On the Separation and Relatedness of Classifiers, Number, and Individuation in Niuean *

TLDR: In this paper, the role of number in Niuean, an Austronesian language in the Tongic subgroup of the Polynesian family, is discussed. But it is argued that the concepts of individuation, classification and number are separable, even though they overlap significantly.

Abstract: This paper focuses on the role of number in Niuean, an Austronesian language in the Tongic subgroup of the Polynesian family. It is argued that the concepts of individuation, classification, and number are separable, even though they overlap significantly, as argued by Borer (2005). Number (i.e. singular/plural) must be expressed in the Niuean noun phrase, but it can be expressed on a variety of different elements in the phrase, such as on a quantifier, a numeral, or the reduplicated noun itself, or by means of a plural marker. The following question is addressed: Is it possible to situate number in a single functional head in Niuean? The answer is yes, but several problems must first be addressed. In order to explain the lack of the plural particle in quantified and counted nominal phrases, it is proposed that the linking particle that appears in such phrases be analyzed as a deficient classifier. This allows a uniform analysis for number: Niuean, like Armenian, has both a classifier and a number system. The paper then turns to examine certain classifying collective particles, which co-occur with the plural marker. These are considered to merge lower than number, but if number is otherwise unexpressed, they can raise to serve the function of number. The number marker itself is analyzed as being ambiguous between a number and a collective particle. In conclusion, neither the number system, nor the classifier system in Niuean is canonical, suggesting a system in change from classifiers to number.