---
title: "The Lexical Semantics of English Count and Mass Nouns (1996)"
description: "He argues that the grammatical tests are reliable: plural marking, numerals, many versus much, the… 25 references, cited by 3 papers here."
authors: ["Brendan S. Gillon"]
year: 1996
venue: "Breadth and Depth of Semantic Lexicons"
source: "https://aclanthology.org/W96-0307/"
licence: "CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 (ACL Anthology, before 2016)"
licence_url: "https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/"
summary_licence: "Elamur Cosmic License"
canonical: "https://research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/gillon-1996-lexical-semantics-english-count-mass/"
---
[Elamur Research](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/) · [this page in HTML](https://research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/gillon-1996-lexical-semantics-english-count-mass/)

[home](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/) / [papers](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/) / [1996](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/1996/) / The Lexical Semantics of English Count and Mass Nouns

# The Lexical Semantics of English Count and Mass Nouns

**Authors:** Brendan S. Gillon · **Year:** 1996 · **Venue:** Breadth and Depth of Semantic Lexicons · **Licence:** [CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 (ACL Anthology, before 2016)](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/)

**Links:** [Publisher's page](https://aclanthology.org/W96-0307/) · [PDF](https://aclanthology.org/W96-0307.pdf)

**Citations:** 3 in our library, of the 149,439 papers whose bibliographies we read

## Summary
Gillon asks how a semantic lexicon should distinguish and relate English mass and count nouns. He argues that the grammatical tests are reliable: plural marking, numerals, many versus much, the indefinite article, and anaphoric *one*. The denotation-based tests favoured by formal semanticists, cumulative and divisive reference, fail. Plural count nouns are also cumulative. Mass nouns such as *furniture* have parts that are not furniture, and count nouns like *rope* remain divisible into ropes. His diagnosis is that mass nouns should be left *unspecified* for minimal parts rather than marked as lacking them.

He encodes the distinction with lexical features ±CT that constrain number (±PL), and he states agreement and conjunction rules. He also gives a mereological semantics: count nouns denote sets of minimal aggregates, and mass nouns denote a singleton holding the largest aggregate. Finally, he argues that shifts between classes, including proper names used as common nouns, need productive rules with their own semantics, plus separate entries for lexicalized cases. The result links morphosyntax to meaning in a lexicon.

## Key points
- **Diagnostic table.** Count nouns accept cardinal and quasi-cardinal numerals (*several*), the indefinite article, *many/few*, a singular/plural contrast and *one* as anaphor. Mass nouns take *much/little* instead.
- **Minimal pairs against divisivity.** Count and mass nouns covering similar things include suitcases/luggage, shoes/footwear, vehicles/traffic, leaves/foliage, animals/wildlife and cannons/artillery. Words such as stone, rock, string, rope and tile work as both classes.
- **Four noun classes.** Two tests divide nouns four ways, into count nouns, mass nouns, pronouns and proper names: one asks whether a noun takes determiners, the other whether it shows a singular/plural alternation.
- **Number features.**
  - +CT nouns take exactly one of ±PL; −CT nouns must be −PL.
  - Some nouns fix their number lexically, such as *police* and plural mass nouns like *earnings*, *dregs*, *groceries*, *remains* and *odds*.
  - A conjoined NP is plural whenever it has more than one conjunct.
- **Semantics of aggregates.** Three elements yield seven aggregates. These form a complete join semi-lattice that has a unit but no zero. A plurality is just the sum of its atoms, whereas a collective has constituting conditions.

## Interesting ideas
- Decide mass vs count from distributional grammar (numerals, *many/much*, *a*, plural forms, *one*-anaphora) rather than from intuitions about what the noun refers to; the tests are observable and checkable.
- Leave mass nouns unspecified for atoms instead of asserting they have none, so that *furniture* (atomic) and *water* (non-atomic) share one semantics.
- Treat number as features, with ±CT limiting ±PL, some nouns fixing number lexically, and conjunction summing to plural. This gives a small, explainable rule set for agreement.
- Separate a plurality, which is a bare sum, from a collective, which survives changes of membership and can be formed by the same people twice.
- Handle class shifts in two layers: productive conversion rules with their own meaning (*every Compaq*, *a veritable Napoleon*, *How many Marys*), and dedicated entries for lexicalized cases (*kleenex*, *xerox*).

## For Mova

How these ideas could serve Mova, our small open language model — its files, stages and tests:

- **I1** (tokens): The noun lexicon in crate en could carry a ±CT flag induced from these corpus contexts, with each flag backed by cited example contexts.
- **I2** (world): Mass-noun entities could be stored as aggregates whose atomicity is filled in from ontology knowledge only when needed, such as when a word problem asks how many pieces of furniture there are.
- **I3** (tree): The features could validate UD Number on nouns and determiners, and serve as a negative-control check that flags parses where a subject and its verb disagree.
- **I4** (world): Group nouns like *committee* could become persistent entities with member links, while plain plurals stay as sums, keeping holdings and event tracking correct when members change.
- **I5** (frames): When a proper name appears with a determiner, a conversion rule could reinterpret it as a product, family member, name-bearer or salient-property type, and record which rule fired.

*Our summary of the paper, in our own words — not its text. The work belongs to its authors; read it at the links above.*

📚 Shelves (2): [🖥️ Computer Science](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/computer-science/) · 18,614 works · [🤖 Artificial Intelligence](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/shelves/computer-science/artificial-intelligence/) · 17,965 works

🧭 Topics (2): [English](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/topics/english/) · 2,379 works · [📖 Lexical semantics & word embeddings](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/topics/lexical-semantics/) · 65 works

## Cite

Cite as: Brendan S. Gillon. 1996. The Lexical Semantics of English Count and Mass Nouns. Breadth and Depth of Semantic Lexicons.

The paper itself, not this page. BibTeX from the library's record of the work.

```bibtex
@inproceedings{gillon1996lexical,
  title = {{The Lexical Semantics of English Count and Mass Nouns}},
  author = {Brendan S. Gillon},
  booktitle = {Breadth and Depth of Semantic Lexicons},
  year = {1996},
  url = {https://aclanthology.org/W96-0307/}
}
```

- [← previous Lines on the classification of Ethopian-Semitic](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/fellman-1996-lines-classification-ethopian-semitic/)
- [next → SANDERS, A. (1994): The Short Oxford History of English Literature.](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/gonzalez-1996-sanders-1994-short-oxford-history/)
- [↑ back to papers of 1996](https://md.research.elamur.ai/free/en/papers/1996/)

## References

25 references, 0 of them with a card of ours. ↗ leads to the work, «find» searches for one we have no id for yet.

1. Bauer, Laurie 1983 English Word-formation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press (Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics). [↗](https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139165846)
2. Bunt, Cornelius 1985 Mass Terms and Model Theoretic Semantics. Cambridge University Press. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Bunt%2C+Cornelius+1985+Mass+Terms+and+Model+Theoretic+Semantics%2E+Cambridge+University+Press%2E)
3. Carlson, Lauri 1980 Plural Quantification. MIT: unpublished ms. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Carlson%2C+Lauri+1980+Plural+Quantification%2E+MIT%3A+unpublished+ms%2E)
4. Cheng, C. Y. 1973 'Response to Moravscik'. In Hintikka et al (eds) 1973 pp. 286-288. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Cheng%2C+C%2E+Y%2E+1973+%27Response+to+Moravscik%27%2E+In+Hintikka+et+al+%28eds%29+1973+pp%2E+286%2D288%2E)
5. Clark, Herbert and R. J. Gerrig 1983 'Understanding Old Words with New Meanings'. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior: v. 22 (1983), pp. 591-608. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5371(83)90364-x)
6. Cruse, D. A. 1986 Lexical Semantics. Textbooks in Linguistics). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press (Cambridge Eschenbaeh, Carolta 1992 'Semantics of Number'. Journal of Semantics: v. 10, pp. 1-31. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Cruse%2C+D%2E+A%2E+1986+Lexical+Semantics%2E+Textbooks+in+Linguistics%29%2E+Cambridge%2C+England%3A+Cambridge+University+Press+%28Cambridge+Eschenbaeh%2C+Carolta+1992+%27Semantics+of+Number%27%2E+Journal+of+Semantics%3A+v%2E+10%2C+p)
7. Gillon, Brendan S. 1992 'A Common Semantics for English Count and Mass Nouns'. Philosophy: v. 15, n. 6, pp. 597-639. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Gillon%2C+Brendan+S%2E+1992+%27A+Common+Semantics+for+English+Count+and+Mass+Nouns%27%2E+Philosophy%3A+v%2E+15%2C+n%2E+6%2C+pp%2E+597%2D639%2E)
8. Hintikka, Jaakko, Julius Moravscik, and Patrick Suppes (eds) 1973 Approaches to Natural Language. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: D. Reidel Publishing Co. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-2506-5)
9. Jackendoff, Ray 1991 'Parts and Boundaries'. Cognition: v. 41, pp. 9-45. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(91)90031-x)
10. Jesperson, Otto 1909 A Modern English Grammar on Historical Principles. 7 vols. l~ondon, England: Allen and Unwin. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Jesperson%2C+Otto+1909+A+Modern+English+Grammar+on+Historical+Principles%2E+7+vols%2E+l%7Eondon%2C+England%3A+Allen+and+Unwin%2E)
11. Leech, Geoffrey N. 1981 Semantics. Harmondsworth, England: Penguin Books, Inc. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Leech%2C+Geoffrey+N%2E+1981+Semantics%2E+Harmondsworth%2C+England%3A+Penguin+Books%2C+Inc%2E)
12. Link, Godehard 1983 'The Logical Analysis of Plurals and Mass Terms'. In: Bauerle, Rainer, Christoph Schwarze, and Arnim von Stechow (eds) 1983, pp. 302-323. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Link%2C+Godehard+1983+%27The+Logical+Analysis+of+Plurals+and+Mass+Terms%27%2E+In%3A+Bauerle%2C+Rainer%2C+Christoph+Schwarze%2C+and+Arnim+von+Stechow+%28eds%29+1983%2C+pp%2E+302%2D323%2E)
13. Link, Godehard 1991 Plural. In: von Stechow and Wunderlich (eds) 1991. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Link%2C+Godehard+1991+Plural%2E+In%3A+von+Stechow+and+Wunderlich+%28eds%29+1991%2E)
14. Lcnning, Tore 1987 'Mass Terms and Quantification'. Linguistics and Philosophy: v. 10, n. 1, pp. 1-52. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Lcnning%2C+Tore+1987+%27Mass+Terms+and+Quantification%27%2E+Linguistics+and+Philosophy%3A+v%2E+10%2C+n%2E+1%2C+pp%2E+1%2D52%2E)
15. ter Meulen, A. 1981 'Intensional Logic for Mass Terms'. Philosophical Studies: v. 40, pp. 105-125. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=ter+Meulen%2C+A%2E+1981+%27Intensional+Logic+for+Mass+Terms%27%2E+Philosophical+Studies%3A+v%2E+40%2C+pp%2E+105%2D125%2E)
16. Ojeda, Almerindo 1992 Linguistic Individuals. Stanford, California: Center for the Study of Language and Information. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Ojeda%2C+Almerindo+1992+Linguistic+Individuals%2E+Stanford%2C+California%3A+Center+for+the+Study+of+Language+and+Information%2E)
17. Ostler, Nichlas and B. T. S. Atkins 1991 'Predictable Meaning Shift: Some Linguistic Properties of Lexical Implication Rules'. In: Pustejovsky and Bergler (eds) 1991. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Ostler%2C+Nichlas+and+B%2E+T%2E+S%2E+Atkins+1991+%27Predictable+Meaning+Shift%3A+Some+Linguistic+Properties+of+Lexical+Implication+Rules%27%2E+In%3A+Pustejovsky+and+Bergler+%28eds%29+1991%2E)
18. Pelletier, F. J. 1974 'Proposals for Semantics of Mass Terms'. Journal of Philosophical Logic: v. 3, pp. 87-108. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Pelletier%2C+F%2E+J%2E+1974+%27Proposals+for+Semantics+of+Mass+Terms%27%2E+Journal+of+Philosophical+Logic%3A+v%2E+3%2C+pp%2E+87%2D108%2E)
19. Pustejovsky, James 1995 The Generative Lexicon. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press. [↗](https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780195136975.003.0018)
20. Pustejovsky, James and Suzanne Bergler (eds) 1991 Lexical Semantics and Knowledge Representation. Berlin: Springer-Verlag (Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence). [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Pustejovsky%2C+James+and+Suzanne+Bergler+%28eds%29+1991+Lexical+Semantics+and+Knowledge+Representation%2E+Berlin%3A+Springer%2DVerlag+%28Lecture+Notes+in+Artificial+Intelligence%29%2E)
21. Quine, Willard van Ormine 1960 Word and Object. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Quine%2C+Willard+van+Ormine+1960+Word+and+Object%2E+Cambridge%2C+Massachusetts%3A+The+MIT+Press%2E)
22. Quirk, Randolph; Sidney Greenbaum; Geoffrey Leech; Jan Svartik 1985 A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language. London, England: Longman Group Limited. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Quirk%2C+Randolph%3B+Sidney+Greenbaum%3B+Geoffrey+Leech%3B+Jan+Svartik+1985+A+Comprehensive+Grammar+of+the+English+Language%2E+London%2C+England%3A+Longman+Group+Limited%2E)
23. Roeper, Peter 1983 'Semantics for Mass Terms with Quantifiers'. No~s: v. 22, pp. 251-265. Linguistics and i Simons, Peter 1987 ParLs: A Study in Ontology. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. [↗](https://doi.org/10.2307/2215145)
24. von Stechow, Arnim and Dieter Wunderlich (eds) 1991 Semantics. An International Handbook of Contemporary Research. Berlin: De Gruyter. [find](https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=von+Stechow%2C+Arnim+and+Dieter+Wunderlich+%28eds%29+1991+Semantics%2E+An+International+Handbook+of+Contemporary+Research%2E+Berlin%3A+De+Gruyter%2E)
25. Wierzbicka, Anna 1988 The Semantics of Grammar. Publishing Co. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins [↗](https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.18)

*Updated 1 November 2026*