, such as most, and are felicitous with stubbornly distributive adjectives, such as big, but why it is also the case that mess mass nouns, such as meat, can also get cardinality comparison readings in the same contexts. For the latter case, the key to the analysis is to make use of contextual portioning, a process that is independently motivated in the portion readings of measure phrases.

Keywords

Iceberg semanticsmass/count distinctionmeasure phrasesDutchGermancontextual portioningneat mass nounsmess mass nouns
Type
Chapter
Information
Countability in Natural Language , pp. 161 - 198
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barner, David, and Snedeker, Jesse (2005). Quantity judgements and individuation: evidence that mass nouns count. Cognition 97: 41–66.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chierchia, Genaro (1998). Plurality of mass nouns and the notion of semantic parameter. In Rothstein, Susan (ed.), Events and Grammar, pp. 52–103. Berlin: Springer[Kluwer].Google Scholar
Dalrymple, Mary, Kanazawa, Makoto, Mchombo, Sam, and Peters, Stanley (1994). What do reciprocals mean? In Harvey, Mandy and Santelmann, Lynne (eds.), Proceedings of SALT 4. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.Google Scholar
Gillon, Brendan (1992). Towards a common semantics of English count and mass nouns. Linguistics and Philosophy 15.6: 597–639.Google Scholar
Khrizman, Keren, Landman, Fred, Lima, Suzi, Rothstein, Susan, and Schvarcz, Brigitta R. (2015). Portion readings are count readings, not measure readings. In Brochhagen, Thomas, Roelofsen, Floris, and Theiler, Nadine (eds.), Proceedings of the 20th Amsterdam Colloquium. Amsterdam: ILLC.Google Scholar
Landman, Fred (1989). Groups, i & ii. Linguistics and Philosophy 12.5: 559–605, 723–744.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landman, Fred (1991). Structures for Semantics. Berlin: Springer [Kluwer].Google Scholar
Landman, Fred (1995). Plurality. In Lappin, Shalom (ed.), The Handbook of Contemporary Semantic Theory, 1st ed. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Landman, Fred (2000). Events and Plurality. Berlin: Springer [Kluwer].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landman, Fred (2004). Indefinites and the Type of Sets. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Landman, Fred (2011). Count nouns – mass nouns – neat nouns – mess nouns. In Glanzberg, Michael, Partee, Barbara H., and Šķilters, Jurģis (eds.), Formal Semantics and Pragmatics: Discourse,Context and Models. The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication 6, 2010, http://thebalticyearbook.org/journals/baltic/issue/current.Google Scholar
Landman, Fred (2016). Iceberg semantics for count nouns and mass nouns: classifiers, measures and portions. In Rothstein, Susan and Šķilters, Jurģis (eds.), Number: Cognitive, Semantic and Cross-linguistic Approaches. The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication 11, 2016, http://dx.doi.org/10.4148/1944-3676.1107.Google Scholar
Landman, Fred (2020). Iceberg Semantics for Mass Nouns and Count Nouns. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lima, Suzi (2014). The Grammar of Individuation and Counting. PhD Dissertation, University of Massachusetts Amherst.Google Scholar
Link, Godehard (1983). The logical analysis of plurals and mass terms: A lattice-theoretic approach. In Bäuerle, Rainer, Egli, Urs, and von Stechow, Arnim (eds.), Meaning, Use and the Interpretation of Language, pp. 303–323. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Partee, Barbara, and Borschev, Vladimir (2012). Sortal, relational, and functional interpretations of nouns and Russian container constructions. Journal of Semantics 29.4: 445–486.Google Scholar
Pelletier, Francis Jeffry, and Schubert, Leonard (1989/2002). Mass expressions. In Gabbay, Dov and Guenthner, Franz (eds.), The Handbook of Philosophical Logic. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Rothstein, Susan (2011). Counting, measuring, and the semantics of classifiers. In Glanzberg, Michael, Partee, Barbara H., and Šķilters, Jurģis (eds.), Formal Semantics and Pragmatics: Discourse, Context and Models. The Baltic International Yearbook of Cognition, Logic and Communication 6, 2010, http://thebalticyearbook.org/journals/baltic/issue/current.Google Scholar
Rothstein, Susan (2017). Semantics for Counting and Measuring. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwarzschild, Roger. (1996). Pluralities. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Schwarzschild, Roger. (2009). Stubborn distributivity, multiparticipant nouns and the count/mass distinction. In Proceedings of NELS 39. Amherst, MA: GLSA.Google Scholar
Sharvy, Richard (1980). A more general theory of definite descriptions. Philosophical Review 89.4: 607–624.Google Scholar
Winter, Yoad (2001). Plural predication and the strongest meaning hypothesis. Journal of Semantics 18.4: 333–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×