COUNT AND MASS NOUNS
David Lee
(2001) reprinted from Chapter 8 of Cognitive Linguistics, South Melbourne: Oxford
University Press, pp. 137–145.
We have assumed so far that nouns come with their count status already established. Dictionaries
tell us that a certain word is count or noncount, or, in certain cases, both. In the paper below,
David Lee tries to account for count status using an approach called Cognitive Linguistics, which
seeks to find a semantic (i.e. meaning-based) rationale for grammatical phenomena. We have
D2
David Lee
192
E X T E N S I O N
already seen in C2 that the count status of a noun can change if a specific meaning is needed
(e.g. ‘beer’ can become ‘a beer’). But Lee goes much further, arguing that count status is principally
determined by meaning.
While this approach is not free from criticism, the paper certainly provides some interesting
insights into the way the count status of a noun may have arisen, historically at least. And it
serves as a useful reminder that we should not blindly accept simplified, pedagogic rules based on
form without looking for deeper, scientific rules based on meaning (as we saw in A1 regarding
the difference between ‘some’ and ‘any’).
A few words about the text. Lee uses the term ‘mass’ rather than ‘noncount’, as some other
grammarians do. A central concept in the paper is that of ‘construal’ (from the verb ‘construe’).
This refers to how we perceive or make sense of the world. Another important concept (which Lee
is disagreeing with) is arbitrariness: the idea that connections (between meaning and grammar
in this case) are random or accidental. Finally, note the use of asterisks to indicate unacceptable
forms.
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |