On the problem of categorization in linguistics

Morphosyntax

Functional information

• 
  Primary distinction between nouns and verbs
  
  • 
    Distinguishing between Entities (people and things) and Events (actions, states, etc.)
    
  • 
    In many languages, other word classes can be defined at least partly by how much they look like nouns or verbs
    
    • 
      E.g. across languages, adjectives are often noun-like or verb-like
      

• 
  Typical properties used to distinguish nouns and verbs:
  

Nouns

• 
  Typically refer to persons or objects
  
• 
  Typically function as arguments
  
• 
  Can get definiteness marking
  
• 
  Typically mark case
  
• 
  Typically mark number
  
• 
  Typically mark gender
  

Verbs

• 
  Typically refer to actions and states
  
• 
  Typically function as predicates
  
• 
  Typically can get voice marking
  
• 
  Typically mark tense
  
• 
  Typically mark aspect
  
• 
  Typically mark mood
  

• 
  Austronesian language, Taiwan
  
• 
  Five dialects
  
  • 
    Northern: Takibakha, Takituduh
    
  • 
    Central: Takbanuaz, Takivatan
    
  • 
    Southern: Isbukun
    
• 
  Philippine-type voice system (De Busser 2011)
  
  • 
    AV, UV, LV, …
    
• 
  Very productive morphology
  
  • 
    No clear distinction between inflection and derivation
    
  • 
    For instance, voice markers are also nominalizers
    

Everything is normal (but in a weird way)

• 
  Traditional categories (Kroeger 1998)
  
• 
  Non-traditional categories (Himmelmann 2008)
  
• 
  Nominalist hypothesis (Kaufman 2009a, 2009b)
  
• 
  (Root) precategoriality (Foley 1998)
  
• 
  There are no word classes (Broschart 1997; Gil 1994, 2009)
  

All word classes are an illusion

• 
  There appear to be nouns and verbs
  
  • 
    Semantics
    
  • 
    Typical use
    

LV ≈ LOCATION?


LOCATION ≈ LV?

• 
  There appear to be nouns and verbs
  
  • 
    Semantics
    
  • 
    Typical use
    
• 
  … but the traditional criteria for categorizing nouns and verbs do
  

not work

• 
  Both nouns and verbs can be predicates
  
• 
  Both nouns and verbs can have definiteness markers
  
• 
  Both nouns and verbs can have tense and aspect marking (but verbs more often do so)
  
• 
  Both nouns and verbs can have voice marking
  
• 
  Voice marking is also used for certain kinds of derivations
  

⇒ It is a bit of a mess

• 
  Word classes are important in linguistics
  
• 
  (And in language teaching)
  
• 
  Especially nouns and verbs
  
• 
  A systematic word class categorization problem in linguistics
  
  • 
    Especially in lesser studied languages
    

• 
  If the categories nouns and verb do not exist or cannot be established using similar criteria, a number of questions arise:
  
  • 
    Are these problems an indication that Noun and Verb are not general cognitive categories?
    
  • 
    Should we revise or update how we establish the basic categories in language?
    
  • 
    How can we compare the grammar of languages if their word classes are not the same?
    
  • 
    How can we use linguistic theories across languages?
    
  • 
    How should we teach languages to our students?
    

• 
  But maybe what we discovered is not as unexpected as we thought
  

• 
  Let’s review some better known languages
  
  • 
    How do they establish the noun-verb distinction?
    
  • 
    
    Which problems do we encounter?
    
• 
  English & Mandarin Chinese
  
• 
  Vietnamese
  

Any questions or remarks?

• 
  English noun-verb distinctions
  
  • 
    Compound
    
  • 
    Cry
    
  • 
    Flower
    
  • 
    Throw
    
  • 
    Work
    

• 
  We can use online corpora to analyze these examples:
  
  • 
    https://www.english-corpora.org/
    

Bennett, Charles E. 1908. A Latin Grammar. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Broschart, Jürgen. 1997. Why Tongan does it differently: categorial distinctions in a language without nouns and verbs. Linguistic Typology 1– 2. 123–165.

De Busser, Rik. 2009. Towards a Grammar of Takivatan Bunun: Selected Topics. Melbourne: La Trobe University PhD.

De Busser, Rik. 2011. Towards an analysis of argument alignment in Takivatan Bunun. Studies in Language 35(3). 523–555.

Donatus, Aelius. 4th century. De