Sommige or sommigen?Factors conditioning the –e or –en of

independently used quantifiers

Eric Hoekstra

Taalkunde In Nederland-Dag 2013

2. Two uses of quantifiers

• In an attributive construction.

• Independently used (nominalised).

3. Attributive use

Beide fammen binne oan it dûnsjen.both women are at the dancing“Both young women aredancing.”

NB The attributive quantifier does not display variation between –e and – en.

4. Independent use

Beide / Beiden binne oan it dûnsjen.both are at the dancing“Both are dancing.”

NB The independently used quantifier may in actual practice be written with –e or with –en.

The same facts hold of Dutch.

5. Prescriptive rules for Dutch independently used quantifiers

They are written with –n (ANS 1997:366) iff(i) they don’t have an antecedent within the text(ii) they refer to humans.Otherwise, write –e.

6. Relevant factors (hypotheses)

1. The semantics of the antecedent (person or not)

2. The specific lexical item involved3. The position in the syntactic structure4. The position of the antecedent

(intratextual or not)

Only factors 1-3 are investigated here.

7. Type of construction

Partitive construction automatically entails an intratextual antecedent:

Sommige fan ‘e feintsjessome of the boys

8. Relevance

The claims made in the literature are all based on the author’s intuitions, not on corpus based research, with the exception of Popkema (1979).

9. Popkema (1979)

• Does not calculate significance.• Does not calculate phi-value (explanatory

value).• Has as his aim to establish a prescriptive rule.• Presents extensive quantitative data.

10. Factor 1

Is there a correlation between the use of –e or –en, and the presence of a human or nonhuman antecedent?

(Significance and phi-coefficient:http://faculty.vassar.edu/lowry/tab2x2.html)

11. Quantifier: beide(n) ‘both’

beide(n) + human - human-en 71 14-e 219 97

p = 0.9 % phi = 13% source: Popkema

-En correlates with human antecedent.The correlation does not explain much of the observed variation (phi = 13 %)

12. Quantifier: inkelde(n) ‘a few’

p < 0.1 % phi = 66% source: Popkema

-En correlates with a human antecedent.The correlation explains a lot of the observed variation.

inkelde(n) + human - human-en 46 3-e 2 6

13. Sommige and somlike ´some´

p < 0.1 % phi = 60% source: Popkema

-En correlates with a human antecedent.The correlation explains a lot of the observed variation.

sommige(n) + somlike (n)

+ human - human

-en 44 2-e 5 7

14. Ferskate ‘several’

p > 5 % source: Popkema

Not significant.

ferskate(n) + human - human-en 2 0-e 20 6

15. Correlation –en with the presence of a human antecedent

The presence of a human antecedent promotes the use of -en, for low degree quantifiers.

beiden‘both’

inkelden‘a few’

somliken ‘some’

ferskaten‘several’

+ + + -

16. Factor 2

Is there a correlation between the specific quantifier involved and the choice of –e / -en?

(Data on the previous slide already suggested this)

17. Comparison inkelde ‘a few’ with ferskate ‘several’

p < 0.1 % phi = 76 % source: Popkema

There is a correlation between the choice of quantifier and –E / -EN, and it explains a lot of the observed variation.

inkelde ferskate-en 49 2-e 8 26

18. Comparison sommige+somlike ‘some’ with ferskate ‘several’

p < 0.1 % phi = 68% source: Popkema

The correlation explains a lot of the observed variation.

sommige+somlike ferskate-en 46 2-e 12 26

19. Conclusion

There is a partial correlation between the use of –e or –en, and the specific quantifier involved. Medium degree quantifiers use the -e more often than low degree quantifiers.

20. Factor 3

Is there a correlation between the choice of suffix (–e / -en) and type of construction in which the independently used quantifier is found?

Example of syntactic construction: the partitive construction.

21. Partitive construction

* Beide(n) fan ‘efeintsjes.both of the boys

Inkelde(n) / somlike(n), sommige(n) / ferskate(n) a fewsome some severalfan ‘e feintsjes.of the bousboys

Beide ‘both’ is anyhow excluded from the partitive.

22. Inkelde(n) ‘a few’

p = 1,7 % phi = 41 % source: Popkema

The partitive correlates with –e, as compared to other constructions.

inkelde(n) partitive other-en 2 47-e 3 5

23. Sommige ‘some’

p < 0.1 % phi = 29 % source: FLC

The partitive correlates with –e, as compared to other constructions.

sommige(n) partitive other-en 10 102-e 12 24

24. Somlike ‘some’

p < 0.1 % phi = 32 % source: FLC

The partitive correlates with –e, as compared to other constructions.

somlike(n) Partitive other-en 40 307-e 15 12

25. Ferskate ‘several’

p > 5% source: FLC

Not significant (NB too few instances).

ferskate(n) partitive other

-en 1 2

-e 17 13

26. Conclusion

The partitive shows a preference for –e as compared with other constructions, for low degree quantifiers.

Hence construction type is a relevant factor.

27. Overall conclusions

The following three factors are relevant forthe choice of suffix (–E / -EN):

1. Human / nonhuman reference2. Specific quantifier involved3. Type of construction

The ANS promotes major and minor tendencies to absolute prescriptive rules (as far as Frisian is concerned, but by and large Dutch seems to exhibit similar facts).

Thank you for your attention!

ehoekstra@fryske-akademy.nl