All Talks

A psycholinguistic typology of possessive classifiers

We use psycholinguistic methods to further the typology of possessive classifiers. We investigate six Oceanic languages of Vanuatu and New Caledonia with varying inventories of possessive classifiers: Merei (2), Lewo (3), Vatlongos (4), North Ambrym (5), Nêlêmwa (20) and Iaai (23). We discuss the results of three experiments: (a) free listing: a participant hears a classifier and responds with associated nouns; (b) possessive labelling: a participant hears a list of nouns and responds with an associated classifier; and (c) card sorting: a participant groups pictures based on classifiers in their language.

The data has revealed two previously unexplored typological dimensions: (i) a difference in the hierarchical type of classifier and (ii) a difference in the prototypical membership of the classifiers.

Evidence from all three experiments shows the classifiers are not homogeneous within and across systems; rather there is a cline from major to minor. Major classifiers have a large number of associated nouns and are open to new nouns, whereas minor classifiers have a limited number of associated nouns and are closed to new nouns. Our studies suggest that participants prefer to use major classifiers, even when a minor classifier would be more semantically precise. This suggests that the major classifiers are more cognitively salient than the minor classifiers.

Evidence from free-listing specifically reveals language internal differences in the structuring of a classifier’s associated nouns. An analysis using Sutrop’s Cognitive Salience Index (2001) indicates diversity across classifiers: some have a single prototypical member whereas others have multiple prototypes. This reveals that the semantic domains of some classifiers are more unified than others.

We advance the typology of nominal classification, giving quantitative measures to differentiate classifier types. We highlight the value of a psycholinguistic methods, which are used to investigate variation across different systems, supporting a unified account of nominal classification.

References
Sutrop, Urmas. 2001. List Task and a Cognitive Salience Index. Field Methods 13(3): 263-276

All Talks