Cross-linguistic Studies On Numeral Classifiers

On the background of linguistic typology, the dissertation is designed to present the hitherto unraised question pertaining to Chinese numeral classifiers through the researches made within the broader frame of world languages.The introduction concerns general issues such as achievements accumulated, methodologies, the corpus of the field, and relevant terminology, etc.Firstly, the dissertation reviews Chinese and international achievements on classifier languages with special emphasis on features and functions of numeral classifiers:Western typologists argue that the individual classifier in Chinese is used in the numerical structure and its main function is to classify nouns on the basis of the attributes such as shapes and functions. Meanwhile, this dissertation maintains that Chinese individual classifiers function as the measuring unit rather than as the assumed function, i.e. classification or individualization of nouns. From this perspective, the dissertation is devoted to investigating the various strata of numeral classifier languages in the world and to probing common and unique characteristics of the languages. In the same vein, Aikhenvald (2000) claiming that Mandarin, Thai, Vietnamese, Cantonese and other languages have multiple classifier systems holds attention. According to her, the Mandarin has both numeral- and deictic classifiers, belonging to the group of multiple classifier languages. To illustrate, the 'ben' in the 'zhe ben shu'(literally 'this book') is a deictic classifier attached to the demonstrative which classifies the noun. However, the author does not agree with her view, maintaining that it is an expanded function of the classifiers rather than the classification of nouns.Following the line of thought, the dissertation refers to the semantic map model for the purpose of highlighting the expanded function of classifiers in many languages. According to the author's observation, the numeral classifiers has expanded functions which are classified as fourteen:measure unit, Num-Cl transferred referent, indefinite transferred referent, indefinite marker, generic reference maker, Dem-Cl-N, Dem-Cl transferred referent, definite marker, definite transferred referent, relative clause marker without head, relative clause marker with head and possessive modifier marker without head, possessive modifier marker with head, noun classifier. And, further researches on the classifiers'functions in ninety eight languages show the conceptual space of classifiers functions which is a convenient diagram to allow for the comparison of language-particular categories in some functional domain and an give initial explanation on semantic relationship between the concept and the expanded mechanism, maintaining that the definite- and indefinite marking functions of the classifiers stem from the omission of numeral 'one' and directives respectively. It then follows that the attributive marker of the classifier (relative clause markers and possessive attributive markers) is not derived from the definite maker but from the Dem-Cl transferred referent.Further researches reveal that the traditionally upheld view that the numeral classifiers and the plural markers constitute a complementary relationship in the sense that the language with classifiers has no plural markers is mistaken. Rather, Chinese and Korean have both the numeral classifier and plural marker,'men' and 'deul' respectively. Siding with Corbett's (2005) viewpoint that nouns in Chinese and in Korean is general number rather than generic reference, the author further learns from his category of quantification:associatives plural, distributives plural and collectives plural. Thereby, the author draws a contrast between the Chinese 'men' and the Korean 'deul.'In conclusion, the summary is given and the author's contributions together with the possible drawbacks are taken into account.