Associative forms in a typology of number systems: evidence from Yup'ik

17 Pages·1996·5.264 MB·English

by  GREVILLE G. CORBETT, MARIANNE MITHUN

J. Linguirlics3 2 (!996), r-17. Copyright @ t996 CambridgeU niversityP ress
Associative forms in a typology of number
systems: evidence from Yup'ikl
GREVILLE G. CORBETT AND MARIANNE MITHUN
Universitlt of Suney University of Califumia, Santa Barbara
^nd
(Received z5 May r995; revised z7 September r995.;
A g€neral typology of number systemsh as to coDfront the problem of variation both
in the number valuesi n diffelent larguagesa nd in the inventories ofnominals involved.
We start from the Smith-Stark Hierarchy and extend this approach to additioaal
numbers (such as dual and paucal). Associative plurals appear to undermine this
typology, if we tueat them as a tiird mrmber. Either the associativep lual or the
ordinary plural proves to be exceptional.
The morphology of associativem arking in Central Pomo and in Central Alaskan
Yup'ik suggestst hat this is the wrong approach. In Central Pomo the associative
contains an original plural segment. More significantly, Central Alaskan Yup'ik
provides the ideal combination of three numbers and complex morphology to
demonstrate that associatives should not be troated as additional numbers.
Associativity atrd number are realized separately, \trhich shows tlat associativesa re
a separatec ategory interacting with number. This allows us to maintain the typology
proposed.
I. INTRODUcTIoN: REQUIREMENTFSo R A TYPoLoGY oF NUMBER
SYSTEMS
The attempt to construct a typology ofnumber systemsa ppears to be greatly
complicated by the existence of associative forms. These forms consist of a
nominal plus a marker, and denote a set comprised of the referent of the
nominal (the main member) plus one or more associated members:
Hrngaian Jdnos-ik ("/dzos-ASSOCIATIVE)' John and his family/friends'.
We shall show how the typological problem arises and then, with data from
Central Pomo and from Central Alaskan Yuo'ik. demonstrate how it can be
[r] We owe a great deal to Edith Moravcsik, who drew our attention to the importance of
associativef orms, initiated an email discussion on the topic, atrd provided many helpful
comments, also to David Gil for exteNiv€ stimulating discussiotr,t o Totry Woodbury-for
discussiono fthe history ofsome Yup'ik forms, atrd to two allonyroous "/Z rcf€rees for their
remarks. We are also grateful to Frans PlaDl for organizing a sessiooo n associativesa t the
Pre-Inaugrual Meeting of the Association for Linguistic T,?olo$/, Konstanz 29 Nov.-
I Dec. 1994,w here a version ofthis paper was given. A revisedv ersion was prcsenteda t the
Litguistics Association of Great Britain, Essex,r 8-2o Sept. 1995; we wish to tha[k those
present at these meetings for helpful discussion. The support of the ESRC (UK) under
grant Rooo236o63a nd of the Academic Senate,U niversity of California, Santa Ba$ara,
is gatefully acknowledged.
GREVILLE G. CORBETT AND MARIANNE MITHUN
resolved. We shall be concerned with nominal number: verbal number
(quantification over events or participants) is also a complex problem, but
not one for which associative forms are of direct relevance. Analyses of
verbal number are given in Durie (1986)a nd Mithun (1988a);f or nominal
and verbal quantificationm ore generallys eeG il (1993).
In trying to establish a general typology of nominal number, a major
difficulty is the number of variables. We find that the number of number
values varies dramatically from language to language, from those with
singular and plural to those with additional duals, trials, quadrals and
paucals.A t the samet ime, the number of nominalsi nvolved in the nunber
systems howsc onsiderablev ariation too. A reasonablea pproachi s to usea
version of what has been termed an Animacy or Topicality Hierarchy to
determine the nominals with the highest involvement in the number system,
and from these to determine the possible values (singular, plural, dual, etc.)
of the number category in a given language. The possible inventories of
numberv aluesa re subjectt o a typology of number systems.
We therefore outline the hierirchy, in the version proposed by Smith-Stark
(1974)i n sectionz , beforeg oing on to the problemw hich associativep lurals
causef or such an approach (section 3). We consider data from Central Pomo
which suggesta possibles olution (section4 ). Then we move on to even
clearer data for resolving the problem from Central Alaskan Yup'ik (section
z. Tnp Srr,Itrn-STARK HIERARCHY AND THE PRoBLEM oF MINoR
NUMBERS
We wish to establisht he inventory ofcount nouns of particular languagesa s
a basis for establishing the possible pattems. In part this is an over-
simplification, since Allan (198o) has argued that countability is a
characteristico fnoun phrasesa nd not ofnouns. However,a sh e points out:
Even though countability is characteristic of NP's, not of nouns, it is
nonethelessa fact that nouns do show countability preference- insofar as
some nouns more often occur in countable NP's, others in uncountable
NP's, and still otherss eemt o occur quite freely in both. (I98o: 566).
Thus strictly speaking we are investigating the countability preferenceso f
nominals.
In doing this, Smith-Stark (1974) proposed the following version of the
Animacy Hierarchy:
(t) The Smith-Stark Hierarchy
speaker> addressee> kin > rational > human > animate > inanimate
(rst person (znd person
pronouns) pronouns)
ASSOCIATIVE FORMS: EVIDENCE FROM YUP'IK
He suggesttsh at plurality 'splits' a languageif it is a significanto pPosition
for certainc ategoriesb ut irrelevantf or others' (1974:6 57).P lural numberi s
distinguishedin some languagesf,o r example,o n first and secondp erson
pronouns and nouns referring to rational beings, including humans' but not
those referring to animals or inanimate objects. While languagesm ake the
split in different places, the claim is that the inventory of items which show
plurality (whether through direct marking or indirectly through ageement)
must involve somet op portion ofthe hierarchy.T herei s a good deal ofdata
supporting his claim, though he also notes a small number of less
straightforward cases.
Consider now the question of further number values. It is possible for a
language to have an additional number value, say the dual, which pattems
with the plural (that is, the same 'split' applies to dual and to plural)
Typically in such a languagei f a noun has a dual it also has a plural, and vice
versa. Smith-Stark assumedt hat this was the normal situation in his brief
considerationo f numbers other than the plural, though he did note a
potential problem {t974: 669f n. 6). In fact, there are severali nstanceso f
such number values which may pattern in ways that are not in accord with
the Smith-Stark hierarchy. Thesea re found for a relatively small proportion
of the nouns of a given language,a nd we have termed them r"nxon I'uIr,mexs
(Corbett 1995,s ectionz ).
To take just one exampleo f a minor number, considert he North-East
Caucasian language Avar. It has singular and plural and, for a limited
numbero fnouns, a paucal.T he paucali s usedw hent he numbero f referents
is restricted( 'a lew'), the ordinary plural for larger numbers ('many').
(Sulejmanov( 1985),l rom whom the data are taken, calls them'restricted
plural' and 'unrestrictedp lural'.) Exampleso f nouns with three number
forms include the following:
(z) Paucals and plurals in Avar
SINGULAR PAUCAL PLURAL GLOSS
nus nris-al nus-6bi daughter-in-law
bor6q bor6q-al b6rq-al snake
kut6n kut6n-al kritn-al Plough
bel b6l-al bfl-dul sPade
i;c,l iil-al i,ul-al brush
Sometimes,a s in the last example, the difference between paucal and plural
is marked only by the position of the stress.S ulejmanov says only that this
three-wayo ppositioni s availablef or a restrictedg roup ofnouns; he lists 89
which havet he contrast.O f these,o ne is a kinterm (nus' daughter-in-law')
and a further eight denote non-human animates; the rest are inanimates. It
appearst hat the nouns which have a distinct paucal form are not in general
high on the Smith-Stark Hierarchy. Avar demonstratest hat of the inventory
GREVILLE G. CORBETT AND MARIANNE MITHUN
of nouns which are within the number system, some delimited Sroup may
have a further number opposition. In languagesl ike Avar the distribution of
thesef orms is not subject to the Smith-Stark Hierarchy and they constitute
a minor number (for further exampless eeP lank (1989: 296-3te), Kibrik
(I992: I5), Corbett( 1995)).N ote that thesem inor numbersi nvolven ominals
which have an additional number; they are the converse of the familiar
problem of defectiven ouns, where a small number of nouns lacks one of the
major numbers which they might be expectedt o have (thus English scrssors
lacks the singular).
Though minor numbersr equire a relaxationo f the typology of number,
they do not vary without constraint.W e proposet hreec riteria:'?
First, they involve a proportion of the nouns of a given languagew hich is
relatively small by comparisont o those involved in the major number(s),
where being a major number involvess plitting the noun inventory, taking
somet op segmento f the Smith-StarkH ierarchy.
Secondt,h e possiblem inor numbersa re drawn from the inventory of major
numbers.T hat is, a number which can operatea s a minor number will be
found in anotherl anguageo peratinga s a major number.
Third, a language with a minor number must have a number system which
would match an otherwisea ttesteds ystemo f major numbers( e.g.s ingular
- dual plural as opposedt o the unattested* singular- trial - plural) both
with the minor numberi ncludeda nd without it.
The effecto fthese claimsc an be illustratedb y our Avar example.T he Avar
situation, with major singular and plural and minor paucal, flts in the
tlpology of nurnbers ystemsb ecause:
r. The number of nouns with paucal forms is relatively small by
comparisont o thosew ith only singulara nd plural forms.
z. The paucal, here functioning as a minor number, is also found as a
major number,f or instancei n Yimas.
3. Major singular,m ajor paucala nd major plural is an occurrings ystem
(asi n Bayso),a nd major singulara nd major plural is alsoa n occurring
system( as in English).
The relevanceo f these claims concerning minor numbers for associativesi s
that the latter are also potential counter-examplest o the extension of the
Smith-Stark Hierarchy to constrain the distribution of nominals for all
[2] Thesea re an improvemento n the accounti n Corbett (t995).
4
ASSOCIATIVE FORMS: EVIDENCE FROM YUP'IK
number values. We need to indicate why the same' escapem echanism' is not
availablef or associativesa, nd hencew hy the latter apparentlyp osem ore
seriousp roblemsf or a typology of number systems.
3. AssocIATIvEp LURALs:A ppARBNTC ouNttl-rx,q.upres
Considerf irst Hungarian( a Finno Ugric languages pokeni n Hungary,d ata
lrom Edith Moravcsik, personalc ommunication:)
(3) J6nos
'John'
(4) Jdnos-ok
'Jobn-pl' (more than one John)
$) Jinos-6k
John-Assoc.PL
'John and associates''J,o hn and his group','John'n them'
In Hungarian, the particular members of the group may vary according to
circumstances( family, friends and so on), but they will be human and near-
equals. The associativep lural ending can be added mostly to proper names
and to nouns for kinterms, titles and occupations; examples formed with
ordinary common nouns are strange.aT he associativep lural forms function
[] Thus we find:
(i) apa / ap6,-Ek I api-m-6k
father father-Assoc. pL father- r . sc . Poss-Asso.c P L
'father' 'father and his group' 'my father and his group'
(ii) elnitk I az elnitk-'k / az elti5k fr-dk
president DEFp resident-Aslso.c P L DF president Mr-asloc . PL
'president' 'the presidenta trd his group' 'Mr Prcsidenta nd group'
The last form, including lr 'Mr' could be us€d as a form of addtess to the President
(asking, for instarce, when the president and assoclatesw ill do something) but not as a
folm of addresst o the group. As metrtioned above, nouns for professions caa take the
associativef orm :
(iii) tanit6 / a t^nft6-ek
teaoher DEFt eacher-AssocP. L
'teacher' 'the teacher alld his group'
However, it is not available for other common nouns:
(iv) ember / 'az ember-6k
man DEFm an-ASSOC.PL
'man' 'the man and his group'
As in the text, the Hungarian data wete kindly supplied by Edith Moravcsik (pe$onal
communication).
GREVILLE G. CORBETT AND MARIANNE MITHUN
as plurals for subject-verb agreement, and in object position they control
definite object agreemento n the verb.
Since nouns for kinterms and some others denoting humans have two
forms (associativep lural and ordinary plural), we might expect-to-findt he
same with the personal pronouns. What we actually find is the following:
(6) Personapl ronounsi n Hungarian
SINGULAR PLURAL
r6n mi
2letl
3 6 6k
Each pronoun has only one plural form. The first and secondp erson
p.orrorro. have suppletive plurals, while the third person pronoun, whose
^position
on the Smith-StarkH ierarchyi s somewhatu ncertain( Smith-stark
i974: 664),u sest he regularp lural marker,a si n: nd 'wo man' n6 k'women' 'n
-ii t tt tigttt, we have a straightforwardv iolation of the Smith-Stark
Hierarchy: the associativep lural is availablef or a middle segment( nouns
denoting kin and some other humans), rather than a top segment.including
the persinal.pronounsH. owever,M oravcsik (1994)p roposesth at in fact the
fusf and second person plural pronouns universally illustrate associative
plural (group plural) meaning: 'We and you-PLU are semantically group
plurals in that we normally means "I and some others" (rather than "more
ihan one speaker")a nd the normal meaningo fToa is also "you and some
others" rathert han "more than onel istener".'(The ideat hat thesep ronouns
can have associativem eaningg oesb ack at least as far as Jespersen(1 924:
r9z).) Moravcsik further links this interpretation specifically to the Smith-
Staik Hierarchy, and continues: 'It thereforem akes senset hat a special
plural, such as the group plural, that applies to lesst han all nominals should
apply'to personal l.ottootts and human nouns, and to proper names and
kintirms in particular.' Thus if we treat the associativep lural as a separate
number,i t is possiblet o claim that the top segmenot fthe hierarchyi s indeed
involved. In somel anguagesju st the first and secondp ersonp ronounsa re
involved, while in others,l ike Hungarian, kinterms and even other nouns
denotingh umansa re involved.
Therea re two problems.T he first is the lesss erious'I f the fust and second
p"rsoo prono,rrs are associativep lurals,w hy is this not in their form?
-clear
iFor a iiscussion of the forms of plural pronouns, including instancesw hich
haver egularp lural morphology,s eeM yrkin (1964)) A simplea nswerm ight
be thathe form need not be transparent, so long as there is some formal
contrast, such as that between English 1 and we. The more serious problem
I4l Eva Csatd points out Oersonal communication) that, itr the ob-lique plural forms'
'-' ptooou^ of all three peisons include a numbq marker; this is similar to the ordinary
Dlural. not to the associativem ark€r'
ASSOCIATIVE FORMS: EVIDENCE FROM YUP'IK
concernst he ordinary plural. If the first and secondp ersonp lural pronouns
are associativep lurals, then the ordinary plurals become exceptional, since
they would typically involve some central segment of the hierarchy. We
would have to say that the claims of the Smith-Stark Hierarchy relate to
associativep lurals. The considerabled ata on the distribution of ordiirary
plurals,w hich haveb eenp artially understoodb y referenceto the hierarchy,
would now all be problematic.
It might be argued that we have been over-simplifying by viewing the
pronouns as being either ordinary plurals or associativep lurals. The first
personp lural may be an ordinary plural, if rarely, and the secondp erson
plural is often useda s an ordinary plural. (Jesperse(nt 924: t9z) statest hat
the secondp erson plural can be of either type). It could therefore be
suggestedth at the associativep lural is a part of the plural, and the personal
pronounsc overt he wholep lural range.B ut this merelyb lurs the issue.I fthe
associativep lural is a part of the plural, why shouldw e not treat the dual as
part ofthe plural (since'two'is includedi n'more than one')?W e cannotd o
this becauset he dual (in the languagesw hich have a dual) shows a regular
form-meaning correspondence,w hich demonstratest hat it forms a separate
number. The Smith-Stark Hierarchy is precisely a typology of formal
contrasts.I t is the lack ofa formal contrasti n the pronouns,a sc omparedt o
formal contrasts like Hungarian Jdnosok (plural) verws Jdnosik (as-
sociative),w hich makest he pronouns a clear problem with respectt o the
Smith-StarkH ierarchy.
If we wish to continue claiming that the associativep lural is a separate
number, a last escapem echanismw ould be to claim that it is a minor number
(like the paucali n Avar). This is unsatisfactorya, s our data from Hungarian
show.F irst, it appearsth at the associativep lural meaningi s availablef or the
first and secondp ersonp lural pronounsa sw ell as for some' higher' nouns:
the problem is the lack of a form-meaning correspondence.A nd second,
recallt hat minor numbersa lwaysc orrespondt o a major number; that is to
say, any number postulated as a minor number is found in another language
as a major number. But no instanceo f an associativep lural functioning as
a major number parallel to an ordinary plural has been found. Thus, as
before, either the associativep lural or the ordinary plural would fail to flt the
typology. (Sincet he associativeis not found as a major number, it cannot
possibly meet the more stringent criterion for minor numbers, namely that
the language with a claimed minor number must have a number system
matching an attested system of major numbers both with the minor number
includeda nd without it.)
We try two ways forward. First we look for straightforward morphological
evidenceo n the relation betweena ssociativea nd plural. In Central Pomo we
find suggestived iachronic evidencet hat they are, or rather, were separate.
Secondw e look at a more complexn umber system,a nd herew e ar€ able to
confirm the conclusion suggestedb y the Central Pomo data.
GRBVILLE G. CORBETT AND MARIANNE MITHUN
4. CENTRAL POMO
Somei nsight into the status ofthe associatived istinction cornesf rom Central
Pomo, a languageo f the Pomoan family indigenous to Northern California.
Central Pomo itself is spoken roo miles north of San Francisco,w ith one
dialecto n the coasta t Point Arena/Mancheste(rt hen ameo fone 'rancheria',
the California term for a smallr eservation)a nd two dialects5 o milesi nland,
on the RussianR iver near Ukiah. Only a handful of speakersre main.6
Number is specifiedi n Central Pomo in multiple areaso f the grammar and
lexicon.T he numberd istinctionsf ound on nouns,p ronouns,a djectivesa nd
verbs operate independently of each other and differ in important ways. A
full accounto fthe systemc an be found in Mithun (I988b).W e focush ereo n
nominal number and its relation to associativem arking'
Only a small seto f nounsh avep lural forms,m ost denotingh uman beings
('man', 'woman', 'child', 'old woman', most kinsmen).S everaol f the plural
forms are simply irregular, but others can be seent o be formed with a suffix
-(I)4/. It takest he shape-Ja/a fter vowels:
(7) m:i'!a m|'!2-!ay
woman woman-Pl-
'woman' 'women'
The initial J doesn ot appeara fter consonants:
(8) 6r.8 66't-ay
person person-PL
'person' 'persons'
The plural forms are generally usedo nly when their referentsa re significantly
individuated.P ronouns,b y contrast, systematicallys how distinct singular
and plural forms whenever they refer to humans.
In addition to the relatively restricted plural marking for nouns, Central
Pomo also has an associativem arker -1oya.Its usec an be seeni n (9):
(9) NormanB all:toya l6w-ae:Y a ?e mu'1.
(name):6596 talk . PL-TMPRF. PL : PE coP that
'Norman Ball and them were talking about that.'6
The verbal morphology in (9) reflects the plurality of the subject. The verb
root l6w-'ta]k' is inherentlyp lural, denotingc onversationin a group, and
the suffix -ai is the plural form of the imperfective aspect.
The associativep hrase can also fill other grammaticalr oles. In (ro) it
functionsa s the grammaticalp atient of the verb 'discuss'.
[5] We are grateful to MIs FrancesJ ack (Hopland Rancheda), Mrs SalomeA lcantra and Mrs
Florence Paoli (Yokaya Rarcheria) and Mrs Wioifled L€al and Mrs Eileen Oropeza( Point
Arena Rancheria) for sharing their krlowledge of the language.
[6] Hyphens (, are used here to indicate affx boundaries, and equals signs (=) for clitic
boundaries. Ceotral Pomo co4tains a dch inventory of€vidential markers, ahong them the
clitic : ld that marks information known from direct pe$onal experience( PE)
ASSOCIATIVE IORMS: EVIDENCB FROM YUP,IK
(Io) Eileen:!oya-l:wa ma dan6-'d: a?
(name): AsSoc-pATQ: 2 . sc talk. SG-IMPRsFG.= Ili.{I\,lED
'You're discussingE ileena nd them?'
The associativee nclitica ppearsw ith proper names,a si n (9) and (to) above,
and with kintermsa si n (rr):
(r r) Ma-th6-Io'ya hinlil 6anri 5?riduw-ay ?i-n
3. poss-mother-AssocI ndian word not.know-Pl- be'as
'Becauset heir parentsd on't speakt he Indian language.'
The associative also appears with indefinite pronouns, which are used as
interrogatives as well:
(rz) BL':toya:wa mida napn6-w?
who:.Assoc: e there sit. pl--ppJ
'Who [all] is living theren ow?'
The shape of the associative: toya is distinct from that of the noun
pluralizer -1ay.I f we look at the forms of the pronouns,h owever,w e see
evidence suggestingt hat the associative: /ola includes an origrnal plural
marker,
(ry\ Personapl ronounsi n Cenftal Pomo
AGENT PATIENT POSSESSIVE
SG PL SG PL SG PL
t ?a' ya 10' yal khe yri'?khe
2 ma mdya mI o m6yal mkhe mdya '?koe
3 mu'l mri'Iuya mf'Iu rnri'! uyal mri'kk! rnri'luya'khe1
3R' Ii' liya li'Io liyal 1i'khe! Iiya'k"e!
The plural segment -/a appears clearly in the second person and the third
person long-distance reflexive pronouns, somewhat less clearly in the fust
and basic third person forms due to the historical erosion of certain
unstressed initial syllables. The same plural segment -/d appears in the
associative::lo -ra.
The situation in Central Pomo has provided a valuableh int. It suggests
that the present associative marker was probably formed from separate
associativea nd plural segments,w hich would in turn lead us to believe that
number and associativity should be treated as separate categories' It is
possible to analyse the Hungarian data in a similar way. The associative
suffix -dk might be segmentablei nto two components, associative- d- plus a
plural element -k- also visible in the nominal plural suffix -ok and third
personp ronominalp lural dk. SeeM oravcsik (forthcoming,s ection2 .r.6) for
a discussion of the advantagesa nd disadvantageso f this approach
hl The forms marked '3R' are part of a set of speciale mpathetic/logophotic/long-distance
reflexive Dronouns.
GREVILLB G. CORBETT AND MARIANNE MITHUN
5. CENTRAL ALASKAN YUP.IK
To make further progress,a good strategy, as is often the casew ith number,
is to look at a more complex systemi nvolving a third number' If we analyse
a languagew ith a dual in addition to singular and plural, then theoretically
we might find two outcomes:
r. Four numbers;s ingular,d ual, ordinary plural, associativep lural'
z. Three numbers: singular, dual, plural, plus an additional category -
associativenessw. hich we would expect to be available for dual and
plural'
We now examine a language with three numbers and associativef orms'
Our data are from Central Alaskan Yup'ik, which is spoken in
southwesternA laska in the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta and Bristol Bay areas'
According to Jacobson( 1993: r) there were in 1993a pproximately2 o,ooo
Central Alaskan Yup'iks, of whom some ro,5oo spoke Yup'ik' Children
learn Yup'ik as theii first language in about half of the Yup'ik villages'8
Central Alaskan Yup'ik is one of the Yup'ik group of languagesw ithin the
Eskimo branch of the Eskimo-Aleut family. Since this language is vital to
our claims, a brief sketch will be helpful.
5.r Sketcho f CentralA laskan Yup'ik
Verbs, which may be intransitive or transitive, contain pronominal suffixes
referring to their core arguments.T hey distinguish singular, dual, and plural
numbei in all persons. There is no gender, but there is a long-distance
reflexive used, roughly speaking, for an argument in certain kinds of
deoendentc lausest hat is coreferent with the subject of a higher clause' The
pronominal suffxes are precededb y one of a set of mood markers (indicative,
optative,i nterrogative,s ubordinative,a nd variousc onnectives)B' ecauses o
many featuresa re distinguishedb y the pronominal suffixes,a nd-becauseth eir
shapesv ary with the mood, the number of pronominal forms is quite large'
Nouns also take inflectional suffixes,w hich mark an elaborate cases ystem
with a basic ergative/absolutive pattem. The singular, dual, and plural forms
of the unmarked absolutivec aseo f'kayak' can be seeni n (I4)' (t5), and
(r6):e
f8l We are verv sraleful to George Charles and Liz Ali, both of Bethel, Alaska, for sharing
' ' their intuitiois on tbeir languige, and to Tony woodbury for helpful discussion
[9] It is interesting to note that there are very few nouns whic,hh ave singular lorms only One
'-' e*a-ple is 'wat"t'. (Abstact nouns with meadngs like 'happiness' are.generallyn ot
usea.i uost- "ni ouus tlat would correspotrd to English massn ouns are typically interpreted
as cotmt nounsi n Yup'ik wbend ual or plural suffxesa re added For instance-'4'4( sg )
'oil', r./4rk(d ual) lwo sealpokeosr jar s of oil .l4tlt(pl)'thteeormoresealpokesorlats
of oil'. ilelatively few noun; ate defectivei n tetms ofnumber in other rays Thele are some
which have only the plual, such as niidrSTtsrlutet 'tudio'
'
IO