Work Papers of the Summer

Institute of Linguistics, University

of North Dakota Session

Volume 46 Article 2

January 2002

The structural status of Bora classifiers

David J. Weber
SIL-UND

How does access to this work benefit you? Let us know!

Follow this and additional works at: https://commons.und.edu/sil-work-papers

Part of the Linguistics Commons

Recommended Citation
Weber, David J. (2002) "The structural status of Bora classifiers," Work Papers of the Summer Institute of
Linguistics, University of North Dakota Session: Vol. 46, Article 2.
DOI: 10.31356/silwp.vol46.02
Available at: https://commons.und.edu/sil-work-papers/vol46/iss1/2

This Article is brought to you for free and open access by UND Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for
inclusion in Work Papers of the Summer Institute of Linguistics, University of North Dakota Session by an
authorized editor of UND Scholarly Commons. For more information, please contact
und.commons@library.und.edu.
 The structural status of Bora classifiers1
David Weber
I claim that Bora classifiers have the structural status of (bound) nouns, based on facts like the
following:
1. Some classifiers also occur as independent nouns (possibly with minor phonological differ-
ences).
2. Classifiers have the referential properties typical of nouns. Like typical nominals, they denote
classes of objects and may refer to a member of the class they denote. They are never used
to attribute properties to another referring expresssion.
3. Classifiers have the distribution typical of nouns: they may be a clausal subject, they may
be modified by a relative clause, they may have a prepositional complement, and so forth.
And classifiers head noun phrases, a claim for which various arguments are given, among them
one based on the remarkable similarity between the host-classifier and possessor-possessed con-
structions.

Introduction
Following Thiesen and Weber [4], I claim here that Bora classifiers are bound nouns, ones with rather general
denotations, and that they head noun phrases. Phrases like ath EREE–kpa (worthless-hslabi) ‘worthless plank
(table, bench, machete, etc.)’, I claim, have structures like the following:
[NP [Adj áth ÉRÉÈ– ] [N –kpà ] ]
worthless hslabi
This paper contributes to the study of the typology of classifier systems (Senft [3], Aikhenvald [1]) by
providing another example of a system in which the classifiers are very noun-like.2
Section 1 gives reasons for believing that classifiers are nouns. Section 2 gives reasons to believe that
classifiers head their phrases.

1 Classifiers are nouns

This section presents reasons for believing that classifiers are nouns. They are not typical nouns in that
(1) their meanings are generally less specific than those of nouns, and (2) they are bound, being affixed (or
cliticized?) to a preceding noun, adjective, or verb. Of course, neither of these characteristics should deter
us from recognizing that they are nouns.
1Work Papers of the Summer Institute of Linguistics, University of North Dakota Session, Volume 46
(2002).
http://www.und.edu/dept/linguistics/wp/2002Weber.PDF
Copyright @2002 by SIL International.
This paper was read at the 2003 International Congress of Americanists, Santiago, Chile, in the symposium
“Integración de una de las últimas piezas del rompecabezas amazónico: El complejo cultural y lingüı́stico
del Caquetá-Putumayo.”
2 The important part of the claim I wish to make is not that classifiers are nouns—indeed, parts of speech

may be epiphenomenal, as suggested by Croft [2]—but that classifiers have many of the formal, distributional
and semantic properties typical of nouns.
Weber: Bora classifiers 2

1.1 Some classifiers are also free nouns

For some classifiers there are corresponding (free) nouns, with perhaps minor differences between the bound
and free forms. For example, corresponding to the classifier –o:Pi hjaguari, as in 1a, is the noun o:Pi ‘jaguar,
dog’, as in 1b and c:
L
(1) a. tsh á–o:Pı̀ ‘one (jaguar)’
b. ò:Pı́–:pj È ‘jaguar (SgM)’
c. ò:Pı́–mj È ‘jaguars (AnPl)’
The classifier –ha hshelteri denotes things having an interior and can serve as a covering, e.g., a house, a
pair of pants, a shirt, etc. However, when ha: is used as a noun, it refers to a house, and only to a house.
Other examples are:
classifier free noun
ı́–pjh Èx kh ò ‘this night’ ph Èx kh ò ‘night’
th É–x kh ò:hı̀ ‘that day’ kh ò:hı̀ ‘day’
th É–x kh È:mÈ ‘that old man’ kh È:mÈ ‘old man’
tsh á–nẀijpà ‘one month’ nẀijpà ‘moon, sun’
The classifier –mi htransporti denotes objects that can transport people. Following different modifiers it
may refer to canoes, cars, airplanes, and so forth; e.g.:
(2) kh Ẁ:hẂkpà–mı̀ ‘launch’ (i.e. a boat with an onboard motor)
fire.burning-htransporti
ı́x tsjh ı́–È–mı̀ ‘car, truck’
upland-per-htransporti
kh á:mÉ–È–mı̀ ‘airplane’
high-per-htransporti
The cognate noun mi:–nE (transport-høi) refers to a canoe.
The significance of such cases is this: if Bora classifiers are themselves nouns, then it is no surprise that
some are also used as independent nouns. Indeed, this is what one might expect.

1.2 Classifiers have the referential properties typical of nouns

Classifiers are like typical nominal elements in denoting classes of objects, that is, ones that, prototypically,
can be localized in space and persist over time. For example, –mi htransporti denotes the class of objects
that can transport people: canoes, cars, airplanes, and so forth.
1. Some classifiers are like pronouns in denoting small, deictically-determined classes singletons; e.g., –tsj E
hSgFi, –mWtsh i hDuMi, –mE hAnPli, and so forth.

2. Some classifiers denote large classes of objects that share one or more properties; e.g., –i:Pj o hsticki
denotes the class of things that are relatively long and slender, roughly cylindrical, and have an
orientation (toward one end); –hi hdiski denotes the class of things that are disk-like, which includes
pills, fields,. . . and even nations.

3. Some classifiers denote classes of objects defined rather narrowly; e.g., –tsh i hchildi, –PE htreei, and
–pa hboxi.
No matter whether broad or narrow, whether deictically-determined or not, classifiers are never used to
attribute their properties to some other referring expresssion (like adjectives do); they are only used to refer
to an object that has these properties.
Classifiers may also bind anaphors. For example, in 3 –mE hAnPli binds the anaphor i ‘self’:
(3) ı̀mı́tsj É–mÉ ı̀ máx tsjh ò–nÈ ‘They want to eat.’
want-hAnPli self eat-høi
Weber: Bora classifiers 3

1.3 Classifiers have the distribution typical of nouns

Classifiers are affixed (or cliticized?) to a preceding noun, adjective, or verb. We now briefly consider these
three distributional possibilities.
Classifiers following nouns. Canonical classifiers normally accompany simple nouns, but Bora classi-
fiers do so only rarely. There are cases like the following three, but they are not common.
First, Bora has a class of nouns that denote a general concept and must be used with a classifier. The
classifier picks out a particular aspect of that concept to form a referring expression. For example, mWtsh i:tsh i
denotes a pear apple tree generally, with all its parts (roots, trunk, branches, leaves, fruit, flowers) or related
concepts, like a grove of such trees. A classifier is used to refer to one of these:
(4) a. mẂtsh ı́:tsh ı̀–pà ‘pear apple fruit’
b. mẂtsh ı́:tsh ı̀–PÈ ‘pear apple tree’
c. mẂtsh ı́:tsh ı̀–páhẀ ‘pear apple grove’
Note that the denotation of such expressions is an object of the type referred to by the classifier. This is
evidence that the classifier heads the noun phrase, as discussed further in section 2.1.
Second, multiple classifiers may be used (although such cases are rare):
(5) a. mẂtsh ı́:tsh ı́–PÈ–Pá:mı̀ ‘leaf of a pear apple tree’
pear apple-htreei-hleafi
b. ẂmÉ–PÈ–kpà ‘plank’
tree-htreei-hslabi
c. ẂmÉ–PÈ–kh ò ‘pole’
tree-htreei-hpolei
Note that 5a refers to a leaf, 5b to a plank, and 5c to a pole. None refers to a tree. See section 2.3 for further
discussion of such cases.
Third, some bound nouns form referring expressions only when combined with a classifier. For example,
WmE–, ı́na– and mı́nE– never occur except when followed by a classifier, as in ẂmÈ–PÈ ‘tree’, ı́nà–Pá:mı̀
‘leaf’ and mı́nÈ–x th È ‘peccary’.
Classifiers following adjectives. A classifier may follow an adjective (and other nominal modifiers,
e.g., quantifiers) to form a noun phrases referring to an object of the type denoted by the classifier. For
example, consider the noun phrases in 6 having the adjective mitjh a ‘big’:
(6) a. mı́tjh à–PÈ ‘big tree’
big-htreei
b. mı́tjh à–kpà ‘big plank (bench, table, machete, etc.)’
big-hslabi
c. mı́tjh à–Pá:mı̀ ‘big leaf (paper, book, etc.)’
big-hleafi
Classifiers following verbs. A classifiers may follow a verb to indicate the subject of the clause, as in
7:
(7) áı́:Bj É–Pá:mı̀ ‘The leaf (paper, book, etc.) is burning.’
burn-hleafi
A classifiers may follow a subordinate verb (indicated by high tone on its first syllable, here represented by
S) as the head of a relative clause:
S
(8) ó áx tjh Ẁmı́–ij [øi aı́–:Bj È ]–hài ‘I saw a house that was burning.’
I see-hti burn-sIn -hshelteri
With this by way of introduction, let’s consider more specific ways in which classifiers have the distribution
typical of nouns.
First, morphologically, classifiers are like nouns in bearing inflection for number and case, as in 9:
(9) tsjh ÉmÈ–mÉ–ijhı̀–kh È ‘to the sick people’
be.ill-hAnPli-pl-objAn
Weber: Bora classifiers 4

Second, classifiers are like nouns in that they may be the subject of a sentence, as illustrated with –:ph E
hSgMi, –PE htreei and –ha hshelteri in 10:
(10) th á:pò–:pÈ ‘He treats (medically).’
áı́:Bj È–PÈ ‘The tree is burning.’
ı́mı́:Bj È–hà ‘The house (clothes, etc.) is finished.’
Third and quite significantly, preverbal overt subjects do not co-occur with such classifier subjects. This is
because the classifier is the subject; it is not simply an agreement marker. (A subject indicated by a classifier
following the verb may be followed by an overt subject noun phrase, but the overt subject is appositive to
the classifier subject.)
Fourth, like nouns, classifiers may head relative clauses (either restrictive or nonrestrictive). The initial
syllable of the relative clause’s verb bears high tone, as characteristic of subordinate clauses. (This high tone
is represented with S.) Examples follow:
S
(11) ó áx tjh Ẁmı́–ij th È:–mı̀ [tı̀–pj È ımı́páx tsjh ò ]–mı̀
I see-hti that-htransporti that-hSgMi fix -htransporti
‘I saw the canoe (launch, car, etc.) that he fixed.’
S
(12) [ó–ph ÉÈ ò ts ı x kh ò ]–hà tsh Ẃ:kh à nóx kh ànẂ–Pı̀
I-rem I sew -hshelteri already deteriorate-hti
‘The clothes that I sewed are now deteriorated.’
And fifth, like nouns, classifiers may have “prepositional” complements as, for example, in English (a)
table like this one. In Bora, this is ı́–kpá–ÈmÉ–kpà ‘a plank (table, machete, etc.) like this one’, in which
–EmE– ‘similar to’ is a postposition. Compare the structures in Figure 1:

Figure 1: A plank like this one.

a. NP b. NP
HH 
H
 HH
 H  H
N PP PP N
H
table
 H HH
P NP  H –kpà
NP P
H
 H -hslabi
like Det N HH
DET N –ÈmÉ
this one -like
ı́– –kpá
this -hslabi

In both cases there are two noun phrases. The lower refers to the object of comparison while the higher
refers to the object being likened to it. In Bora both of these noun phrases are headed by an instance of
–kpa hslabi.

2 Classifiers head their phrases

Within Bora noun phrases classifiers play a role typical of nouns, that is, they head the noun phrase. The
syntax of noun phrase formation is played out internal to the (phonological) word. Indeed, the syntax of
noun phrases external to the word amounts to little more than apposition; see Thiesen and Weber [4] for
further discussion.
I claim that classifiers are the structural heads of their phrases (with the possible exception of classifiers
Weber: Bora classifiers 5

used as post-verbal subjects3 ). Given that classifiers are nouns, what is projected from them are noun
phrases. What precedes (nonfinite verb, subordinate verb, demonstrative, numeral, quantifier, adjective,
etc.) is a modifier.
In the following sections various arguments are presented.

2.1 What gives a noun phrase its character?

The head of a phrase is what gives the phrase its character. Formally, a head’s features are shared by the
phrase projected from it. For example, assuming that dog is [+animate] and brown is [+color], the phrase the
brown dog is [+animate] because its head, dog, is [+animate]. It is not [+color] because brown is a modifier,
not the phrase’s head. (The phrase very brown is [+color] because its head, brown, is [+color].)
For example, kpa:hakh W ‘know’ is a verb, perhaps bearing features like [+cognitive], these shared with
L
its nonfinite form kpa:hakh W ‘knowing’. Suppose this is combined with with –Pa:mi hleafi (leaf, paper, book,
etc.), which has features like [+nominal, −verbal, −abstract, −animate]. Which features prevail? Those of
the nonfinite verb or those of the classifier? Because kpà:hákh Ẁ–Pá:mı̀ means ‘book’, it is clear that the
features of the classifier prevail, not those of the nonfinite verb. This noun phrase would, like its head, be
[+nominal, −verbal, −abstract, −animate].

2.2 Ambiguity with mitjh a ‘many, big’

That the classifier heads the noun phrase is quite clear when we consider mitjh a, which is ambiguous between
‘many [+plural]’ and ‘big’ (unspecified for number). This ambiguity can be seen in 13a:
(13) a. mı́tjh à–mÈ ‘many men (or male animals)’
many/big-hAnPli or ‘big men (or male animals)’
b. mı́tjh à–:pÈ ‘big man (or male animal)’
many/big-hSgMi but not *‘many man (or male animal)’
13a is ambiguous because the feature [+plural] of the head, the classifier –mE hAnPli, does not conflict with
either meaning of mitjh a. By contrast, 13b is not ambiguous because the head, the classifier –:pE hSgMi, is
[−plural], and this can not combine (unify) with the [+plural] of ‘many’. The features of the head prevail,
so the only meaning is ‘big man (or male animal)’.
Of course, this all depends on recognizing that the classifier is the head of the phrase.

2.3 Multiple classifiers

Consider now the issue of headedness in relation to phrases that have multiple classifiers. Consider example
5a above, (repeated here as 14c):
(14) a. [ mẂtsh ı́:tsh ı́ ] –PÈ ‘pear apple tree’
b. [ [ mẂtsh ı́:tsh ı́ ] –PÈ ] –Pá:–mı̀ ‘leaf of pear apple tree’
pear apple htreei hleafi
mẂtsh ı́:tsh ı́ ‘pear apple’ (the concept of) is not a referring expression. When followed by –PE htreei it refers
to a tree (a pear apple tree). When this in turn is followed by –Pa:mi hleafi, it refers to a leaf (the leaf of a
pear apple tree). At both levels the expression refers to a thing of the type indicated by the classifier, and
this is evidence that the final classifier heads the phrase.
3It might be possible to extend the claim that classifiers are the structural heads of their phrases to
post-verbal subjects on an analysis that projects sentences from their inflection. I do not pursue that
possibility here.
Weber: Bora classifiers 6

2.4 Semantic prominence

It is important to understand that heads are not necessarily the semantically most significant part of a phrase.
For example, consider English one in Give me the big one. Here one makes little semantic contribution to
the phrase, but heads the phrases; witness *Give me the big.
Bora has a similar phenomena with the classifier –nE høi, which means nothing more than [−animate].
It may serve as a semantically empty filler to satisfy the requirement that a phrase have a head. Indeed,
generally the expression that –nE heads would not refer except that its presence as a head makes the expres-
sion referential. One such case would be the formation of free possessive pronouns from bound possessive
pronouns by the addition of –nE høi, as discussed in Thiesen and Weber [4].
Another case is that of mi–nE canoe-høi ‘canoe’. By itself, the root mi– does not refer to a canoe; it
simply attributes the property ‘transportation’. But it refers to a canoe when combined with –nE høi, which
(1) satisfies the structural requirement for a head, and (2) denotes [−animate] objects, thus enabling the
phrase to refer. As a culturally-based default, it refers to a canoe. Note: the root attributes; the classifier
refers (just like English big attributes and one refers).

2.5 Agreement in numeral phrases

When a numeral phrase is used to quantify a noun, that noun must agree in animacy, gender and number
with the numeral phrase, as illustrated in 15:
(15) [ı́–nj Èx kh Ẃ–È–Póx tsh ı̀–th Ẁ tsh à–:ph ı̀] ò:Pı́–:pj È ‘six dogs’
this-side-per-hhandi-sou one-hSgMi dog-hSgMi
The phrase that means ‘six’ ends with the classifier –:ph ı̀ hSgMi because ‘six’ is expressed as ‘one (finger)
from this hand’, and ‘a finger’ is animate, singular, and masculine. Thus, in 15, contrary to what one might
expect, ‘dogs’ is marked as singular and masculine in agreement with the numeral phrase.
This lends further supports for the claim that classifiers head their phrases. What matters are the features
of the numeral phrase and the noun, which are precisely the features of the classifiers with which each ends.
That is, the classifiers determine the features of their phrases, even though these features do not reflect the
semantics of the expressions.

2.6 Affinities with the genitive construction

A host+classifer construction and a genitive construction (possessor+head) are formally and functionally
similar. Formally, they have similar tone marking. Functionally, some of the same thematic relations hold
between the first and second parts of the construction.
Tonal similarities. Every Bora syllable is spoken with either high or low tone. Any number of high
tone syllables may occur one after another. A sequence of two low tones may occur at the end of a tonal
L L
word or phrase, but not elsewhere: *σ σ σ. We call the prohibition against adjacent low tones except at the
end of a word/phras the *llx constraint. It applies both within a word and across word boundaries within
a tonal phrase.
The genitive construction is formed by juxtaposing the possessor and the head (possessed), with a low
tone at the boundary between them. We will call this tone the “genitive tone” and represent it as G .

[tonal phrase NPpossessor G Nhead ]

The possessor and head form a single tonal phrase within which the *llx constraint must be respected.
When the head is mono- or bisyllabic, the genitive tone docks on the possessor’s final syllable. When the
head has more than two syllables, the genitive tone docks on the head’s initial syllable.
The possibilities are charted in Table 1. (The genitive low tone is indicated by a G over the vowel.
The possessor and head are separated by .) These are the basic patterns; see Thiesen and Weber [4] for
discussion of how lexically-marked tones may perturb these.
Weber: Bora classifiers 7

Table 1: The basic tone patterns of the genitive construction

head (possessed)
σ# σσ# σσσ(. . . )
G G G
#σ σ σ σ σ́ σ σ́ σ σ́ σ(. . . )
G G G
possessor #σσ σ́ σ σ σ́ σ σ́ σ σ́ σ́ σ σ́ σ(. . . )
G G G
(. . . )σσσ (. . . σ) σ́ σ σ (. . . σ) σ́ σ σ́ σ (. . . )σσ́ σ́ σ σ́ σ(. . . )

Now consider the tone of a host followed by a classifier. A low tone C occurs at the boundary between
a classifier and what precedes it. It is docked (with a few exceptions) as in Table 2:

Table 2: The tone patterns of classifiers

classifier
σ# σσ# σσσ(. . . )
C C C
#σ σ σ σ́ σσ σ́ σ σ́ σ(. . . )
C C C
host #σσ σ́ σ σ σ́ σ σ́ σ σ σ́ σ σ́ σ(. . . )
C C C
(. . . )σσσ (. . . )σ σ́ σ σ (. . . )σ σ́ σ σ́ σ (. . . )σ σ σ́ σ σ́ σ(. . . )

Monosyllabic classifiers place the low tone on their host’s final syllable, as in 16:
C
(16) a. tsh ı :–kpà ‘other plank’
other-hslabi
C
b. tsh Ẃ:kh á–a–kpà ‘old plank’
old-hslabi
After a monosyllabic host, a bisyllabic classifier bears the low tone on its initial syllable, as in 17:
C
(17) tsh ı́–ija:mı̀ ‘other leaf’
other-hleafi
After a polysyllabic host, a bisyllabic classifier places the low tone on the host’s final syllable, as in 18:
C
(18) tsh Ẃ:kh áa–Pá:mı̀ ‘old leaf’
old-hleafi
Longer classifiers (three or more syllables) bear the low tone on their initial syllable, as in 19:
C
(19) tsh Ẃ:kh áá–a:máı̀ ‘old row’
old-hrowi
A comparison of the docking of the genitive tone G and the classifier tone C shows a remarkable
similarity; they differ only in one cell, the top middle one. This suggests a tight formal (and possibly
historic) relationship between the two constructions.
Functional similarities. The genitive construction is used to express various relationships between
(the referents of) the possessor and head, ones typically expressed with genitives, such as ownership (my
canoe, his food), kinship and other social relations (my mother, that town’s chief), properties (my goodness,
my height, his size), and so forth. Among these, two are shared with the host+classifier construction.
First, the possessor may indicate the subject of the head, when the head is a nonfinite verb. The
possessor’s thematic relation to the head may be—among other possibilities—agent. This is illustrated in
20, where ‘he’ is the agent of ‘teaching’. (In this example the genitive low tone, indicated by G, and the
nonfinite low tone, indicated by N, coincide on the head’s first syllable.)
G
N
(20) tı́:pj É Wkpá:pò ‘his teaching’
his teach[−finite]
Weber: Bora classifiers 8

See Thiesen and Weber [4] for further discussion and examples.
Turning to the host+classifier construction, one of the most common uses is for the host to be a finite
verb, with the classifier indicating the subject; see, for example, 20 above.
Second, the possessor may be a subordinate clause modifying the head. This is like a relative clause in
which the modifying clause is the possessor of a genitive construction, as evidenced by the genitive tonal
pattern. Examples follow:
G
(21) [tı̀–tsj È tsh ı́:má–Bá–th Ẁ–nÉ] ijax tsjh óth à
that-hSgFi child-have-neg-høi length.of.time
‘during the time she had not given birth’
G
(22) [kpáx ph ı̀:–kh È Ẃ:hÉ–th Ẃ–nÉ] patsı́ x kh à–hà
man-objAn arrive-neg-høi adolescent-hSgFi
‘young woman who has not been with a man’
Turning to the host+classifier construction, when the host is an adjective (demonstrative, quantifier,. . . )
or a noun, the relation is one of simple modification.
These formal and functional similarities between the genitive and classifier constructions strongly sug-
gest that the order of the modifier and head should be the same in both constructions. For the genitive
construction the order is clearly modifier+head, (just as expected for a head-final language). From this we
can conclude that the order for the classifier construction is also modifier+head, so the classifier is the head,
and thus heads the noun phrase.

Conclusion
Based on a variety of evidence we conclude that (1) Bora classifiers are nouns, and (2) except for when they
follow a finite verb, the host+classifier construction is a noun phrase headed by the classifier.

References
[1] Aikhenvald, Alexandra. 2000. Classifiers: A typology of noun categorization devices. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.

[2] Croft, William. 2001. Radical construction grammar: Syntactic theory in typological perspective. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.

[3] Senft, Gunter (editor). 2000 Systems of Nominal Classification. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.

[4] Thiesen, Wesley and David Weber (forthcoming). A grammar of Bora. Publications in Linguistics.
Dallas: SIL International and the University of Texas at Arlington.

David Weber
7264 W Main St
Westmoreland, NY 13490
david weber@sil.org