政大機構典藏-National Chengchi University Institutional Repository(NCCUR):Item 140.119/146587

政大典藏 > College of Foreign Languages and Literature > Graduate Institute of Linguistics > Theses > Item 140.119/146587

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/146587

Title:	早期乘法數詞語序的理論性研究 A theoretical investigation of the word order of early multiplicative numerals
Authors:	梁永平 Liang, Yung-Ping
Contributors:	何萬順 Her, One-Soon 梁永平 Liang, Yung-Ping
Keywords:	乘法數詞位數詞語序加法／乘法歧意顯性標記計數符號 Multiplicative numeral Base order Additive/multiplicative ambiguity Overt markings Tally
Date:	2023
Issue Date:	2023-08-02 14:08:23 (UTC+8)
Abstract:	一個乘法數詞有兩種可能的語序：位數詞可能置於乘數詞前後，稱為位數詞置前與位數詞置後語序。這項類型學差異的重要性長期被學界忽視，但Her and Allassonnière-Tang (2022)指出這兩種語序的分布應不是隨機的，因為大部分位數詞置前語言集中於非洲，其餘地區則以位數詞置後語言為主。根據這項地理分布，他們提出一個假說：人類在遷離非洲前已開始使用乘法數詞；他們並指出位數詞置前語序在理論上的優勢能進一步支持這個假說。本論文論證位數詞置前語序更能滿足剛發展出乘法數詞的早期人類的需求，並試圖解釋為何位數詞語序的傾向會從偏向置前語序轉為偏向置後語序。基於相關文獻，本論文強調兩點：第一，語言是人類產生精確數量概念以及操作這些概念之算術能力的必要條件；從人類獲得語言能力到遷離非洲，這之間有長達三萬年的時間能讓人類發展乘法數詞，這為Her and Allassonnière-Tang(2022)的乘法數詞單一起源假說提供支持。第二，乘法數詞的句法結構與線性化理論預測絕大部分乘法數詞應採位數詞置後語序，違反語言事實，這顯示功能性的因素（如溝通需求或語言處理需求）對位數詞語序的影響應大於句法結構。因此，本論文基於Her and Allassonnière-Tang (2022)的假說提出理論，說明位數詞置前語序產生的語言處理負擔較小；但該語序也帶來複雜數詞的加法／乘法歧意。本論文接著討論Her et al. (2022)提出的支持Her and Allassonnière-Tang (2022)假說的一些實證證據，並指出複雜數詞中負責消除加法／乘法歧意的顯性標記是鞏固位數詞置前語序優越性的關鍵證據。最後，本論文透過討論三項猜想，試圖解釋為何現今的語言轉為傾向位數詞置後語序。 A multiplicative numeral has two possible word orders, in which the numeral base precedes or follows the multiplier, namely the base-initial and base-final orders. This typological variation has long been seen as trivial, but Her and Allassonnière-Tang (2022) indicate that the distribution of these two word orders does not seem to be random, for most base-initial languages clusters in Africa, while the rest of the world is filled with base-final languages. Based on this geographical distribution, they propose a hypothesis that humans already used multiplicative numerals before the migration out of Africa, and this hypothesis can be further supported on a basis of a theoretical advantage of the base-initial order. In this thesis, I aim to argue that the base-initial order is more suitable for the need of early humans who began developing multiplicative numerals, and try to explain the change of preference from the base-initial to the base-final order. According to the literature, two points are highlighted: first, language is a necessary condition for humans to hold the concepts of precise numbers and the arithmetic ability manipulating them, and there is a 30,000-year gap between the time humans got language ability and the time humans migrated out of Africa for humans to develop multiplicative numerals. This gap further corroborates Her and Allassonnière-Tang’s single origin hypothesis of multiplicative numerals (2022). Second, the syntactic structure of multiplicative numerals and the theories of linearization predict that multiplicative numerals should generally be base-final, which is against the observed fact, showing that functional factors (e.g., communication or processing needs) should have higher influence on the base order than syntactic structures. Therefore, I first propose a theory based on Her and Allassonnière-Tang’s hypothesis (2022) to show that the base-initial order generates less processing burden, but it brings an additive/multiplicative ambiguity of complex numerals. Next, I discuss some pieces of empirical evidence in Her et al. (2022) supporting Her and Allassonnière-Tang’s hypothesis, and show that overt markings on complex numerals for the additive/multiplicative disambiguation is the key to confirm the superiority of the base-initial order. Lastly, I try to explain why languages nowadays turned to favor the base-final order through the discussion on three speculations.
Reference:	Al-Bataineh, H., & Branigan, P. (2020). The syntax of (complex) numerals in Arabic. OSF Preprints. February 14. doi:10.31219/osf.io/6pesa. Allassonnière-Tang, M., & Her, O. S. (2019). Insights on the Greenberg-Sanches-Slobin generalization: Quantitative typological data on classifiers and plural markers. Folia Linguistica, 53(2), 297-331. Allassonnière-Tang, M., & Her, O. S. (2020). Numeral base, numeral classifier, and noun: Word order harmonization. Language and Linguistics, 21(4), 511-556. Blench, R. (2006, March). Two streams out of Africa: the Pleistocene settlement of the rim of the Indian Ocean. In The 18th congress of the Indo-Pacific prehistory association (IPPA-18), Symposium held at the University of the Philippines, Manila, The Philippines. Bolhuis, J. J., Tattersall, I., Chomsky, N., & Berwick, R. C. (2014). How could language have evolved?. PLoS biology, 12(8), e1001934. Brannon, E. M. (2005). The independence of language and mathematical reasoning. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(9), 3177-3178. Cantlon, J.F., & Brannon, E.M. (2010). Animal Arithmetic. In M. D. Breed, & J. Moore (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Animal Behavior (pp. 55-62). Amsterdam: Elsevier. Chan, B. H. S. (2015). Portmanteau constructions, phrase structure, and linearization. Frontiers in psychology, 6, 1851. Chan, E. 2021. Numeral Systems of the World`s Languages. Retrieved April 11, 2023,from https://lingweb.eva.mpg.de/channumerals/ Chomsky, N. (1986). Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin, and use. Santa Barbara, California: Greenwood Publishing Group. Chomsky, N. (1987). Language and problems of knowledge: The Managua lectures (Vol. 16). Cambridge, MA: MIT press. Chomsky, N. (2017). The Galilean challenge. Inference: International review of science, 3(1). Chrisomalis, S. (2009). The origins and coevolution of literacy and numeracy. In D. R. Olson (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of literacy (chap. 4). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Chrisomalis, S. (2010). Numerical notation: A comparative history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Comrie, B. (2011). Typology of numeral systems. In Numeral types and changes worldwide (J. Gvozdanovic, Ed.) (Trends in Linguistics: Studies & Monographs 118). Mouton: De Gruyter. Retrieved April 11, 2023, from https://lingweb.eva.mpg.de/channumerals/TypNum_Latest_21ho.pdf Comrie, B. (2013). Numeral Bases. In M. S. Dryer & M. Haspelmath (Eds.), The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. Available online at http://wals.info/chapter/131, last accessed on 2021-08-06. Corbett, G. G. (1978). Universals in the syntax of cardinal numerals. Lingua, 46(1), 61-74. Di Sciullo, A. M. (2015). On the domain specificity of the human language faculty and the effects of principles of computational efficiency: contrasting language and mathematics. Revista Linguíʃtica, 11(1), 57-70. Dryer, M. S. (2013). Order of Adjective and Noun. In Dryer, Matthew S. & M. S. Dryer & M. Haspelmath (Eds.), The World Atlas of Language Structures Online. Leipzig: Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology. Available online at http://wals.info/chapter/87, Accessed on 2022-09-15. Friederici, A. D. (2020). Hierarchy processing in human neurobiology: how specific is it?. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 375(1789), 20180391. Friederici, A. D., Bahlmann, J., Friedrich, R., & Makuuchi, M. (2011). The neural basis of recursion and complex syntactic hierarchy. Biolinguistics, 5(1-2), 087-104. Gallistel, C. R., & Gelman, R. (2000). Non-verbal numerical cognition: From reals to integers. Trends in cognitive sciences, 4(2), 59-65. Gelman, R., & Butterworth, B. (2005). Number and language: how are they related?. Trends in cognitive sciences, 9(1), 6-10. Greenberg, J. (1978). Generalizations about Numeral Systems. In J. Greenberg et al. (Eds.), Universals of Human Language Ⅲ: Word Structure (pp. 249-295). Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Grinstead, J., MacSwan, J., Curtiss, S., & Gelman, R. (1998). The independence of language and number. In A. Greenhill, M. Hughes, H. Littlefield, & H. Walsh (Eds.), (pp. 303–313). Proceedings of the 22nd annual Boston University conference on language development, Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press. Hauser, M. D., Carey, S., & Hauser, L. B. (2000). Spontaneous number representation in semi-free-ranging rhesus monkeys. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 267(1445), 829-833. Hauser, M. D., Chomsky, N., & Fitch, W. T. (2002). The faculty of language: what is it, who has it, and how did it evolve?. Science, 298(5598), 1569-1579. He, C. (2015). Complex numerals in Mandarin Chinese are constituents. Lingua, 164, 189-214. He, C., Her, O. S., Hu, X., & Zhu, W. (2017). Overt coordination in additive numerals of minority languages in South China. Syntax, 20(3), 292-316. He, C., & Her, O. S. (2022). Complex numerals in English: constituents or not?. English Language & Linguistics, 26(4), 723-749. Her, O. S. (2012a). Distinguishing classifiers and measure words: A mathematical perspective and implications. Lingua, 122(14), 1668-1691. Her, O. S. (2012b). Structure of classifiers and measure words: A lexical functional account. Language and Linguistics, 13(6), 1211-1251. Her, O. S. (2017a). Deriving classifier word order typology, or Greenberg’s Universal 20A and Universal 20. Linguistics, 55(2), 265-303. Her, O. S. (2017b). Structure of numerals and classifiers in Chinese: Historical and typological perspectives and cross-linguistic implications. Language and Linguistics, 18(1), 26-71. Her, O. S., & Allassonnière-Tang, M. (2022). Is It ‘three hundred’ or ‘hundred three’? An Exploration of the Worldwide Distribution of Numeral Base Orders in Human Languages and Its Implications. Research project proposal, National Science and Technology Council, Taiwan, Project No. 111-2410-H-029-009-MY3. Her, O. S., Chen, Y. C., & Yen, N. S. (2017). Mathematical values in the processing of Chinese numeral classifiers and measure words. PLoS One, 12(9), e0185047. Her, O. S., & Hsieh, C. T. (2010). On the semantic distinction between classifiers and measure words in Chinese. Language and linguistics, 11(3), 527-551. Her, O. S., & Lai, W. J. (2012). Classifiers: The Many Ways to Profile `one`—A Case Study of Taiwan Mandarin. International Journal of Computer Processing of Languages, 24(01), 79-94. Her, O. S., Liang, Y. P., Hsu, H. H., & Allassonnière-Tang, M. (2022). Early Humans Had Only Base-initial Numerals: A Hypothesis. Unpublished manuscript. Her, O. S., & Lin, K. H. (2015). Fenleici yu liangci de qufen——Yi taiwan huayu weili [On the Differentiation of Classifiers and Measure Words——Take Taiwan Mandarin as an Example]. Hanyu Xuebao [Journal of Chinese Languages], 4, 56-68. [Text in Chinese]. Hornstein, N., Nunes, J., & Grohmann, K. K. (2005). Understanding minimalism. Cambridge University Press. Kayne, R. S. (1994). The Antisymmetry of Syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Kerstens, J., Ruys, E., & Zwarts, J. (1996). Lexicon of Linguistics: Case assignment. Retrieved April 11, 2023, from https://lexicon.hum.uu.nl/?lemma=Inherent+case&lemmacode=675&lemma=Inhe rent+case&lemmacode=675 Kremers, J. (2009). Recursive linearization. The Linguistic Review, 26(1), 135-166. Lai, H. L. (2017). Yuyixue [Semantics]. Taipei: Wu-Nan Book Inc. [Text in Chinese]. Leslie, A. M., Gallistel, C. R., & Gelman, R. (2007). Where integers come from. The innate mind: Foundations and the future, 3, 109-149. Li, B. T., Yang, W. C., & Her, O. S. (2018). Shuci yu liangci xitong zai minzujiechu xia de bianhua: yi Zangmianyu Sunwar he Rabha weili [On the variation of numeral systems and classifier systems under ethnic contact: A case study of Sunwar and Rabha in Tibeto-Burman]. Minzuxuejie [Ethnologia], 42, 39-79. [Text in Chinese]. Liu, E., & Xu, Y. (2019). Rapid information gain explains cross-linguistic tendencies in numeral ordering. In A. K. Goel 0001, C. M. Seifert, C. Freksa (Eds.), Proceedings of the 41th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, CogSci 2019: Creativity + Cognition + Computation (pp. 139-165). cognitivesciencesociety.org. Pitt, B., Gibson, E., & Piantadosi, S. T. (2022). Exact number concepts are limited to the verbal count range. Psychological Science, 33(3), 371-381. Qiu, X. G. (1995). Wenzixue gaiyao [An Introduction to Grammatology]. Taipei: Wanjuanlou. [Text in Chinese]. Robertson, J. S. (2004). The possibility and actuality of writing. In S. D. Houston (Ed.), The first writing: Script invention as history and process (chap. 4). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Rutkowski, P. (2007). The syntactic structure of grammaticalized partitives (pseudopartitives). University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 13(1), 26. Spelke, E., & Dehaene, S. (1999). Biological foundations of numerical thinking. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3(10), 365-366. Stampe, D. (1976). Cardinal number systems. In Mufwene, C. A. Walker, & S. B. Steever (Eds.), The Proceedings of CLS 12 (pp. 594–609). Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society). Tomlin, R. S. (2014). Basic Word Order (RLE Linguistics B: Grammar): Functional Principles. London: Routledge. Varley, R. A., Klessinger, N. J., Romanowski, C. A., & Siegal, M. (2005). Agrammatic but numerate. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(9), 3519-3524. Von Mengden, F. (2010). Cardinal Numerals: Old English from a Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Mouton: de Gruyter. Wiese, H. (2007). The co-evolution of number concepts and counting words. Lingua, 117(5), 758-772.
Description:	碩士國立政治大學語言學研究所 109555004
Source URI:	http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0109555004
Data Type:	thesis
Appears in Collections:	[Graduate Institute of Linguistics] Theses

Files in This Item:

File	Description	Size	Format
500401.pdf		6042Kb	Adobe PDF2	107	View/Open

社群 sharing

Loading...