Documentation

Linglib.Theories.Semantics.Quantification.BinominalDefs

Semantics.Quantification.Binominal — Defs #

@cite{saab-2026} @cite{ten-wolde-2023}

Cross-linguistic types for binominal (N₁-of-N₂) constructions: the 3-way BinominalType (Saab 2026, Romance-cross-linguistic) and the 6-way OfBinominalType (ten-Wolde 2023, English-specific grammaticalization cline). Plus the structural-property predicates, the cline ordering, and diachronic-monotonicity theorems.

Provenance #

Moved from Core/Lexical/Binominal.lean in the cleanup that dissolved Core/Lexical/. Lives at Theories/Semantics/Quantification/ (sibling of the existing Binominal.lean semantic-composition file, which consumes OfBinominalType for quantizingToOfBinominal and other construction-specific compositions). Naming follows the mathlib Defs.lean idiom: this file holds the data + structural predicates; the sibling Binominal.lean holds the semantic composition rules.

Framework commitment #

The 6-way OfBinominalType taxonomy and the grammaticalization cline (clinePosition, bleaching_monotone, plural_loss_monotone, agreement_loosens_monotone, etc.) follow @cite{ten-wolde-2023}'s specific framework. This is one carve-up among several active frameworks for binominal noun phrase structure:

The 3-way BinominalType (Saab 2026) is closer to consensus across Romance binominals (pseudoPartitive / quantificational / qualitative) but is not without contestation: e.g., Espinal & Mateu on Romance evaluatives differ from Saab 2026's grouping.

UNVERIFIED: All ten-Wolde Table/§ references (Table 4.2, §4.3.4, §4.3.5, §4.4.5, Ch. 7) cited from memory; verify before treating as authoritative.

The three-way binominal classification (@cite{saab-2026}).

This coarser-grained taxonomy covers the structural types attested across Romance binominals. The finer-grained English subtypes are captured by OfBinominalType.

Instances For
    @[implicit_reducible]
    Equations
    Equations
    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
    Instances For

      Does the Num head in this structure carry [E]? @cite{saab-2026}: Num[E] is present iff the complement of Num is a standard nP (not an EquP with an indexical empty noun).

      Equations
      Instances For

        Core result: NP-ellipsis is licensed iff Num has [E].

        Which noun is the semantic head of the binominal construction.

        Instances For
          Equations
          • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
          Instances For
            @[implicit_reducible]
            Equations

            The six types of of-binominal construction (@cite{ten-wolde-2023}).

            The ordering reflects the grammaticalization cline: N+PP → Head-Classifier → Pseudo-partitive / Evaluative → EM → BI.

            UNVERIFIED: Cline ordering and per-type characterization rests on ten-Wolde's diachronic reconstruction; competing frameworks (Aarts, den Dikken, Selkirk) carve the space differently.

            • nPP : OfBinominalType

              N+PP: N₁ denotes a referent, PP ascribes a property. the beast of the field, the hell of the damned

            • headClassifier : OfBinominalType

              Head-classifier: PP classifies the type or material of N₁. a cake of rye, a beast of prey

            • pseudoPartitive : OfBinominalType

              Pseudo-partitive: N₁ quantizes, N₂ is semantic head. a glass of water, a piece of cake, a bunch of flowers

            • evaluative : OfBinominalType

              Evaluative BNP (EBNP): N₁ ascribes evaluative property to N₂. that idiot of a doctor, a whale of a man

            • evaluativeModifier : OfBinominalType

              Evaluative Modifier (EM): [N₁ of a] is a complex modifier. a hell of a time, a whale of a job

            • binominalIntensifier : OfBinominalType

              Binominal Intensifier (BI): [N₁ of a] intensifies Adj/Quant. a hell of a good time, a whale of a lot of fun

            Instances For
              Equations
              • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
              Instances For
                @[implicit_reducible]
                Equations

                Does N₁ undergo semantic bleaching (loss of lexical content)? Bleaching increases along the grammaticalization cline.

                The nature of bleaching differs: pseudo-partitive N₁ (glass, piece) bleaches from referential noun → quantizing measure term; evaluative N₁ bleaches from gradable predicate (EBNP) → evaluative modifier (EM) → degree intensifier (BI).

                Equations
                Instances For

                  Does [N₁ of a] function as a single constituent (modifier phrase)? The reanalysis of [N₁ of a] into a modifier unit is the defining structural change at the EM stage.

                  Equations
                  Instances For

                    Can N₂ be a mass noun? EBNP and EM restrict N₂ to count and collective nouns; BI extends to mass nouns (sporadically — not freely productive), reflecting the structural change where [N₁ of a] modifies a following adjective rather than N₂ directly. Earlier types (N+PP, HC, PP) have no such restriction.

                    Equations
                    Instances For

                      Level of number agreement between N₁ and N₂.

                      Instances For
                        Equations
                        • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                        Instances For
                          @[implicit_reducible]
                          Equations

                          Is of obligatory in the construction? Mandatory for all types except BI, where it can be absent in reduced forms like helluva, hella.

                          Equations
                          Instances For

                            The cline is a total order: each type has a unique position.

                            Bleaching increases along the cline: all types at position ≥ 2 are bleached.

                            Head switches from N₁ to N₂ at position 2.

                            N₁ plural ability is lost at position 4 (EM).

                            Det₂ number marking is lost at the same point as N₁ plural (position 4).

                            [N₁ of a] constituency emerges at position 4 (EM).

                            N₁ descriptive premodification is lost at position 4 (EM), together with N₁ plural and [N₁ of a] constituency.

                            Monotonicity: once N₁ premodification is lost, it stays lost.

                            Evaluative types are always N₂-headed.

                            Referential types are always N₁-headed.

                            Monotonicity: once bleaching starts, it never reverses.

                            Monotonicity: once N₁ plural is lost, it stays lost.

                            N₂ mass restriction is non-monotone: it narrows at the evaluative stage (positions 3–4) and widens again at BI (position 5), reflecting the structural change where [N₁ of a] shifts into AdjP.

                            of becomes optional only at the most grammaticalized stage (BI).

                            Map the three-way Spanish type to the six-way English type.

                            UNVERIFIED CROSS-LINGUISTIC CLAIM: this mapping presupposes that Spanish qualitative maps to English evaluative (Saab's qualitative ≡ ten-Wolde's evaluative). Espinal & Mateu on Romance evaluatives differ from Saab in details; verify whether the grouping survives their critique.

                            Equations
                            Instances For

                              Spanish qualitative maps to an evaluative (N₂-headed) English type.