Taalportaal - the digital language portal

Dutch1
Frisian
Saterfrisian
Afrikaans

Show all

4.1.1.3.Properties of N1

quickinfo

In Section 4.1.1.2 we distinguished the three types of N1s listed in (38), and in this section we will investigate the properties of these types. We will show that N1s of type (38a) are deficient in several respects, whereas N1s of type (38b) behave like regular nouns. N1s of type (38c) show mixed behavior: in some contexts they exhibit deficient behavior, whereas in other contexts they behave just like regular nouns.

Types of N1s:

purely quantificational: quantifier nouns

referential: container, part and collective nouns

mixed: measure nouns

I. Morphological properties
II. Syntactic properties: determiners and prenominal modifiers
III. Some semantic properties
IV. Some similarities between N1s and cardinal numerals

[+] I. Morphological properties

This subsection discusses the morphological properties of the different types of N1. We will first discuss their ability to undergo pluralization and diminutivization, and then their ability to enter into the process of nominal compounding.

[+] A. Pluralization

The primeless examples in (39) show that all N1s can be preceded by the indefinite determiner een'a'. This suggests that we are dealing with count nouns, and we therefore expect pluralization to be possible. The primed examples show that this is indeed possible with most N1s, but that the quantifier noun in (39a') resists the formation of a plural. Furthermore, (39b') shows that the plural marking on the measure noun liter is optional.

a.		een boel mensen
		a lot [of] people

a'.	*	vier boel(en) mensen	QN
		four lot(s) [of] people

b.		een liter melk
		a liter [of] milk

b'.		twee liter(s) melk	MN
		two liter(s) [of] milk

c.		een emmer peren
		a bucket [of] pears

c'.		vier emmers peren	ConN
		four buckets [of] pears

d.		een reep chocolade
		a bar [of] chocolate

d'.		vier repen chocolade	PartN
		four bars [of] chocolate

e.		een groep studenten
		a group [of] students

e'.		vier groepen studenten	ColN
		four groups [of] students

The general pattern in (39) is compatible with the classification in (38): quantifier nouns lack a plural form, whereas the referential nouns do allow plural formation. And, as expected, the measure nouns show mixed behavior: they may or may not take the plural suffix depending on whether they have a quantificational or a referential, package unit reading. Still, there are a number of complications that we will discuss in the following subsections.

[+] 1. Ambiguous N1s

Some nouns are ambiguous between a purely quantificational reading and a referential reading, and it will not come as a surprise that these can enter the constructions in two forms. The examples in (40) illustrate this for the collective noun paar'pair'. Example (40a) represents the—probably unmarked—quantificational reading: the QC refers to a quantity of eight shoes/books that consists of four sets of two shoes, which may or may not form a pair. Example (40b), of course, also refers to eight shoes, but now it is implied that the shoes make up four pairs; the markedness of (40b') is due to the fact that books normally do not come in pairs.

a.		vier paar	schoenen/boeken
		four pairs [of]	shoes/books

b.		vier paren	schoenen
		four pairs [of]	shoes

b'.	??	vier paren	boeken
		four pairs [of]	books

For completeness’ sake, note that whereas the QC in (40a) refers to exactly eight shoes/books, the QC een paar schoenen/boeken may refer to any small number of books; the cardinality can be equal or larger than 2.

[+] 2. Measure nouns involved in linear measurement

Measure nouns like liter in (39b') are ambiguous between a purely quantificational and a referential reading. On the quantificational reading the measure noun takes the singular form and the QC in (39b') simply refers to a certain quantity of milk without any implication about the packaging units of the milk; on the referential, package unit reading the measure noun takes the plural form and the QC refers to two separate units of milk of one liter each. In some cases, however, the referential reading seems to be blocked: this is illustrated in (41) for measure nouns involved in linear measurement.

a.		Er	viel	twee meter sneeuw.
		there	fellsg	two meter [of] snow

b.	*?	Er	vielen	twee meters sneeuw.
		there	fellpl	two meters [of] snow

The infelicity of (41b) is probably due to the fact that the noun phrase twee meter sneeuw does not refer to a fixed quantity of snow given that the quantity depends on the surface area that we are talking about: the noun phrase twee meter is related to the height of the snow, but the length and width of the area covered with snow is left open. When the N2 is such that only one dimension is considered relevant, the use of the measure phrase will give rise to an interpretation involving a certain, more or less fixed, quantity of a substance, and consequently the result improves greatly. This is illustrated in (42): whereas (42a) leaves open the question of how many pieces of rope we are dealing with, the noun phrase in (42b) refers to five pieces of rope of 1 meter each.

a.		Er	was vijf meter	touw	over.
		there	was five meter [of]	rope	left

b.	?	Er	waren	vijf meters	touw	over.
		there	were	five meters [of]	rope	left

The examples in (43) show that pluralization of measure nouns does not necessarily give rise to a referential, package unit interpretation: this is only the case if the measure noun is preceded by a numeral; if a numeral is lacking and the measure noun is given accent, a purely quantificational, in this case “high quantity”, reading is again possible. That the constructions in (43) are purely quantificational is also clear from the fact that the QCs trigger singular agreement on the verb. Observe that on the intended reading, the properties of N2 do not affect acceptability: in contrast to (41b), example (43b) is fully acceptable.

a.	Hij	dronk	liters	melk.
	he	dranksg.	liters [of]	milk
	'He drank many liters of milk.'

b.	Er	viel	meters	sneeuw.
	there	fellsg.	meters [of]	snow
	'there fell many meters of snow'

c.	Er	lag	meters	touw.
	there	laysg.	meters [of]	rope
	'Many meters of rope were lying there.'

The “high quantity” reading is also available with container nouns like emmer'bucket'. However, since example (44a) shows that a QC with this reading triggers plural agreement, it is clear that the container noun must still be considered a regular, referential noun. The part nouns and collective nouns do not allow this “high quantity” reading, which is indicated in (44b&c) by means of a number sign. This difference between the container nouns, on the one hand, and the part and collective nouns, on the other, again suggests that the division between quantificational and referential nouns is not sharp, but gradual.

a.	Er stonden	emmers	peren.
	there stood	buckets [of]	pears
	'There stood many buckets of pears.'

b.	#	Er lagen	repen	chocola.
		there lay	bars [of]	chocolate

c.	#	Er	liepen	groepen	studenten.
		there	walked	groups [of]	students

Finally, note that, unlike cardinal numerals, individuating quantifiers like enkele'some' and vele'many' always trigger the plural suffix on the measure noun. The agreement on the verb can be singular, just as with the numerals in (41). This is shown in (45).

a.		Hij	dronk	enkele/vele	liters/*liter	bier.
		he	drank	some/many	liters/liter [of]	beer

b.	Er	viel/*?vielen	enkele meters	sneeuw.
	there	fellsg/pl	some meters [of]	snow
	'There fell many meters of snow.'

[+] 3. Nouns involved in the measurement of time

Measure nouns involved in measuring time must be plural if preceded by a numeral, as shown by (46a). Nevertheless, we are dealing with a purely quantificational construction here: the QC does not refer to five separate units of vacation of a week each—in fact, there is no implication whatsoever about the temporal units involved.

a.		We	hebben	vijf weken/*week vakantie	per jaar.
		we	have	five weekpl/sg [of] vacation	per year

b.		Vijf weken vakantie per jaar	is/??zijn	eigenlijk	te weinig.
		five weeks [of] vacation per year	is/are	actually	too little

It is not clear to us whether the QC vijf weken vakantie should be treated on a par with QCs like twee liter melk. Apart from the difference in plural marking, the two constructions differ in that in the former the N2vakantie can be replaced by the adjective vrij'free/off' without any clear difference in meaning, whereas adjectives can never be combined with a measure noun like liter. This fact suggests that we are dealing with a second-order predicate in example (46b). This would also account for the fact that the binominal construction in (46b) triggers singular agreement on the verb despite the fact that N1 is plural: the verb always exhibits singular agreement if we are dealing with second-order predication.

		Vijf weken vrij	per jaar	is eigenlijk	te weinig.
		five weeks off	per year	is actually	too little

[+] B. Diminutive formation

The three types of N1s also differ with respect to diminutive formation. The examples in (48c-d) show that the referential nouns allow it, whereas (48a) shows that quantifier nouns do not. As expected, the measure nouns again show mixed behavior: diminutivization is possible if they are interpreted referentially, but not if they are interpreted quantificationally. That the diminutive is derived from the referential and not the quantificational measure noun is clear from the fact illustrated by (48b') that they must be pluralized if preceded by a cardinal numeral.

a.	*	een boeltje mensen
		a lotdim [of] people

b.		een litertje melk
		a literdim [of] milk

b'.		twee litertjes/*litertje melk	MN
		two litersdim/literdim [of] milk

c.		een emmertje peren
		a bucketdim [of] pears

c'.		twee emmertjes peren	ConN
		two bucketsdim [of] pears

d.		een reepje chocolade
		a bardim [of] chocolate

d'.		twee reepjes chocolade	PartN
		two barsdim [of] chocolate

e.		een groepje studenten
		a groupdim [of] students

e'.		twee groepjes studenten	ColN
		two groupsdim [of] students

Note that een beetje'a bit' in een beetje water'a bit of water' is only an apparent counterexample to the claim that quantificational N1s do not undergo diminutivization: een beetje is a lexicalized formation, which is clear from the fact that it does not have a counterpart without the diminutive suffix: *een beet water. The plural form ??twee beetjes water also seems degraded (although a number of rather forced cases can be found on the internet).

[+] C. Nominal compounds

The data discussed in Subsections A and B show that it is necessary to make a distinction between purely quantificational and referential N1s. Only the latter allow pluralization and diminutive formation. This distinction seems supported by data involving compounding. The denotation of a nominal compound is mainly determined by its second member, which can be considered the head of the compound; the first member only has the function of further specifying the denotation of the second one; cf. Section 1.4. This is clear from the fact that a tafelaansteker'table lighter' is a kind of lighter, not a kind of table. Given this, we predict that only referential nouns can appear as the head/second member of a compound.
The examples in (49) show that this prediction is indeed correct. The first prediction is that the container, part, and collective nouns can appear as the head of a compound, and the acceptability of (49c-e) shows that this is indeed the case, although we should note that perenemmer is a possible, but non-attested word. The second prediction is that the quantifier nouns cannot occur as the head of a compound given that they do not have a denotation, and (49a) shows that this is again the case. A problem is that we expect the measure nouns to exhibit mixed behavior, whereas they actually pattern with the quantifier nouns. This suggests that the referential reading of measure nouns is rather marked, and only arises under strong pressure from the context.

a.	*	mensenboel	QN
		people-lot

b.	*	melkliter	MN
		milk-liter

c.		perenemmer	ConN
		pears-bucket

d.		chocoladereep	PartN
		chocolate-bar

e.		studentengroep	ColN
		students-group

Note that the quantificational force of the container, part, and collective nouns has completely disappeared in the compounds in (49c-e). This also holds for nouns that are normally used as quantifier nouns. For example, in a compound like beestenboel'pig-sty', the head of the compound is not the quantifier noun boel but a noun denoting collections of things that need not necessarily belong together. Similarly, the meaning of the second member of compounds like studentenaantal'number of students' is not related to the quantificational interpretation of aantal, but to its referential interpretation; cf. the discussion of example (4).

[+] D. Conclusion

The findings in Subsections A to C, summarized in Table 2, have shown that we a distinction should be made between N1s that are purely quantificational and N1s that are more referential in nature. Quantifier nouns belong to the first kind; container, part and collective nouns all belong to the second type; and measure nouns are ambiguous between the first and the second type.

Table 2: Morphological properties of N1s

	quantificational	mixed	referential
	QN	MN	ConN	PartN	ColN
plural	—	+/—	+	+	+
diminutive	—	+/—	+	+	+
compounding	—	+/—	+	+	+
referential	—	+/—	+	+	+

The pattern in Table 2 corresponds nicely with our findings in Table 1: that quantifier nouns are purely quantificational is in accordance with the fact that they cannot trigger agreement on the finite verb or a demonstrative; that measure nouns are ambiguous between a purely quantificational and a referential, package unit reading is in accordance with the fact that either they or N2 may trigger agreement; that container, part and collective nouns are referential is consistent with the fact that they block agreement between N2 and the finite verb or the demonstrative. The fact that all N1s have some quantificational force is consistent with the fact that in all cases, N2 can be interpreted as the semantic head of the construction.

[+] II. Syntactic properties: determiners and prenominal modifiers

Subsection I has shown that the classification in (38) into quantificational, referential and hybrid N1s is reflected by the morphological behavior of these nouns. This subsection shows that the classification is also reflected by their syntactic properties, especially in the type of determiners and (quantificational) modifiers they may have; the purely quantificational nouns are more restricted in this respect than the referential ones. For example, given that a definite article is used to identify a specific entity that is part of the denotation of the noun, we expect that they can only combine with referential nouns, which have such a denotation, and not with purely quantificational nouns, which lack such a denotation.

[+] A. Articles

Example (50) illustrates again that all N1s can be preceded by the indefinite article een. If we are dealing with a quantifier noun, however, the definite article cannot be substituted for the indefinite one. With measure nouns this is possible, although this results in the loss of the purely quantificational reading: het ons kaas refers to a certain piece or quantity of cheese that can be identified by the addressee. The remaining types of N1s can all be preceded by both the definite and the indefinite article. Observe that it is N1 that agrees in gender and number with the article: the N2s in (50) would all select the article de, not het; cf. the discussion of example (16) in Section 4.1.1.2, sub I.

a.		een boel studenten
		a lot [of] students

a'.	*	de boel studenten	QN
		the lot [of] students

b.		een ons kaas
		an ounce [of] cheese

b'.		het ons kaas	MN
		the ounce [of] cheese

c.		een kistje sigaren
		a boxdim. [of] cigars

c'.		het kistje sigaren	ConN
		the boxdim. [of] cigars

d.		een stuk zeep
		a piece [of] soap

d'.		het stuk zeep	PartN
		the piece [of] soap

e.		een groepje studenten
		a groupdim [of] students

e'.		het groepje studenten	ColN
		the groupdim [of] students

It should be noted, however, that many noun phrases that normally do not allow a definite article can be preceded by it if they are modified: a proper noun like Amsterdam, for example, normally cannot be preceded by the definite article, but if it is modified by, e.g., a relative clause the definite article is licensed: het Amsterdam *(dat ik zo goed ken)'the Amsterdam that I know so well'. The examples in (51) show that quantifier nouns exhibit ambiguous behavior in this respect: some, like boel in (51a), do not allow the definite determiner in these modified contexts either, while others, like paar'couple of' or stoot'lot of' in (51b), are compatible with the determiner in such contexts.

a.	*	de boel studenten	(die	ik	ken)
		the lot [of] students	that	I	know

b.		de paar/stoot boeken	*(die	ik	heb	gelezen)
		the couple/lot [of] books	that	I	have	read

Note, however, that the determiner in (51b) is probably not part of the noun phrase headed by N1, but of the noun phrase headed by N2. A reason for assuming this is that the noun paar is neuter (at least in its use as a collective noun), and should therefore select the definite determiner het, not deas is the case in (51b): het/*de paar schoenen'the pair of shoes'. This suggests that the construction in (51b) is similar to the quantified constructions in (52), where the article is undisputedly selected by the noun.

a.		de vijfentwintig boeken	??(die	ik	gisteren	heb	besteld)
		the twenty-five books	that	I	yesterday	have	ordered

b.		de vele boeken	??(die	ik	heb	gelezen)
		the many books	that	I	have	read

The fact that quantifier nouns normally cannot be preceded by a definite article may cast some doubt on the assumption that the element een in constructions with quantifier nouns is a “true” article. The idea that we are dealing with a spurious article should not be dismissed given that there are many contexts in which een clearly does not function as an article; cf. Section 4.2.1 for another example. For instance, een can also be used in examples such as (53) with a plural noun, where it seems to function as a modifier with an “approximative” meaning. It is tempting to relate this use of een to that in een boel mensen in (50a).

een	vijfentwintig	studenten
a	twenty-five	students
'approximately/about twenty-five students'

That we are dealing with a “spurious article” when the noun is purely quantificational can be indirectly supported by the fact illustrated in (54a) that German ein is not morphologically marked for case if it precedes a quantifier noun, as it would normally be if it were part of a referential noun phrase; cf. (54b), where the noun Paar is referential and the article ein has the dative ending -em.

a.		mit	ein	paar	kühlen	Tropfen	QN
		with	a	couple [of]	cool	drops

b.		mit	einem	Paar	schwarzen	Schuhen	ColN
		with	adat	pair [of]	black	shoes

Another reason for assuming that the element een in een boel mensen differs from the other occurrences of een in (50) is that it cannot be replaced by its negative counterpart geen'no'. This is illustrated in (55); note especially the difference between (55a) and (55e), which form a minimal pair (provided we abstract away from the agreement on the finite verb).

a.	*	Er	staan	helemaal	geen boel studenten	op straat.	QN
		there	stands	prt	no lot [of] students	in the.street

b.		Ik	heb	helemaal	geen ons kaas	gezien.	MN
		I	have	prt	no ounce [of] cheese	seen

c.	Ik	heb	helemaal	geen kistje sigaren	gestolen.	ConN
	I	have	prt	no box [of] cigars	stolen
	'I didnʼt steel any box of cigars'

d.	Ik	heb	helemaal	geen stuk zeep	gepakt.	PartN
	I	have	prt	no piece [of] soap	taken
	'I havenʼt taken any piece of soap.'

e.	Er	staat	helemaal	geen groep studenten	op straat.	ColN
	there	stands	prt	no group [of] students	in the.street
	'There is no group of students in the street.'

The data in this subsection suggest that quantifier nouns cannot be preceded by an article. In (50a), the element een is a spurious indefinite article, which is possibly related to the modifier een in examples such as (53). The other types of N1 occur both with the indefinite and the definite article.

[+] B. Demonstrative pronouns

Demonstrative pronouns exhibit a pattern similar to the definite article. Example (56a) shows that a quantifier noun like boel never occurs with a demonstrative pronoun, whereas other quantifier nouns, like paar in (56b), are more readily acceptable with demonstrative pronouns (especially the proximate ones). Note that it is not necessary to modify the QC in (56b), which may be due to the fact that the demonstratives themselves function as modifiers in the sense that they imply some partitioning of the set denoted by N2; cf. Section 5.2.3.

a.	*	Deze/Die	boel boeken	(die ik gelezen heb)	liggen	daar.
		these/those	lot [of] books	that I read have	lie	there

b.	Die/?Deze	paar euroʼs	(die hij me gaf)	maken	geen verschil.
	those/these	couple [of] euros	that he me gave	make	no difference
	'Those few euros he gave me make no difference.'

Recall from Section 4.1.1.2, sub I, that the demonstratives in (56b) do not agree in gender and number with N1 but with N2. This can be readily illustrated by means of the minimal pair in (57). In (57a), the QC refers to two shoes that form a pair: the neuter noun paar is therefore referential and the demonstrative agrees with it. In (57b), the QC refers to a set of two or more shoes: the neuter noun paar is therefore purely quantificational and the demonstrative agrees with N2.

a.		dit/dat	paar	schoenen	ColN
		this/that	pair [of]	shoes

b.		deze/die	paar	schoenen	QN
		these/those	couple [of]	shoes

Section 4.1.1.2, sub I, has already shown that QCs containing a measure noun exhibit the same ambiguity as paar, albeit that the construction in which the demonstrative agrees with N2 is considered marked by some speakers. The relevant examples are repeated in (58a&b).

a.		dit/dat[+neuter,+sg]	pond[+neuter]	uien
		this/that	pound [of]	onions

b.	%	deze/die[-neuter,-sg]	pond	uien[-neuter,-sg]
		these/those	pound [of]	onions

The examples in (59) show that the remaining types of N1s can freely occur with demonstrative pronouns. The demonstrative pronouns in (59) must agree with N1; replacing them by deze/die leads to ungrammaticality.

a.		dit/dat[+neuter]	kistje[+neuter]	sigaren
		this/that	boxdim [of]	cigars

b.		dit/dat[+neuter]	stuk[+neuter]	zeep
		this/that	piece [of]	soap

c.		dit/dat[+neuter]	groepje[+neuter]	studenten
		this/that	groupdim [of]	students

The examples in this subsection have shown that demonstrative pronouns can only appear with a subset of the quantifier nouns; if possible, the demonstrative agrees in gender and number with N2. Container, part and collective nouns can readily be combined with demonstrative pronouns, and agree with them in number and gender. Measure nouns, again, show a more hybrid behavior.

[+] C. Possessive pronouns

Example (60a) shows that possessive pronouns always seem to give rise to a degraded result with quantifier nouns, regardless of whether a modifier is present or not. The use of a possessor is at least marginally possible with a measure noun like pond in (60b): the measure noun must receive a referential interpretation in this case. Possessive pronouns are easily possible with the referential nouns in (60c-e).

a.	*	mijn	paar boeken	(die ik gelezen heb)
		my	couple [of] books	that I read have

b.	?	Hier	ligt	mijn pond kaas,	en	daar	het jouwe.
		here	lies	my pound of cheese	and	there	yours

c.		mijn kistje sigaren
		my boxdim [of] cigars

d.		mijn stuk zeep
		my piece [of] soap

e.		zijn groepje studenten
		his groupdim [of] students

[+] D. Quantifiers and cardinal numerals

The examples in (61) show that a quantifier noun like boel'lot of' cannot be preceded by a quantifier or numeral. The ungrammaticality of (61a) is not surprising given that the quantifiers sommige'some'/alle'all' and the numeral vier'four' require a plural noun, whereas the quantifier noun cannot be pluralized; cf. (39). That appealing to this fact is not sufficient to account for the ungrammaticality of (61a) is clear from the ungrammaticality of (61b): the distributive quantifier elk'each' requires a singular noun.

a.	*	sommige/alle/vier	boel(en)	schoenen
		some/all/four	lot(s) [of]	shoes

b.	*	elke	boel	schoenen
		each	lot [of]	shoes

The ungrammaticality of the examples in (61) must therefore be related to the quantificational function of the quantifier nouns. This can be done by appealing to the fact, which will be discussed extensively in Chapter 6, that quantifiers and numerals operate on sets; given that quantifier nouns do not denote sets, the quantifier/numeral cannot perform its function. Note that the quantifier/numeral cannot operate on N2 either since that is precisely the function of the quantifier noun: it is never possible to have two quantifiers or numerals that take scope over the same noun phrase.
The examples in (62) show that container, part and collective nouns freely co-occur with quantifiers. It should be noted, however, that these nouns have lost their quantificational property in the sense that in these cases the QCs refer to concrete cups, pieces and flocks.

a.		sommige/alle/vier	koppen	koffie
		some/all/four	cups [of]	coffee

a'.		elke	kop	koffie
		each	cup [of]	coffee

b.		sommige/alle/vier	stukken	taart
		some/all/four	pieces [of]	cake

b'.		elk	stuk	taart
		each	piece [of]	cake

c.		sommige/alle/vier	kuddes	geiten
		some/all/four	flocks [of]	goats

c'.		elke	kudde	geiten
		each	flock [of]	goats

As noted previously, some N1s, like paar'pair', can be used both as a purely quantificational and as a referential noun. Given the observations above, we expect that the addition of a quantifier will have a disambiguating effect. This is indeed borne out given that the examples in (63) can only be given a referential interpretation; these QCs refer to some/all/each of the pairs of shoes in the domain of discourse.

a.		sommige/alle	paren	schoenen
		some/all	pairs [of]	shoes

b.		elk paar	schoenen
		each pair [of]	shoes

The examples in (40), repeated here as (64), show that the noun paar can also be preceded by a cardinal numeral, in which case the noun may appear either in its singular or in its plural form. In both cases the QC refers to exactly eight shoes, but the examples differ in the implication that the shoes make up four pairs: this is implied by (64b) but not by (64a). It is tempting to account for this difference by claiming that the noun paar is purely quantificational in (64a) and referential in (64b). However, if this is indeed the case, we have to conclude that there is no general ban on using a cardinal numeral with purely quantificational nouns.

a.		vier	paar	schoenen
		four	pair [of]	shoes

b.		vier	paren	schoenen
		four	pairs [of]	shoes

Example (65) shows that measure nouns can be preceded by a quantifier. The use of an existential/universal quantifier, which triggers the package unit reading, gives rise to a slightly marked result. The distributive quantifier elk does not trigger this reading and gives rise to a perfectly acceptable result.

a.	?	sommige/alle	liters	melk
		some/all	liters [of]	milk

b.		elke liter	melk
		each liter [of]	milk

Most measure nouns preceded by a numeral can appear either in singular or plural form; see Subsection IA, for some exceptions. In the latter case, the quantifier noun is clearly used as a referential noun with a package unit reading: (66b) refers to four discrete quantities of milk of one liter each; in (66a), on the other hand, it refers to one quantity of milk, further specified as a quantity of four liters. This supports the suggestion above (64) that there is no general ban on using cardinal numerals with purely quantificational nouns.

a.		vier liter	melk
		four liter [of]	milk

b.		vier liters	melk
		four liters [of]	milk

For completeness’ sake, observe that some N1s are lexically restricted in the sense that they can only be used if a cardinal numeral is present. An example is given in (67). The N1man must appear in its singular form.

vier	man/*mannen	personeel
four	man/men [of]	personnel
'a staff consisting of four members'

[+] E. Attributive adjectives

On the basis of what we have seen so far, we may expect modification of N1 by means of an attributive modifier to be impossible in the case of purely quantificational nouns; attributive modifiers are used to restrict the set denoted by the modified noun, but purely quantificational nouns do not denote any such set. As shown in (68a), this expectation is indeed borne out. The remaining examples in (68) show that modification of the other N1s is possible.

a.	*	een	klein	paar	fouten	QN
		a	small	couple [of]	mistakes

b.	een	kleine	kilo	kaas	MN
	a	small	kilo [of]	cheese
	'nearly a kilo cheese'

c.		een	groot	glas	bier	ConN
		a	big	glass [of]	beer

d.		een	groot	stuk	kaas	PartN
		a	big	piece [of]	cheese

e.		een	grote	groep	studenten	ColN
		a	big	group [of]	students

There are, however, various restrictions on the use of the attributive adjectives in constructions of this type. If we are dealing with a measure noun like kilo, the adjective modifying N1 must be one of the following sorts: it can be quantificational, as veel in (69a), have an adverbial meaning indicating approximation, such as klein in (69b), or have a “partitive” meaning, such as half and heel in (69c).

a.	Er	stroomden	vele liters	wijn.
	there	streamed	many liters [of]	wine
	'Many liters of wine were served.'

b.	een kleine liter	wijn
	a small liter [of]	wine
	'nearly a liter of wine'

c.		een halve/hele liter	wijn
		a half/whole liter [of]	wine

Container, part and collective nouns exhibit similar restrictions: the examples in (70) to (72) show that quantificational, size and “partitive” adjectives are possible, whereas adjectives denoting other properties give rise to marked results.

a.		talrijke glazen bier
		numerous glasses [of] beer

a'.	??	een versierd glas bier
		a decorated glass [of] beer

b.		een grote kist sinaasappelen
		a big box [of] oranges

b'.	??	een houten kist sinaasappelen
		a wooden box [of] oranges

a.		een halve reep chocola
		a half bar [of] chocolate

a'.	?	een gestolen reep chocola
		a stolen bar [of] chocolate

b.		een klein stuk krijt
		a small piece [of] chalk

b'.	?	een gebroken stuk krijt
		a broken piece [of] chalk

a.		vele groepen studenten
		many groups [of] students

a'.	?	een verspreide groep studenten
		a dispersed group [of] students

b.		een enorme vlucht kraanvogels
		an enormous flight [of] cranes

b'.	?	een opgeschrikte vlucht kraanvogels
		a frightened flight [of] cranes

Recall from Section 4.1.1.2, sub IIB, that an attributive adjective preceding N1 can be used to modify N2. Thus, all types of attributive adjectives may precede these N1s provided that they can be construed with N2: an example such as een smakelijk glas bier'a tasty glass of beer' is acceptable with the attributive adjective expressing a property of the N2bier'beer'. An interesting case, about which we have little to say, is geef me een nieuw glas bier'give me a new glass of beer': in this example the adjective nieuw'new' is construed with N1, but it does not attribute a property to the glass in question; it is rather interpreted as “another glass of beer”.

[+] F. Summary

Table 3, which summarizes the findings of the previous subsections, shows that quantifier nouns can entertain far fewer syntagmatic relations than container, part and collective nouns. The latter can be preceded by all sorts of determiners, quantifiers and numerals, and do not exhibit special restrictions concerning attributive modification. The former, on the other hand, exhibit all kinds of restrictions: the element een preceding quantifier nouns may not be an indefinite article but must be something else, and definite determiners, quantifiers, numerals, possessive pronouns, and attributive modifiers do not occur at all; demonstrative pronouns may appear with some but not all quantifier nouns. Measure nouns again show a more mixed behavior: the notation —/+ indicates that the element in question can be used if the noun has a referential, but not if it has a quantificational interpretation. The findings in Table 3 are consistent with the classification given in (38), which groups the five noun types into the three supercategories in the top row.

Table 3: Determiners and quantificational modifiers of N1

	quantificational	mixed	referential
	QN	MN	ConN	PartN	ColN
indefinite article	—	+	+	+	+
definite article	—	—/+	+	+	+
demonstrative	—/+	—/+	+	+	+
possessive	—	—/+	+	+	+
quantifier	—	—/+	+	+	+
cardinal numeral	—	+	+	+	+
attributive modifier	—	+	+	+	+

[+] G. A note on recursive QCs

A final piece of evidence in favor of the classification in (38) comes from recursive QCs, that is, QCs that embed some other QC. The examples given so far always contain two nouns, but it is possible to have more complex cases in which a QC is embedded in a larger QC, which results in sequences of three or more nouns. Given the fact that the second part of a QC must denote a set, it is predicted that the embedded QC cannot be purely quantificational. The examples in (73) suggest that this expectation is indeed borne out. In these examples, N1 is a quantifier noun and it can be followed by any QC as long as the N1 of this QC is not a quantifier noun itself.

a.	*	een hoop	aantal	mensen
		a lot [of]	number [of]	people

b.		een aantal	kilo/kiloʼs	kaas
		a number [of]	kilo/kilos [of]	cheese

c.		een aantal	dozen	lucifers
		a number [of]	boxes [of]	matches

d.		een aantal	repen	chocola
		a number [of]	bars [of]	chocolate

e.		een aantal	groepen	studenten
		a number [of]	groups [of]	students

A problem for the claim that quantifier nouns cannot be used as the N1 of an embedded QC is that the measure noun kilo in (73b) may appear either in its singular or in its plural form; since we argued above that the measure noun is purely quantification in the former case, it seems that QCs headed by a purely quantificational N1 can be embedded within a larger QC after all. However, an alternative analysis seems possible. Consider the examples in (74a&b). We have seen that these examples differ in that (74a) simply refers to four kilos of cheese without any implication concerning the package units, whereas (74b) implies that we are dealing with four separate package units of one kilo each. This suggests that the structures of the two examples differ as indicated in the primed examples: in (74a) the numeral vier can be considered part of a complex quantifier vier kilo, whereas in (74b) it modifies the QC kiloʼs kaas.

a.		vier kilo	kaas
		four kilo [of]	cheese

b.		vier kiloʼs	kaas
		four kilos [of]	cheese

a'.

[[vier kilo] kaas]

b'.

[vier [kiloʼs kaas]]

It seems that a similar analysis can be given to the examples in (73b), repeated below as (75): in (75a), the complex quantifier een aantal kilo functions as N1 with kaas functioning as N2; in (75b), on the other hand, aantal functions as N1 and kiloʼs kaas is an embedded QC.

a.		een aantal	kilo	kaas
		a number [of]	kilo [of]	cheese

b.		een aantal	kiloʼs	kaas
		a number [of]	kilos [of]	cheese

a'.

[[een aantal kilo] kaas]

b'.

[een aantal [kiloʼs kaas]]

Independent evidence in favor of the analyses in the primed examples can be found in the examples in (76), which involve quantitative er. The contrast between the examples can be accounted for by the fact that the elided part corresponds to a single constituent in (76b), but not in (76a).

a.	??	Jan	heeft	[[vier kilo]	[kaas]]	en	ik	heb	er	[vijf [e]].
		Jan	has	four kilo [of]	cheese	and	I	have	er	five

b.		Jan	heeft	[vier [kiloʼs	kaas]]	en	ik	heb	er	[vijf [e]].
		Jan	has	four kilos [of]	cheese	and	I	have	er	five

The other examples in (73) are ambiguous in the same way. We will show this for container nouns. Consider the examples in (77). In (77a) the QC just indicates an amount of sugar, and we are therefore dealing with a complex quantifier vier/een paar zakken'four/a couple of bags', as indicated in (77a'). In (77b), on the other hand, we are dealing with a number of bags that contain sugar, and the phrase zakken suiker is therefore a QC embedded in a larger QC, as indicated in (77b').

a.	Er	zitten	vier/een paar	zakken suiker	in de marmelade.
	there	sits	four/a couple [of]	sacks [of] sugar	in the marmalade
	'The marmalade contains four/a couple of bags of sugar.'

a'.

[[vier/een paar zakken] suiker]

b.	Er	staan	vier/een paar	zakken suiker	op tafel.
	there	stand	four/a couple [of]	bags [of] sugar	on the.table
	'Four/a couple of bags of sugar stand on the table.'

b'.

[vier/een paar [zakken suiker]]

From this we can conclude that (73b) does not provide evidence against the claim that QCs headed by a purely quantificational N1 cannot be embedded within a larger QC. The apparent counterexample een aantal kilo suiker can be analyzed as involving a complex quantifier and therefore need not be considered a recursive QC. Note that the fact that (73a) does not allow an interpretation involving a complex quantifier is consistent with the fact that quantifier nouns cannot be preceded by a numeral either: *vier hoop/hopen mensen'*four lots of people'.
In (78) we give examples of recursive QCs, in which N1 is a measure noun. We find the same contrast as in (73): whereas container, part and collective nouns can be used as the N1 of an embedded QC, quantifier nouns cannot. The sign “$” indicates that the examples in (73c&e) are weird due to our knowledge of the world: boxes of matches normally do not come in units of a kilo, and it is not common to add up collections of entities until they have a certain weight. The main difference between the examples in (73) and (78) concerns the measure nouns: a measure noun cannot be followed by another measure noun in the singular. This supports our earlier claim that a QC headed by a purely quantificational N1 cannot be embedded in a larger QC: the unacceptability of (78b) is due to the fact that there is no complex quantifier *een kilo ons. Example (78b'), on the other hand, seems acceptable despite being marked due to the fact that it is difficult to conceptualize and the intended meaning can be more readily expressed by means of the phrase tien onsjes kaas'the ounces of cheese'.

a.	*	een	kilo	hoop	kaas
		a	kilo [of]	lot [of]	cheese

b.	*	een	kilo	ons	kaas
		a	kilo [of]	ounce [of]	cheese

b'.	?	een	kilo	onsjes	kaas
		a	kilo [of]	ounces [of]	cheese

c.	$	een	kilo	doosjes	lucifers
		a	kilo [of]	boxes [of]	matches

d.		een	kilo	plakjes	kaas
		a	kilo [of]	slices [of]	cheese

e.	$	een	kilo	kolonies	mieren
		a	kilo [of]	colonies [of]	ants

In (79) to (81), we give similar examples for container, part and collective nouns. The examples in (79) show that container nouns behave just like measure nouns. Example (79e) may again be weird for reasons concerning our knowledge of the world, but seems otherwise completely well-formed.

a.	*	een	doos	hoop	kaas
		a	box [of]	lot [of]	cheese

b.	*	een	doos	kilo	kaas
		box [of]	kilo [of]	cheese

b'.	?	een	doos	kiloʼs	kaas
		a	box [of]	kilos [of]	cheese

c.		een	doos	pakjes	lucifers
		a	box [of]	boxes [of]	matches

d.		een	schaal	plakjes	kaas
		a	dish [of]	slices [of]	cheese

e.	$	een	vrachtwagen	kolonies	mieren
		a	truck [of]	colonies [of]	ants

The part nouns in (80) cannot readily be used as the N1 of a recursive QC. This is, of course, due to the fact that they can only be followed by a non-count noun while the referential N1sheading the embedded QCs are count nouns.

a.	*	een	stuk	aantal	chocola
		a	piece [of]	number [of]	chocolate

b.	*	een	stuk	kilo	chocola
		a	piece [of]	kilo [of]	chocolate

b'.	*	een	stuk	kiloʼs	chocola
		a	piece [of]	kilos [of]	chocolate

c.	*	een	stuk	doos	chocola
		a	piece [of]	box [of]	chocolate

d.	*?	een	stuk	reep	chocola
		a	piece [of]	bar [of]	chocolate

e.	*	een	stuk	groep	eenden
		a	piece [of]	group [of]	ducks

The examples in (81) show that the collective nouns behave just like the measure and container nouns.

a.	*	een	verzameling	boel	thee
		a	collection [of]	lot [of]	tea

b.	*	een	verzameling	ons	thee
		a	collection [of]	ounce [of]	tea

b'.		een	verzameling	onsjes	thee
		a	collection [of]	ounces [of]	tea

c.		een	verzameling	zakjes	suiker
		a	collection [of]	bags [of]	sugar

d.		een	verzameling	repen	chocola
		a	collection [of]	bars [of]	chocolate

e.		een	verzameling	series	postzegels
		a	collection [of]	series [of]	stamps

[+] III. Some semantic properties

This subsection discusses some of the semantic properties of the different types of N1s, focusing on their quantificational meaning. We will see that quantifier nouns are quite similar to cardinal numerals in various respects.

[+] A. The quantificational force of N1s

In the previous subsections it has repeatedly been claimed that all N1s are quantificational in the sense that they indicate a certain amount or quantity of the denotation of N2. In this respect, they behave like cardinal numerals or quantifying adjectives like veel'many/much'. As is shown in (82), the latter elements can be questioned by means of the wh-word hoeveel'how many/much'. If N1s indeed have quantifier-like properties comparable to cardinal numerals or quantifying adjectives, we expect them to yield felicitous answers to the question in (82a) as well. Example (82b') shows that this indeed holds for quantifier nouns.

a.		Hoeveel boeken	heb	je	gelezen?
		how.many books	have	you	read

b.		drie/veel
		three/many

b'.		een boel/paar
		a lot/couple

In (83), it is shown that the same thing holds for the measure noun liter'liter' and the container noun glas'glass'. Note that the N1s can undergo pluralization and diminutivization, and can be preceded by a cardinal numeral. This clearly shows that we are dealing with referential nouns.

a.	Hoeveel bier	heb	je	gedronken?
	how.much beer	have	you	drunk
	'How much beer did you drink?'

b.		Een/één	liter/litertje.
		a/one	liter/literdim

b'.		Een/één	glas/glaasje.
		a/one	glass/glassdim

c.		Twee liter/?liters/litertjes.
		two liter/liters/litersdim

c'.		twee	glazen/glaasjes.
		two	glasses/glassesdim

Similarly, part and collective nouns in (84) and (85) can be used as answers to questions involving hoeveel, although there seems to be an additional restriction: if the part noun plak'slice' or the collective noun groep'group' is preceded by the indefinite article een'a', as in (84b) and (85b), the size of the slice/group must be indicated by means of diminutivization or addition of an attributive adjective like dik'big' or groot'big'; this is not needed if these nouns are preceded by a numeral, as in (84c) and (85c).

a.	Hoeveel cake	heb	je	gegeten?
	how.much cake	have	you	eaten
	'How much cake did you eat?'

b.		Een	plakje/*?(dikke)	plak.
		a	slicedim./big	slice

c.		Eén	plak/twee	plakken.
		one	slice/two	slices

a.		Hoeveel toeristen	heb	je	rondgeleid?
		how.many tourists	have	you	prt.-guided

b.		een	groepje/??(grote)	groep
		a	groupdim/big	group

c.		Eén groep/twee groepen.
		one group/two groups

[+] B. Weak versus strong quantification constructions

QCs can be either weak or strong noun phrases. On the weak reading, exemplified in the primeless examples in (86), these noun phrases get a nonspecific indefinite interpretation, that is, they simply refer to a set of new discourse entities. On the strong reading, exemplified in the primed examples, these noun phrases get a partitive interpretation, that is, they refer to a subset of a larger set of entities already given in the domain of discourse. The primed and primeless examples in (86a&d) show that whereas the indefinite article is always possible on the weak reading of QCs, it sometimes gives rise to a degraded result on the strong reading.

a.	Er	zijn	een aantal	studenten	verdwenen.	QN
	there	are	a number [of]	students	disappeared
	'A number of students have disappeared.'

a'.	Een aantal	studenten	zijn	verdwenen.
	a number [of]	students	are	disappeared
	'A number of the students have disappeared.'

b.	Er	is twee kilo	vlees	verdwenen.	MN
	there	is two kilo [of]	meat	disappeared
	'Two kilo of meat has disappeared.'

b'.	Twee kilo	vlees	is verdwenen.
	two kilo [of]	meat	is disappeared
	'Two kilo of the meat has disappeared.'

c.	Er	zijn	twee stukken/dozen	chocola	verdwenen.	PartN/ConN
	there	are	two pieces/boxes [of]	chocolate	disappeared
	'Two pieces/boxes of chocolate have disappeared.'

c'.	Twee stukken/dozen	chocola	zijn	verdwenen.
	two pieces/boxes [of]	chocolate	are	disappeared
	'Two pieces/boxes of the chocolate have disappeared.'

d.	Er	is één/een kudde	schapen	geslacht.	ColN
	there	is one/a flock [of]	sheep	slaughtered
	'A flock of sheep has been slaughtered.'

d'.	Eén/*Een kudde	schapen	is	geslacht.
	one/a flock [of]	sheep	is	slaughtered
	'One flock of the sheep has been slaughtered.'

[+] C. Definite and indefinite N1s

All N1s indicate a certain amount or quantity. The difference between quantifier nouns and the other types of N1s is that quantifier nouns indicate an indefinite amount or quantity, whereas the other types indicate an often conventionally or contextually determined definite amount or quantity. The difference is brought out clearly in constructions with the preposition per'per'. This preposition can be followed by a cardinal numeral like vier'four' but not by a quantifier like veel'many/much', which indicates some indefinite amount or quantity.

a.		per vier
		per four

b.	*	per veel
		per many/much

The examples in (88) show that the same difference can be found between quantifier nouns like boel and hoop, which indicate an indefinite amount of quantities, and the other N1s, which indicate a (conventionally or contextually determined) amount or quantity.

a.	*	per boel/hoop
		per lot/lot

d.		per plak
		per slice

b.		per kilo
		per kilo

e.		per dozijn
		per dozen

c.		per kop
		per cup

The result is often marked if per is followed by a plural noun, although acceptability may vary depending on the context and on the ease of conceptualization; an example such as (89c) gives rise to a perfectly acceptable result in the following example found on the internet: Deze speculaas weegt ca. 125 gram per plak en wordt per twee plakken verkocht'This spiced biscuit weighs about 125 grams and is sold in sets of two pieces'. The fact that (89a) is fully acceptable with the singular form of kilo shows that a phrase like twee kilo does not function as a plural noun phrase; it simply refers to a definite quantity. The marked status of the plural form kiloʼs shows that the noun phrase twee kiloʼs'two kilos' is plural: it refers to two discrete entities of one kilo each.

a.		per twee kilo/*kiloʼs
		per two kilosg/pl

c.	??	per twee plakken
		per two slices

b.	??	per twee koppen
		per two cups

d.	*?	per twee koppels
		per two couples

[+] IV. Some similarities between N1s and cardinal numerals

Subsection III has shown that N1s and cardinal numerals share a number of semantic properties. Therefore, it seems useful to compare the two types of element in other respects as well. This subsection shows that they both license so-called quantitative er and exhibit similar behavior under modification and coordination.

[+] A. Quantitative er

If N1s are quantificational, they may be expected to co-occur with quantitative er. The primeless examples in (90) show, however, that this expectation is borne out for the quantifier and the measure nouns only. Note that the measure noun in (90b) must be followed by the sequence of + numeral, which is probably due to the fact that this makes the quantifier less definite. Given the requirement that the phonetically empty noun is +count, it does not come as a surprise that measure nouns like liter give rise to a degraded result due to the fact that they normally combine with non-count N2s. Given that part nouns also combine with non-count N2s, we might in principle give a similar account for the unacceptability of (90d), but the unacceptability of (90c&e) shows that there is more involved than simply a count/non-count distinction: the ungrammaticality of (90c-e) is clearly related to the referential status of the N1s.

a.	Ik	heb	er	nog	[een paar/boel [e]].	QN
	I	have	er	still	a couple/lot
	'I have still got a couple of them.'

b.	Ik	heb	er	nog	[een kilo	*(of twee) [e]].	MN
	I	have	er	still	a kilo	or two
	'I have still got about two kilos of it.'

b'.	*	Ik	heb	er	nog	[een liter	*(of twee) [e]].
		I	have	er	still	a liter	or two

c.	*	Ik	heb	er	nog	[een doos	(of twee) [e]].	ConN
		I	have	er	still	a box	or two

d.	*	Ik	heb	er	nog	[een reep (of twee) [e]].	PartN
		I	have	er	still	a bar or two

e.	*	Ik	heb	er	nog	[een kudde	(of twee) [e]].	ColN
		I	have	er	still	a herd	or two

Note that the intended contentions of the ungrammatical examples can be expressed by means of the examples in (91), in which N2 is simply left implicit. This is impossible with quantifier nouns like paar, which is typically preceded by the unstressed indefinite article een'a'; the noun paar in (90a) can only be interpreted as a collective noun, which is typically preceded by a numeral in this context.

a.		Ik	heb	nog	één/*?een paar.	QN
		I	have	still	one/a couple

b.		Ik	heb	nog	twee liter(s).	MN
		I	have	still	two liter

c.		Ik	heb	nog	twee dozen.	ConN
		I	have	still	two boxes

d.		Ik	heb	nog	twee repen.	PartN
		I	have	still	two bars

e.		Ik	heb	nog	twee kuddes.	ColN
		I	have	still	two herds

Example (92a) shows that QCs headed by the quantifier noun aantal may trigger either singular or plural agreement on the finite verb (cf. Section 4.1.1.2, sub I), and the same thing is shown for the measure noun kilo in (92b). The primed counterparts with quantitative er, on the other hand, are compatible with plural agreement only, which shows that in these constructions the verb agrees with the phonetically empty N2 that we postulated for these constructions. We added example (92c) to show that in constructions without quantitative er agreement is always triggered by N1.

a.		Daar	lopen/loopt	nog	een aantal studenten.
		there	walkpl/sg	still	a couple [of] students

a'.		Daar	lopen/*loopt	er	nog	[een aantal [e]].
		there	walkpl/sg	er	still	a couple

b.		Daar	liggen/ligt	nog	een kilo of twee	appels.
		there	liepl/sg	still	a kilo or two [of]	apples

b'.		Daar	liggen/*ligt	er	nog	[een kilo of twee [e]].
		there	liepl/sg	er	still	a kilo or two

c.		Daar	ligt/*liggen	nog	een kilo of twee.
		there	liepl/sg	still	a kilo or two

The primed examples in (93) show that N1 differs from N2 in that it cannot be replaced by a nominal gap licensed by quantitative er: this holds both for the quantifier noun aantal in (93a'), and for referential nouns like the part noun stuk'piece' in (93b'). The two types of N1 exhibit divergent behavior when it comes to replacing the phrase N1 + N2: the doubly-primed examples show that this is easily possible if N1 is a referential noun but not if it is a quantifier noun. This different behavior need not be related to the semantic distinction between the two classes, but may simply be due to the fact that the quantifier noun aantal cannot be preceded by a numeral/weak quantifier; the indefinite article een'a' does not license quantitative er.

a.		Ik	heb	nog	een aantal	mededelingen.
		I	have	yet	a number [of]	announcements

a'.

Ik heb er nog [een [e]mededelingen].

a''.

Ik heb er nog [een [e]].

b.		Ik	heb	nog	twee stukken	chocolade.
		I	have	still	two pieces [of]	chocolate

b'.

Ik heb er nog [twee [e]chocola].

b''.

Ik heb er nog [twee [e]].

[+] B. Modification

Cardinal numerals can be modified by variety of modifiers; cf. Section 6.1.1.4. In this subsection, we will be concerned with the modifiers in (94): the modifier minstens'at least' in (94a) indicates that the cardinal number provides a lower bound, whereas hoogstens'at most' in (94b) indicates that it provides an upper bound. The modifiers in (94c) have an approximate meaning. The primed examples show that these modifiers cannot be used with quantifiers like veel'many' or weinig'few'.

a.		minstens tien glazen
		at.least ten glasses

a'.	*	minstens veel glazen
		at.least many glasses

b.		hoogstens tien glazen
		at.most three glasses

b'.	*	hoogstens veel glazen
		at.most many glasses

c.		bijna/ongeveer/precies tien glazen
		nearly/about/precisely ten glasses

c'.	*	bijna/ongeveer/precies veel glazen
		nearly/about/precisely many glasses

The examples in (95) show that most N1s can be preceded by the modifiers in (94). The only exception are the quantifier nouns, which is not surprising given that they indicate an indefinite amount/quantity, just like the quantifier veel in the primed examples in (94); cf. Subsection IIIC. The examples in (95e&e') show that modification of collective nouns is only possible if the collection consists of a default number of entities; if this is not the case (as with a flock or a group), the resulting construction is unacceptable.

a.	*	minstens/hoogstens/bijna/ongeveer/precies	een boel/paar	studenten
		at.least/at.most/nearly/about/precisely	a lot couple [of]	students

b.		minstens/hoogstens/bijna/ongeveer/precies	een kilo	vuurwerk
		at.least/at.most/nearly/about/precisely	a kilo [of]	fireworks

c.		minstens/hoogstens/bijna/ongeveer/precies	een emmer	appels
		at.least/at.most/nearly/about/precisely	a bucket [of]	apples

d.		minstens/hoogstens/bijna/ongeveer/precies	een plak	koek
		at.least/at.most/nearly/about/precisely	a slice [of]	cake

e.		minstens/hoogstens/bijna/ongeveer/precies	een team	voetballers
		at.least/at.most/nearly/about/precisely	a team [of]	footballers

e'.	*	minstens/hoogstens/bijna/ongeveer/precies	een kudde	schapen
		at.least/at.most/nearly/about/precisely	a flock [of]	sheep

The fact that the modifiers in (95) cannot immediately precede N1, but must precede een, suggests that it is the full phrase een N1 that acts as a quantifier. This will be clear from the fact that in examples such as (96a) the modifier must be adjacent to the modified numeral. Finally, it can be noted that in cases in which N1 is preceded by a numeral, it is the numeral and not N1 that is modified. This accounts for the fact that, in contrast to (95e'), (96b) is acceptable.

a.		<*bijna>	de <bijna>	tien studenten
		nearly	the	ten students

b.		minstens/hoogstens/bijna/ongeveer/precies	tien kuddes	schapen
		at.least/at.most/nearly/about/precisely	ten flocks [of]	sheep

[+] C. Scope and coordination

The examples in (97) show that cardinal numerals and quantifiers may take scope over nominal phrases of different sizes: in the primeless examples, their scope is restricted to one conjunct, whereas in the primed examples they may have both conjuncts in their scope.

a.		[[vier mannen]	en	[vier vrouwen]]
		four men	and	four/many women

a'.		[vier [mannen en vrouwen]]
		four men and women

b.		[[veel mannen]	en	[veel vrouwen]]
		four men	and	four/many women

b'.		[veel [mannen en vrouwen]]
		many men and women

The examples differ in the scope of the attributive modifier/numeral: in the primeless examples the numeral/quantifier has scope only over the noun immediately following it, whereas in the primed examples it has scope over both nouns. This difference is clearest with the numeral vier'four' in the (a)-examples: (97a) refers to a set of people with cardinality 8, whereas the phrase in (97b') refers to a set of people with cardinality 4. The difference is less clear with the quantifier veel'may' in the (b)-examples, due to the fact that (97b) implies (97b'). However, the same thing does not hold in the other direction: in a situation with 90 women and 4 men, (97b') might be appropriate whereas (97b) is not.
The quantifier noun hoop has the same property as the quantifier veel: whereas (98a) implies (98b), the implication does not hold the other way round. This shows that in (98b) the quantifier noun must also be assumed to take scope over the conjoined phrase dieven en inbrekers.

a.		[[een hoop dieven]	en	[een hoop inbrekers]]
		a lot [of] thieves	and	a lot [of] burglars

b.		[een hoop [dieven en inbrekers]]
		a lot [of] thieves and burglars

Measure nouns, on the other hand, act like cardinal numerals: the full noun phrase in (99a) refers to a total quantity of two kilos of potatoes and vegetables, whereas in (99a') it refers to a total amount of just one kilo. more or less the same thing holds for the container noun glas'glass' in (99b&b'): (99b) refers to two glasses, one filled with gin and one with tonic, whereas (99b') refers to a single glass filled with a mixture of gin and tonic. The collective nouns also behave in this way, but this will go unillustrated here. Example (99c) show, finally, that part nouns like stuk'piece' cannot take scope over both conjuncts: this is due to the fact that QC with these nouns must refer to a “homogeneous” entity.

a.		[[een kilo aardappelen]	en	[een kilo groente]]
		a kilo [of] potatoes	and	a kilo [of] vegetables

a'.		[een kilo [aardappelen en groente]]
		a kilo [of] potatoes and vegetables

b.		[[een glas [gin]]	en	[een glas [tonic]]]
		a glass [of] gin	and	a glass [of] tonic

b'.		[een glas [gin en tonic]]
		a glass [of] gin and tonic

c.		een stuk koek	en	*(een stuk)	chocola
		a piece [of] biscuit	and	a piece [of]	chocolate

[+] D. Conclusion

This subsection has compared the three types of N1s with numerals and quantifiers. Quantifier nouns have been shown to pattern with quantifiers. Container, part and collective nouns, on the other hand, rather pattern with cardinal numerals, notwithstanding the fact that the latter, but not the former, license quantitative er. Measure nouns again exhibit ambiguous behavior.

References:

⇑ Back to top

About this article

Author(s): Hans Broekhuis

Category: Dutch Syntax

Keywords: AgreementApproximative ModifierArticleAttributiveCoordinationDiminutiveIndefinite ArticleModifierPossessive PronounPrepositionPronounQuantitativeerScalar ModifierSpurious Indefinite ArticleSpurious indefinite article eenSubject-verb Agreementeen

Version: 1.0, December 2015

Version history:

version	editor(s)	date	remarks
1.0	Hans Broekhuis	December 2015

report errorprintcite

Jump to:

introduction
references
related articles