Hubbry Logo
English determinersEnglish determinersMain
Open search
English determiners
Community hub
English determiners
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
English determiners
English determiners
English determiners
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Part of a series on
English grammar
Morphology
Word types
Verbs
Syntax
Orthography
Variance

English determiners (also known as determinatives)[1]: 354  are words – such as the, a, each, some, which, this, and numerals such as six – that are most commonly used with nouns to specify their referents. The determiners form a closed lexical category in English.[2]

The syntactic role characteristically performed by determiners is known as the determinative function (see § Terminology).[3] A determinative combines with a noun (or, more formally, a nominal; see English nouns § Internal structure) to form a noun phrase (NP). This function typically comes before any modifiers in the NP (e.g., some very pretty wool sweaters, not *very pretty some wool sweaters[a]). The determinative function is typically obligatory in a singular, countable, common noun phrase (compare I have a new cat to *I have new cat).

Semantically, determiners are usually definite or indefinite (e.g., the cat versus a cat),[4] and they often agree with the number of the head noun (e.g., a new cat but not *many new cat). Morphologically, they are usually simple and do not inflect.

The most common of these are the definite and indefinite articles, the and a(n). Other determiners in English include the demonstratives this and that, and the quantifiers (e.g., many, and none) as well as the numerals.[1]: 373  Determiners also occasionally function as modifiers in noun phrases (e.g., the many changes), determiner phrases (e.g., many more) or in adjective or adverb phrases (e.g., not that big).[1]: 565  They may appear on their own without a noun, similar to pronouns (e.g., I'll have some), but they are distinct from pronouns.[1]: 412 

Some sources, e.g. Cambridge Dictionary, Longman Dictionary, Collins Dictionary, and Collins COBUILD English grammar distinguish between predeterminers and determiners. Following this distinction, determiners can't be used directly next to each other (not: the my or my the). However, it is possible to put a predeterminer before a determiner (e.g. all the).[5]

Terminology

[edit]

Words and phrases can be categorized by both their syntactic category[b] and their syntactic function. In the clause the dog bit the man, for example, the dog belongs to the syntactic category of noun phrase and performs the syntactic function of subject. The distinction between category and function is at the heart of a terminological issue surrounding the word determiner: various grammars have used the word to describe a category, a function, or both.

Some sources, such as A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language, use determiner as a term for a category as defined above and determinative for the function that determiners and possessives typically perform in a noun phrase (see § Functions).[6]: 74  Others, such as The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language (CGEL), make the opposite terminological choice.[1]: 354  And still others (e.g., The Grammar Book[7]) use determiner for both the category and the function. This article uses determiner for the category and determinative for the function in the noun phrase.

The lexical category determiner is the class of words described in this article. They head determiner phrases, which can realize the functions determinative, predeterminative, and modifier:

  • determiner phrases as determinatives: the box, this hill
  • determiner phrases as predeterminatives: all the time, both those cars
  • determiner phrases as modifiers: these two images, clear enough

The syntactic function determinative is a function that specifies a noun phrase. That is, determinatives add abstract meanings to the noun phrase, such as definiteness, proximity, number, and the like.[8]: 115  While the determinative function is typically realized by determiner phrases, they may also be realized by noun phrases and prepositional phrases:

  • noun phrases as determinatives: my question, this size room
  • prepositional phrases as determinatives: over twenty belts, up to a hundred people

This article is about determiners as a lexical category.

History

[edit]

Traditional grammar has no concept to match determiners, which are instead classified as adjectives, articles, or pronouns.[6]: 70  The articles and demonstratives have sometimes been seen as forming their own category, but are often classified as adjectives. Linguist and historian Peter Matthews observes that the assumption that determiners are distinct from adjectives is relatively new, "an innovation of … the early 1960s."[6]: 70 

In 1892, prior to the emergence of the determiner category in English grammars, Leon Kellner, and later Jespersen,[9] discussed the idea of "determination" of a noun:

In Old English the possessive pronoun, or, as the French say, "pronominal adjective," expresses only the conception of belonging and possession; it is a real adjective, and does not convey, as at present, the idea of determination. If, therefore, Old English authors want to make nouns preceded by possessive pronouns determinative, they add the definite article.[10]

By 1924, Harold Palmer had proposed a part of speech called "Pronouns and Determinatives", effectively "group[ing] with the pronouns all determinative adjectives (e.g., article-like, demonstratives, possessives, numerals, etc.), [and] shortening the term to determinatives (the "déterminatifs" of the French grammarians)."[11]: 24  Palmer separated this category from more prototypical adjectives (what he calls "qualificative adjectives") because, unlike prototypical adjectives, words in this category are not used predicatively, tend not to inflect for comparison, and tend not to be modified.[11]: 45 

In 1933, Leonard Bloomfield introduced the term determiner used in this article, which appears to define a syntactic function performed by "limiting adjectives".[12]

Our limiting adjectives fall into two sub-classes of determiners and numeratives … The determiners are defined by the fact that certain types of noun expressions (such as house or big house) are always accompanied by a determiner (as, this house, a big house).[13]: 203 

Matthews argues that the next important contribution was by Ralph B. Long in 1961, though Matthews notes that Long's contribution is largely ignored in the bibliographies of later prominent grammars, including A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language and CGEL. Matthews illustrates Long's analysis with the noun phrase this boy: "this is no longer, in [Long's] account, an adjective. It is instead a pronoun, of a class he called ‘determinative’, and it has the function of a ‘determinative modifier’."[6]: 71  This analysis was developed in a 1962 grammar by Barbara M. H. Strang[6]: 73  and in 1972 by Randolph Quirk and colleagues.[6]: 74  In 1985, A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language appears to have been the first work to explicitly conceive of determiner as a distinct lexical category.[6]: 74 

Determiners as heads?

[edit]

Until the late 1980s, linguists assumed that, in a phrase like the red ball, the head was the noun ball and that the was a dependent. But a student at MIT named Paul Abney proposed, in his PhD dissertation about English noun phrases (NPs) in 1987, that the head was not the noun ball but the determiner the, so that the red ball is a determiner phrase (DP).[14] This has come to be known as the DP analysis or the DP hypothesis (see Determiner phrase), and as of 2008 it is the majority view in generative grammar,[15]: 93  though it is rejected in other perspectives.[16] Chomsky also rejects it.[17]

A comparison of the structure of a box under the competing analyses
An NP with a determinative DP and a head nominal. The DP is headed by a D "a", and the nominal is headed by an N "box"
A tree diagram of the noun phrase a box with a DP in determinative function
A DP with a head D "a" and a complement NP. The NP is headed by the N "box"
A tree diagram of the determiner phrase a box under the DP analysis

Determiners versus other lexical categories

[edit]

Adjectives

[edit]

The main similarity between adjectives and determiners is that they can both appear immediately before nouns (e.g., many/happy people).

The key difference between adjectives and determiners in English is that adjectives cannot function as determinatives. The determinative function is an element in NPs that is obligatory in most singular countable NPs and typically occurs before any modifiers (see § Functions). For example, *I live in small house is ungrammatical because small house is a singular countable NP lacking a determinative. The adjective small is a modifier, not a determinative. In contrast, if the adjective is replaced or preceded by a possessive NP (I live in my house) or a determiner (I live in that house), then it becomes grammatical because possessive NPs and determiners function as determinatives.[1]: 538 

There are a variety of other differences between the categories. Determiners appear in partitive constructions, while adjectives do not (e.g., some of the people but not *happy of the people).[1]: 356  Adjectives can function as a predicative complement in a verb phrase (e.g., that was lovely), but determiners typically cannot (e.g., *that was every).[1]: 253  Adjectives are not typically definite or indefinite, while determiners are.[1]: 54  Adjectives as modifiers in a noun phrase do not need to agree in number with a head noun (e.g., old book, old books) while some determiners do (e.g., this book, these books).[1]: 56  Morphologically, adjectives often inflect for grade (e.g., big, bigger, biggest), while few determiners do.[1]: 356  Finally, adjectives can typically form adverbs by adding -ly (e.g., cheap → cheaply), while determiners cannot.[1]: 766 

The boundary between determiner and adjective is not always clear, however. In the case of the word many, for example, the distinction between determiner and adjective is fuzzy, and different linguists and grammarians have placed this term into different categories. The CGEL categorizes many as a determiner because it can appear in partitive constructions, as in many of them.[1]: 539  Alternatively, Bas Aarts offers three reasons to support the analysis of many as an adjective. First, it can be modified by very (as in his very many sins), which is a characteristic typical of certain adjectives but not of determiners. Second, it can occur as a predicative complement: his sins are many. Third, many has a comparative and superlative form (more and most, respectively).[18]: 126 

Pronouns

[edit]

Possessive pronouns such as my and your

[edit]

There is disagreement about whether possessive words such as my and your are determiners or not. For example, Collins COBUILD Grammar[19]: 61  classifies them as determiners while CGEL classify them as pronouns[1]: 357  and A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language has them dually classified as determiners[20]: 253  and as pronouns in determinative function.[20]: 361 

The main reason for classifying these possessive words as determiners is that, like determiners, they usually function as determinative in an NP (e.g., my / the cat).[1]: 357  Reasons for calling them pronouns and not determiners include that the pronouns typically inflect (e.g., I, me, my, mine, myself),[1]: 455  while determiners typically allow no morphological change.[1]: 356  Determiners also appear in partitive constructions, while pronouns do not (e.g., some of the people but not *my of the people).[1]: 356  Also, some determiners can be modified by adverbs (e.g., very many), but this is not possible for pronouns.[1]: 57 

We / us and you

[edit]

The words you and we share features commonly associated with both determiners and pronouns in constructions such as we teachers do not get paid enough. On the one hand, the phrase-initial position of these words is a characteristic they share with determiners (compare the teachers). Furthermore, they cannot combine with more prototypical determiners (*the we teachers), which suggests that they fill the same role.[18]: 125  These characteristics have led linguists and grammarians like Ray Jackendoff and Steven Paul Abney to categorize such uses of we and you as determiners.[21][14][1]: 374 

On the other hand, these words can show case contrast (e.g., us teachers), a feature that, in Modern English, is typical of pronouns but not of determiners.[18]: 125  Thus, Evelyne Delorme and Ray C. Dougherty treat words like us as pronouns in apposition with the noun phrases that follow them, an analysis that Merriam–Webster's Dictionary of English Usage also follows.[22][23] Richard Hudson and Mariangela Spinillo also categorize these words as pronouns but without assuming an appositive relationship between the pronoun and the rest of the noun phrase.[24][25]

Adverbs

[edit]

There is disagreement about whether that is a determiner or a degree adverb in clauses like it is not that unusual. For example, A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language categorizes this use of that as an adverb. This analysis is supported by the fact that other pre-head modifiers of adjectives that "intensify" their meaning tend to be adverbs, such as awfully in awfully sorry and too in too bright.[20]: 445–447 

On the other hand, Aarts categorizes this word as a determiner, a categorization also used in CGEL.[8]: 137 [1]: 549  This analysis can be supported by expanding the determiner phrase: it is not all that unusual. All can function as a premodifier of determiners (e.g., all that cake) but not adjectives (e.g., *all unusual), which leads Aarts to suggest that that is a determiner.[18]: 127 

Various quantificational expressions

[edit]

Expressions with similar quantification meanings such as a lot of, lots of, plenty of, a great deal of, tons of, etc. are sometimes said to be determiners,[20]: 263  while other grammars argue that they are not words, or even phrases. The non-determiner analysis is that they consist of the first part of a noun phrase.[1]: 349  For example, a lot of work is a noun phrase with lot as its head. It has a preposition phrase complement beginning with the preposition of. In this view, they could be considered lexical units, but they are not syntactic constituents.

The syntax of determiners and determiner phrases

[edit]

For the sake of this section, Abney's DP hypothesis (see § History) is set aside. In other words, here a DP is taken to be a dependent in a noun phrase (NP) and not the other way around.

Internal structure

[edit]

A determiner phrase (DP) is headed by a determiner and optionally takes dependents. DPs can take modifiers, which are usually adverb phrases (e.g., [almost no] people) or determiner phrases (e.g., [many more] people) .[1]: 431  Comparative determiners like fewer or more can take than prepositional phrase (PP) complements (e.g., it weighs [less than five] grams).[1]: 443  The following tree diagram in the style of CGEL shows the DP far fewer than twenty, with the adverb far as a modifier and the PP than twenty as a complement.

A DP with a modifier AdvP "far" and a head DP. The DP has a head D "fewer" and a comp PP "than twenty"

Functions

[edit]

Determinative

[edit]

As stated above, there is some terminological confusion about the terms "determiner" and "determinative". In this article, "determiner" is a lexical category while "determinative" is the function most typically performed by determiner phrases (in the same way that "adjective" denotes a category of words while "modifier" denotes the most typical function of adjective phrases). DPs are not the only phrases that can function as determinative, but they are the most common.[1]: 330 

A determinative is a function only in noun phrases. It is usually the leftmost constituent in the phrase, appearing before any modifiers.[26] A noun phrase may have many modifiers, but only one determinative is possible.[1] In most cases, a singular, countable, common noun requires a determinative to form a noun phrase; plurals and uncountables do not.[1] The determinative is underlined in the following examples:

  • the box
  • not very many boxes
  • even the very best workmanship
  • my uncle's house (the determinative is an NP, not a DP)
  • what size shoes (the determinative is an NP, not a DP)

The most common function of a DP is determinative in an NP. This is shown in the following syntax tree in the style of CGEL. It features two determiner phrases, all in predeterminer modifier function (see § Predeterminative), and the in determinative function (labeled Det:DP).

Predeterminative

[edit]

If noun phrases can only contain one determinative, the following noun phrases present challenges:

  • all the time
  • both those cars

The determiner phrase the functions as the determinative in all the time, and those functions as the determinative in both those cars. But all and both also have specifying roles rather than modifying roles in the noun phrase, much like the determinatives do. To account for noun phrases like these, A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language also recognizes the function of predeterminative (or predeterminer).[20]: 257  Some linguists and grammarians offer different accounts of these constructions. CGEL, for instance, classifies them as a kind of modifier in noun phrases.[1]: 433 

Predeterminatives are typically realized by determiner phrases (e.g., all in all the time). However, they can also be realized by noun phrases (e.g., one-fifth the size) and adverb phrases (e.g., thrice the rate).[8]: 119–120 

Modifier

[edit]

Determiner phrases can function as pre-head modifiers in noun phrases, such as the determiner phrase two in these two images. In this example, these functions as the determinative of the noun phrase, and two functions as a modifier of the head images.[8]: 126  And they can function as pre-head modifiers in adjective phrases—[AdjP [DP the] more], [AdjP [DP the] merrier]—and adverb phrases—[AdvP [DP the] longer] this dish cooks, [AdvP [DP the] better] it tastes).[1]: 549 [8]: 137, 162 

Determiner phrases can also function as post-head modifiers in these phrases. For example, the determiners each, enough, less, and more can function as post-head modifiers of noun phrases, as in the determiner phrase each in two seats each.[8]: 132  Enough can fill the same role in adjective phrases (e.g., clear enough) and in adverb phrases (e.g., funnily enough).[1]: 549 [8]: 138, 163 

DPs also function as modifiers in DPs (e.g., [not that many] people).[1]: 330 

Fusion of functions

[edit]

Determiners may bear two functions at one time. Usually this is a fusion of determinative and head in an NP where no head noun exists. In the clause many would disagree, the determiner many is the fused determinative-head in the NP that functions as the subject.[1]: 332  In many grammars, both traditional and modern, and in almost all dictionaries, such words are considered to be pronouns rather than determiners.

Types of determiners

[edit]

Several words can belong to the same part of speech but still differ from each other to various extents, with similar words forming subclasses of the part of speech. For example, the articles a and the have more in common with each other than with the demonstratives this or that, but both belong to the class of determiner and, thus, share more characteristics with each other than with words from other parts of speech. Article and demonstrative, then, can be considered subclasses or types of determiners.

Morphological types

[edit]

Compound determiners

[edit]

Most determiners are very basic in their morphology, but some are compounds.[1]: 391 A large group of these is formed with the words any, every, no, and some together with body, one, thing, or where (e.g., anybody, somewhere).[1]: 411  The morphological phenomenon started in Old English, when thing, was combined with some, any, and no. In Middle English, it would combine with every.[27]: 165 

The cardinal numbers greater than 99 are also compound determiners.[1]: 356  This group also includes a few and a little,[1]: 391  and Payne, Huddleston, and Pullum argue that once, twice, and thrice also belong here, and not in the adverb category.[28]

Gradable determiners

[edit]

Although most determiners do not inflect, the following determiners participate in the system of grade.[1]: 393 

The inflectional paradigms of degree determiners
Plain Comparative Superlative
few fewer fewest
little less least
many more most
much

Syntactic and semantic types

[edit]

The following types of determiners are organized, first, syntactically according to their typical position in a noun phrase in relation to each other and, then, according to their semantic contributions to the noun phrase. This first division, based on categorization from A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language, includes three categories:

  • Central determiners occur after any predeterminers and before any postdeterminers; they tend to function as determinatives regardless of the presence or absence of other determiners in the noun phrase.
  • Predeterminers occur before any other determiner in the noun phrase and often function as a determinative when no other word is filling that role or as a predeterminative when the determinative role is already filled.
  • Postdeterminers occur after all other determiners and often function as a determinative when no other word is filling that role or as a pre-head modifier of a noun phrase when the determinative role is filled.

The secondary divisions are based on the semantic contributions of the determiner to a noun phrase. The subclasses are named according to the labels assigned in CGEL and the Oxford Modern English Grammar, which use essentially the same labels.

Central determiners

[edit]
Articles
[edit]

According to CGEL, articles serve as "the most basic expression of definiteness and indefiniteness."[1]: 368  That is, while other determiners express definiteness and other kinds of meaning, articles serve primarily as markers of definiteness. The articles are generally considered to be:[29]

  • the (definite)
  • a(n) (indefinite)

Other articles have been posited, including unstressed some, a zero article (indefinite with mass and plural) and a null article (definite with singular proper nouns).[30]

Demonstrative determiners
[edit]

The two main demonstrative determiners are this and that. Their respective plural forms are these and those.[29]

singular plural
proximal this these
distal that those

The demonstrative determiners mark noun phrases as definite. They also add meaning related to spatial deixis; that is, they indicate where the thing referenced by the noun is in relation to the speaker. The proximal this signals that the thing is relatively close to the speaker while the distal that signals that the thing is relatively far.[1]: 373 

CGEL classifies the archaic and dialectal yonder (as in the noun phrase yonder hills) as a marginal demonstrative determiner.[1]: 615  Yonder signals that the thing referenced by the noun is far from the speaker, typically farther than what that would signal. Thus, we would expect yonder hills to be farther from the speaker than those hills. Unlike the main demonstrative determiners, yonder does not inflect for number (compare yonder hill).

Distributive determiners
[edit]

The following are the distributive determiners:[29]

  • each
  • every

The distributive determiners mark noun phrases as indefinite.[31] They also add distributive meaning; that is, "they pick out the members of a set singly, rather than considering them in mass."[20]: 382  Because they signal this distributive meaning, these determiners select singular noun heads when functioning as determinatives in noun phrases (e.g., each student).[1]: 378 

Existential determiners
[edit]

The following are the existential determiners:[29]

  • any
  • some

Existential determiners mark a noun phrase as indefinite. They also convey existential quantification, meaning that they assert the existence of a thing in a quantity greater than zero.[1]: 380 

Disjunctive determiners
[edit]

The following are the disjunctive determiners:[29]

  • either
  • neither

Disjunctive determiners mark a noun phrase as definite. They also imply a single selection from a set of exactly two.[1]: 387  Because they signal a single selection, disjunctive determiners select singular nouns when functioning as determinatives in noun phrases (e.g., either side). A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language does not recognize this category and instead label either an "assertive determiner" and neither a "negative determiner."[20]: 257 

Negative determiner
[edit]

The negative determiner is no with its independent form none.[29] Distinct dependent and independent forms are otherwise found only in possessive pronouns, where the dependent is only found with a subsequent noun and the independent without (e.g., my way and no way are dependent, while mine and none are independent).

No signifies that not one member of a set or sub-quantity of a quantity under consideration has a particular property. Neither also conveys this kind of meaning but is only used when selecting from a set of exactly two, which is why neither is typically classified as disjunctive rather than negative.[1]: 389–390 

Additive determiner
[edit]

The additive determiner is another.[29] Another was formed from the compounding of the indefinite article an and the adjective other; thus, it marks a noun phrase as indefinite. It also conveys additive meaning. For example, another banana signals an additional banana in addition to some first banana. Another can also mark an alternative. For example, another banana can also signal a different banana, perhaps one that is riper. Because it can also convey this alternative meaning, another is sometimes labeled an alternative-additive determiner.[1]: 391 

Sufficiency determiners
[edit]

The following are the sufficiency determiners:[29]

  • enough
  • sufficient

These determiners convey inexact quantification that is framed in terms of some minimum quantity needed. For instance, enough money for a taxi implies that a minimum amount of money is necessary to pay for a taxi and that the amount of money in question is sufficient for the purpose. When functioning as determinatives in a noun phrase, sufficiency determiners select plural count nouns (e.g., sufficient reasons) or non-count nouns (e.g., enough money).[1]: 396 

Interrogative determiners
[edit]

The following are the interrogative determiners:[29]

  • what
  • which

These determiners can also be followed by -ever and -soever. Interrogative determiners are typically used in the formation of questions, as in what/which conductor do you like best? Using what marks a noun phrase as indefinite while using which marks the noun phrase as definite, being used when the context implies a limited number of choices.[20]: 369 

Relative determiners
[edit]

The following are the relative determiners:[29]

  • what
  • which

These determiners can also be followed by -ever. Relative determiners typically function as determiners in noun phrases that introduce relative clauses, as in we can use whatever/whichever edition you want.[1]: 398 

Predeterminers

[edit]
Personal determiners
[edit]

In grammars that consider them determiners rather than pronouns (see § Determiners versus other lexical categories), the personal determiners are the following:[29]

  • we
  • you

Though these words are normally pronouns, in phrases like we teachers and you guys, they are sometimes classified as personal determiners. Personal determiners mark a noun phrase as definite. They also add meaning related to personal deixis; that is, they indicate whether the thing referenced by the noun includes the speaker (we/us) or at least one addressee and not the speaker (you).[1]: 374  In some dialects such as the Ozark dialect, this usage extends to them as in them folks.[32]

Universal determiners
[edit]

The following are the universal determiners:[29]

  • all
  • both

Universal determiners convey universal quantification, meaning that they assert that no subset of a thing exists that lacks the property that is described. For example, saying "all the vegetables are ripe" is the same as saying "no vegetables are not ripe."[1]: 359  The primary difference between all and both is that both applies only to sets with exactly two members while all lacks this limitation. But CGEL notes that because of the possibility of using both instead, all "generally strongly implicates 'more than two.'"[1]: 374 

Postdeterminers

[edit]
Cardinal numerals
[edit]

Cardinal numerals (zero, one, two, thirty-four, etc.) can represent any number. Therefore, the members of this subclass of determiner are infinite in quantity and cannot be listed in full.

Cardinal numerals are typically thought to express the exact number of the things represented by the noun, but this exactness is through implicature rather than necessity. In the clause five people complained, for example, the number of people complaining is usually thought to be exactly five. But technically, the proposition would still be true if additional people were complaining as well: if seven people were complaining, then it is also necessarily true that five people were complaining. General norms of cooperative conversation, however, make it such that cardinal numerals typically express the exact number (e.g., five = no more and no less than five) unless otherwise modified (e.g., at least five or at most five).[1]: 385–386 

Positive paucal determiners
[edit]

The following are the positive paucal determiners:[29]

  • a few
  • a little
  • certain
  • several
  • various

The positive paucal determiners convey a small, imprecise quantity—generally characterized as greater than two but smaller than whatever quantity is considered large. When functioning as determinatives in a noun phrase, most paucal determiners select plural count nouns (e.g., a few mistakes), but a little selects non-count nouns (e.g., a little money).[1]: 391–392 

Degree determiners
[edit]

In grammars that consider them determiners rather than adjectives (see § Determiners versus other lexical categories), the degree determiners are the following:[29]

  • few
  • little
  • many
  • much

Degree determiners mark a noun phrase as indefinite. They also convey imprecise quantification, with many and much expressing a large quantity and few and little expressing a small quantity. Degree determiners are unusual in that they inflect for grade, a feature typical of adjectives and adverbs but not determiners. The comparative forms of few, little, many, and much are fewer, less, more, and more respectively. The superlative forms are fewest, least, most, and most respectively.[1]: 393  The plain forms can be modified with adverbs, especially very, too and so (and not can also be added). Note that unmodified much is quite rarely used in affirmative statements in colloquial English.

Semantics

[edit]

The main semantic contributions of determiners are quantification and definiteness.

Quantification

[edit]

Many determiners express quantification.[33][1]: 358 

  • Most obviously, cardinal numbers (zero, one, two, etc.) express quantification.
  • The degree determiners much/many, little/few, and their comparative and superlative forms more, most, less/fewer, least/fewest all express quantification. Where two forms are given, the first is used with non-count nouns and the second with count nouns (although in colloquial English less and least are frequently also used with count nouns).
  • The positive paucal determiners also express quantification. These are a few/a little, several, a couple of, a bit of, a number of etc.
  • Finally, determiners expressing maximum, sufficient or zero quantity all express quantification. These are all, both, enough, sufficient, no.

Definiteness

[edit]

From a semantic point of view, a definite NP is one that is identifiable and activated in the minds of the first person and the addressee. From a grammatical point of view in English, definiteness is typically marked by definite determiners, such as the, that, and this, all, every, both, etc. Linguists find it useful to make a distinction between the grammatical feature of definiteness and the cognitive feature of identifiability.[34]: 84  This accounts for cases of form-meaning mismatch, where a definite determiner results in an indefinite NP, such as the example I met this guy from Heidelberg on the train, where the underlined NP is grammatically definite but semantically indefinite.[34]: 82 

The majority of determiners, however, are indefinite. These include the indefinite article a, but also most quantifiers, including the cardinal numerals.

Pragmatics

[edit]

Choosing the definite article over no article in a pair like the Americans and Americans can have the pragmatic effect of depicting "the group as a monolith of which the speaker is not a part."[35] Relatedly, the choice between this and that may have an evaluative purpose, where this suggest a closeness, and therefore a more positive evaluation.[36]

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

English determiners

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
In , determiners are a functional category of words that precede and modify within noun phrases, serving to specify, quantify, or identify the of the noun by indicating , quantity, possession, or proximity. They form a closed class of function words, distinct from adjectives, and are obligatory with singular count nouns to provide grammatical specificity, such as in phrases like the dog or , but optional with or nouns. Determiners are broadly classified into three main positions relative to the : pre-determiners, which express fractions or quantifiers like all or half; central determiners, including articles (the, a, an), (this, that, these, those), possessives (my, your, his), and interrogatives (which, what); and post-determiners, such as cardinal numbers (one, two) and ordinal numbers (first, second). This hierarchical ordering is syntactically rigid, as seen in sequences like all those three books, where pre-determiners precede central ones, followed by post-determiners, ensuring precise semantic interpretation of , , or identification. Historically, determiners emerged as a recognized in English during the mid-20th century, evolving from earlier analyses that grouped them with adjectives, and they play a crucial role in restricting the scope of s by contributing identificational or quantitative features without adding descriptive qualities. In addition to their primary role, some determiners can function pronominally, standing alone to replace a , as in These are mine.

Terminology and History

Definition and Terminology

In , determiners constitute a closed class of words that typically precede and modify within , serving to specify or limit the reference of the noun by indicating , , possession, or proximity. Examples include articles such as the (definite) and a (indefinite), like this and that, quantifiers such as some and many, and possessives like my or John's. These words are obligatory with singular count in English, ensuring the noun phrase achieves referential specificity, as in "the book" or "many books." Unlike such as or verbs, which carry substantial lexical meaning, determiners function primarily as grammatical elements that anchor the to the context, transforming predicative noun expressions into referential arguments. In this role, determiners encode features like familiarity (e.g., the for known entities) or quantity (e.g., some for unspecified amounts), distinguishing them from descriptive modifiers and emphasizing their structural necessity in formation. This functional distinction underscores determiners' position as a separate , often treated as a heterogeneous category that includes both inflected and uninflected forms. The terminology surrounding determiners has evolved from traditional classifications within parts of speech—where they were sometimes grouped under adjectives or called "determinatives"—to contemporary views in , which recognize them as heads of a (DP). In the DP hypothesis, introduced by Abney in 1987, the determiner occupies the head position (D) of a functional projection that dominates the (NP), paralleling the clausal structure of Complementizer Phrase (CP) over infinitive phrase (IP). This framework, widely adopted in modern syntax, reinterprets what were traditionally noun phrases as DPs, with examples like "this book" illustrating the determiner's central role in licensing the entire nominal expression.

Historical Development

The classification of what are now known as English determiners traces its roots to classical Latin and Greek grammars, which heavily influenced early modern English linguistic descriptions. In Greek grammar, the definite article (derived from the demonstrative ho, hē, to) was often treated as a type of adjective or pronoun, while Latin, lacking articles altogether, grouped similar limiting words under adjectives or nouns. Early English grammarians, such as William Lily in his 1542 Short Introduction of Grammar modeled on Latin traditions, similarly classified articles like the and a as adjectives, emphasizing their attributive role without recognizing a distinct category. In the , marked a pivotal shift toward isolating as a separate class. coined the term "" in his 1933 Language, defining it to encompass "limiting adjectives" such as articles, , and possessives, which he identified as a closed-class form exhibiting fixed distributional patterns distinct from open-class adjectives. , in his contemporaneous Essentials of (1933), contributed to this refinement by analyzing articles and as "primary adjectives" with unique syntactic constraints, influencing the structuralist emphasis on function over . These developments established determiners' closed-class status, contrasting with the gradable, descriptive nature of adjectives. Generative grammar further advanced the category in the late , building on Chomsky's 1981 Lectures on Government and Binding, which laid groundwork for functional projections in phrase structure. This led to the DP hypothesis, prominently articulated by Abney in 1987, positing determiners as heads of Determiner Phrases (DPs), supplanting the noun as the central element in nominal constructions and paralleling complementizer phrases (CPs) in clausal syntax. A key milestone was Randolph Quirk et al.'s 1985 A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language, which systematically categorized determiners into predeterminers (e.g., all), central determiners (e.g., the), and postdeterminers (e.g., many), solidifying their independent status in descriptive .

Debates on Category Status

The status of determiners as a distinct has been a subject of significant in linguistic , particularly regarding whether they function as heads of phrases, modifiers, or something else entirely. One prominent position, the (DP) hypothesis, posits that determiners serve as heads that project their own phrasal category, embedding the (NP) as a complement. This view was formalized by Abney (1987), who argued that structures like "the big house" involve the determiner "the" as the head of a DP, with the adjective-noun sequence "big house" forming the NP complement. Evidence for this includes the inability of multiple determiners to co-occur (*the my book), which suggests they compete for a single head position, and parallels with other functional projections like IP for clauses. Counterarguments challenge the head status of determiners, proposing instead that they act as specifiers or within an NP framework, without the full properties expected of heads such as obligatory selectional restrictions on complements. In dependency grammars, for instance, determiners are treated as dependents of the noun head, lacking independent frames that true heads exhibit; "the" in "the book" depends on "book" rather than projecting a separate phrase. Huddleston and Pullum (2002) in their analysis of English nominals similarly reject the DP hypothesis, viewing determiners as determinatives that function as dependents or modifiers within NPs, arguing that the evidence for DP layering overcomplicates simpler NP structures without sufficient empirical gains. Cross-linguistic evidence further fuels the debate by questioning the universality of determiners as a head category. While English relies heavily on articles like "the" and "a" as core determiners, languages such as Russian lack definite and indefinite articles altogether, expressing definiteness through context, word order, or genitive constructions instead (e.g., Russian kniga "book" can be definite or indefinite based on pragmatics). This absence raises doubts about whether the D head is a universal primitive or a language-specific feature, with some analyses suggesting that Russian nominals are headed by N without a dedicated D layer, challenging claims of DP universality. These debates have profound implications for in generative syntax. Under the DP , rules must accommodate DP as the maximal projection, embedding NP as in the simplified :

DP / \ D NP | /|\ the Det N' / \ Adj N big house

DP / \ D NP | /|\ the Det N' / \ Adj N big house

This embedding allows determiners to govern agreement and case features uniformly, paralleling clausal structures, but critics argue it introduces unnecessary complexity, preferring flat NP rules where determiners are optional left dependents without projection. Such differences affect analyses of movement, binding, and scope, with DP proponents gaining explanatory power for phenomena like possessor externalization, while NP advocates emphasize parsimony in cross-linguistic application.

Distinctions from Other Categories

Versus Adjectives

In English noun phrases, determiners and adjectives occupy distinct syntactic positions, with determiners required to precede any attributive adjectives that modify the head . This ordering is obligatory, as illustrated by the grammaticality of "the big house" compared to the ungrammatical "*big the house," reflecting the determiner's role in framing the referential scope of the phrase before descriptive modification occurs. Such positioning ensures that determiners, as functional elements, integrate with the to specify or quantity prior to adjectival attribution. Distributional tests further highlight these differences, particularly in stacking and gradability. Unlike adjectives, which can be stacked in sequences or coordinated (e.g., "the big red house" or "the big and red house"), determiners resist co-occurrence within the same , rendering "*the some house" or "*the a house" ungrammatical. Moreover, adjectives typically permit gradation through intensifiers like "very" (e.g., "very big") or comparative forms (e.g., "bigger"), whereas determiners do not (e.g., "*very the" or "*ther"), underscoring their non-gradable, closed-class nature. Some lexical items exhibit functional overlap between the two categories, such as "whole," which can serve as a predeterminer emphasizing totality (e.g., "the whole ") or as an adjective describing completeness (e.g., "a whole " in contrastive contexts). Despite this versatility, the core distinction persists: determiners primarily encode referential properties like specificity or possession, while adjectives convey descriptive attributes, preventing full interchangeability. Syntactic ambiguity can emerge when a word's category is unclear, as in "old men and women," where "old" unambiguously functions as an modifying only "men" (yielding the reading of elderly males and females of unspecified age), rather than as a applying to the conjoined nouns. Resolution relies on the fixed -adjective order and coordination rules, which preclude "old" from serving as a determiner for "women" without additional structure.

Versus Pronouns

English determiners and share referential functions but differ fundamentally in their syntactic roles: determiners modify within to specify or quantify them, whereas pronouns stand alone as substitutes for entire . For instance, in "the book is on the table," "the" functions as a determiner accompanying the "book," but in "it is on the table," "it" replaces the full "the book" as a . This distinction underscores that determiners cannot occur independently without a following , while pronouns can. A prominent area of contrast appears in possessive constructions, where forms like "my," "your," "his," "her," "its," "our," and "their" serve as when modifying , as in "my " or "their house," but shift to independent possessive pronouns such as "mine," "yours," "his," "hers," "its," "ours," and "theirs" when substituting for , as in "this book is mine" or "that house is theirs." These determiners occupy the determiner slot in the noun phrase structure, limiting co-occurrence with other determiners, unlike the standalone nature of possessive pronouns. In terms of anaphora, pronouns typically establish reference by substituting for previously mentioned noun phrases, relying on an antecedent for interpretation, as in "John left, and he took his keys," where "he" anaphorically replaces "John." Determiners like "the" or demonstratives such as "this" and "that," however, do not substitute but instead signal prior reference when accompanying a noun, as in "John left the keys; this action surprised everyone," presupposing familiarity without full replacement. This highlights pronouns' role in coreference resolution versus determiners' contribution to definiteness within phrases. Special cases involve first- and second-person pronouns like "we," "us," and "you," which primarily function as pronouns but can exhibit determiner-like behavior in constructions such as "we linguists" or "you students," where they precede and modify a , suggesting a fused or extended syntactic role akin to possessives. This usage, analyzed as pronouns acting in determiner positions, contrasts with their independent pronominal forms and aligns with broader debates on pronominal category boundaries.

Versus Adverbs and Quantifiers

English determiners differ from adverbs primarily in their syntactic distribution and function within s. Determiners, such as the or some, occupy a fixed position at the beginning of a to specify or quantify the referent of the noun, as in "the book" or "some books". In contrast, adverbs typically modify verbs, adjectives, or other adverbs, rather than nouns directly, as seen in "quickly run" or "very interesting". This positional restriction highlights that determiners integrate tightly into structure, whereas adverbs exhibit greater mobility across the clause. Rare overlaps occur with words like only, which can function as a quantifier-adverb with focus-sensitive scope over predicates or clauses, such as in "" (modifying the ), unlike its rarer determiner-like use in "only one book". Another example is very, an intensifying that modifies adjectives or adverbs (very quickly), but cannot precede a as a does (the very book is idiomatic but distinct, with very acting as an intensifier rather than a core ). These cases underscore that while some adverbs influence quantification indirectly, they lack the obligatory noun-specifying role of determiners. Quantifiers present a closer boundary with determiners, as many quantifiers—such as many, all, or several—function as determiners when positioned before the noun, forming expressions like "many books" or "all the students". However, quantifiers can also appear independently or "float" away from the noun phrase in adverbial positions, as in "Many of the books fell" or "They all left", which associates the quantifier with the subject but allows it to modify the verb phrase more broadly—a distribution unavailable to prototypical determiners like the. Constructions like "many of the books" further distinguish quantifiers, where many acts external to the definite noun phrase, contrasting with the fused determiner use in "many books". Scope ambiguities further delineate these categories: determiners bind tightly to their , restricting reference within it (all the books quantifies the specific set of books), while quantifiers and adverbs often extend scope over larger clausal elements, as in "Many left early" where many scopes over the event. For instance, several serves as a postdeterminer quantifier in "the several books" but cannot float independently like quantifiers. This fixed versus flexible scoping reinforces the categorical boundary, with determiners anchoring interpretation more rigidly than their or floating quantifier counterparts.

Syntax of Determiner Phrases

Internal Structure

In English syntax, the determiner phrase (DP) exhibits a hierarchical internal structure where the determiner functions as the head, projecting a phrase that encompasses numerals, adjectives, and the noun. The basic template can be represented as [Determiner [Numeral/Adjective [Noun]]], as seen in the example "these three red books," where "these" is the determiner, "three" a numeral, "red" an adjective, and "books" the noun. This structure reflects the DP hypothesis, which posits that determiners head nominal projections rather than nouns doing so, paralleling the clausal structure with complements and specifiers. The layering within the DP includes distinct slots for predeterminers, central determiners, and postdeterminers, forming a sequence that adheres to strict ordering constraints. Predeterminers such as "all" precede central determiners like articles ("the") or ("this"), which in turn precede postdeterminers including quantifiers ("many") or numerals ("three"). This projects as DP > QP > NP, where the Quantifier Phrase (QP) intervenes between the DP and the (NP), accommodating elements like quantifiers that modify the noun's . In English, nouns do not typically raise through these layers, unlike in some , preserving the surface order. Determiners within the DP must agree with the noun in number, with gender relevant only in certain possessive forms (e.g., his/her/its); for instance, "this" (singular) contrasts with "these" (plural) when modifying "book" versus "books," while mass nouns like "" select uninflected forms. Central determiners select an NP complement, ensuring compatibility, as definite articles require a specific but do not permit stacking with incompatible elements like multiple demonstratives. Agreement failures result in ungrammaticality, such as "*this book these," highlighting the functional projections' role in feature checking. Complex DPs demonstrate embedding and limited , as in "all of the many books," where "all" embeds a prepositional phrase containing the central "the" and postdeterminer "many" before the "books." Such constructions reveal limits, as English disallows indefinite in predeterminer slots (e.g., "*all of all of the books" is marginal), constrained by the DP's functional layers to prevent overgeneration. These examples underscore the DP's capacity for compositionality while maintaining linear order through specifier-head-complement relations.

Syntactic Functions

In generative syntax, determiners are posited to head Determiner Phrases (DPs), serving as the functional projection that encodes referential properties and parallels the clausal structure headed by tense or complementizers. The core syntactic role of a determiner, known as the function, involves specifying the , specificity, or quantity of the associated noun, thereby determining its reference within the DP; for instance, in "," "the" heads the DP and takes the "cat" as its complement, rendering the entire construction referential. This function is obligatory for singular countable nouns in English to avoid ungrammaticality, as bare forms like "*cat" are infelicitous in such contexts unless in specialized registers. Predeterminers occupy a position external to the central determiner, functioning to quantify or multiply over the entire DP; examples include "all" and "both," as in "all the cats," where "all" scopes over the definite DP "the cats" to denote totality. These elements precede articles or demonstratives and cannot co-occur with incompatible central determiners, reflecting their hierarchical role in the extended nominal projection. Postdeterminers, such as "many" or cardinal numerals, fulfill a modifier function by following the central and directly qualifying the head within the DP; for example, in "the many cats," "many" modifies the plurality and extent of "cats" while remaining dependent on the preceding definite article. This positioning distinguishes postdeterminers from adjectives, as they resist comparative forms or modification in this slot and enforce strict ordering constraints. At the sentence level, DPs headed by determiners integrate as major constituents, functioning as subjects, objects, or complements, with the determiner influencing case assignment through structural relations; for instance, possessive determiners like "John's" trigger genitive marking on the following , as in "John's cat," enabling the DP to receive external case from verbs or prepositions in clauses like "John's cat chased the mouse." This integration underscores the 's role in licensing the DP's argument status without altering its internal referential properties.

Functional Fusion and Overlaps

English determiners often exhibit functional fusion, where a single form combines multiple syntactic roles, or overlaps with other categories, leading to hybrid behaviors in noun phrases. For instance, "some" functions as both a central determiner and a quantifier, serving an existential role similar to an indefinite article while quantifying over subsets; this is evident in constructions like "some students liked it" (proportional reading) or "some books in my bag" (non-proportional), where it combines with singular, plural count, or noncount nouns. Similarly, the definite article "the" fuses the marking of definiteness with its core determinative function, specifying a unique or contextually identifiable referent without additional quantificational elements. Overlaps with pronouns are particularly prominent in genitive forms, such as "its" or "my," which act as central determiners to express possession while sharing morphological and semantic properties with independent possessive pronouns; for example, "its tail" parallels the pronominal "it is mine" in indicating , yet "its" requires a following and co-occurs with postdeterminers like "many" in "my many books." This dual role highlights , as genitives specify in phrases while echoing pronominal . Ambiguous structures further illustrate fusion, as in "half the cake," where "half" merges predeterminer and quantifier functions to denote a fractional portion, or acts as a postdeterminer in "the second half hour," with its role resolved by contextual positioning; it can even nominalize as "half of the time." Such fusions are constrained by rules that prevent incompatible combinations, ensuring hierarchical ordering in phrases. Predeterminers like "all" and "both" are mutually exclusive, as in the ungrammatical "*all both books," due to semantic clashes in and quantity features— "both" requires a definite plural dual set, while "all" demands a broader inclusive scope. These limits maintain the single central constraint, prohibiting overlaps like "*the my book," and underscore how fusion operates within strict syntactic boundaries rather than .

Types of Determiners

Central Determiners

Central determiners constitute the primary subclass of determiners in English noun phrases, directly specifying the noun's reference and occupying the obligatory central slot in the layered structure [predeterminer - central determiner - postdeterminer - noun]. This position ensures they immediately precede any adjectives or the head noun, as in "the old house" or "this rapid growth". They form a closed class, comprising a finite inventory of items that cannot be productively expanded, unlike open classes such as nouns or verbs. The main subtypes of central determiners are articles, demonstratives, possessives, interrogatives, indefinites, negatives, and universals/distributives, each with distinct morphological and distributional properties. Articles include the definite article the, which marks unique or previously identified referents, and the indefinite articles a and an (the latter used before vowel-initial nouns), which introduce non-specific or new entities, restricted to singular countable nouns. For example, the dog barks specifies a particular dog, while a dog barks refers to an unspecified one. Demonstratives are this and that for singular nouns, and these and those for plural, indicating proximity (this/these for near, that/those for distant), as in that idea works or these books are heavy. Possessives encompass first- and second-person forms (my, your, our) and third-person forms (his, her, its, their), denoting ownership or relation, such as my car or their decision. These subtypes exhibit number agreement where applicable: singular forms like this book contrast with plural these books. Interrogative determiners include which, what, and whose, used in questions and relative clauses to inquire about identity or possession, as in which book?, what time?, or whose house is this?. Indefinite determiners such as some and any refer to unspecified quantities, with some typically in affirmative contexts (some water) and any in questions or negatives (any questions?). Negative determiners like no and neither deny existence or choice, as in no problem or neither option. Universal and distributive determiners every, each, and either specify totality or individuality, e.g., every student or each day. A key characteristic of central determiners is their mutual incompatibility: only one may occur per , preventing combinations like the ungrammatical the this book or my that idea. This exclusivity underscores their role in uniquely specifying the noun's grammatical status. They are obligatory in declarative noun phrases with singular countable nouns, where omission results in ungrammaticality (dog barks is invalid without a ), though mass or plural nouns may allow zero articles in some contexts. In the broader , central determiners integrate with peripheral elements but remain the structural core, as seen in all the three dogs (predeterminer all + central the + postdeterminer three + noun).

Predeterminers and Postdeterminers

Predeterminers occupy a position immediately before central determiners in the noun phrase, serving to indicate fractions, totality, or multipliers that modify the entire determiner phrase. Common examples include "all," "both," and "half," which express the scope of the following elements. For instance, in "all the dogs," "all" functions as a predeterminer specifying the totality of the referent introduced by the central determiner "the." Similarly, "both those pages" uses "both" to denote duality over the demonstrative central determiner "those." Fractions like "half" also appear in this slot, as in "half a cup," where it precedes the indefinite central determiner "a" to indicate partial quantity. Postdeterminers, in contrast, follow central determiners and precede the head, typically including cardinal numbers, ordinals, and quantifiers such as "many" or "few." These elements provide additional specification of quantity, order, or extent within the . Examples include "the two dogs," with "two" as a cardinal postdeterminer after the definite central "the," and "my first job," where "first" is an ordinal postdeterminer following the central "my." Quantifiers like "many" appear in constructions such as "the many books," adding a sense of abundance after the central . Predeterminers and postdeterminers interact with central s under strict ordering constraints, forming sequences of predeterminer–central –postdeterminer before the . Only one central is permitted per , ensuring mutual exclusivity among articles, , and possessives. For example, "all the many hours" combines the predeterminer "all," central "the," and postdeterminer "many" to convey exhaustive plurality. However, sequences violating this order, such as "*all three the dogs," are ungrammatical; instead, the valid form is "all of the three dogs," where "all of" incorporates the predeterminer with the central "the," and "three" serves as the postdeterminer specifying . This fixed reflects the scope relations, with predeterminers taking widest scope over the entire phrase, as in "both of these books," where "both" encompasses the "these." Postdeterminers like "many" in "the many old houses" narrow the further, scoping under the central but over adjectives and the .

Morphological and Gradable Variants

English determiners exhibit limited morphological compared to other parts of speech, primarily marking number and, in some cases, case, but lacking tense or gender agreement. Demonstrative determiners like this inflect for number, appearing as this (singular) or these () to agree with the they modify, while that becomes those in form. Possessive determiners such as whose reflect , derived from pronouns, but do not inflect for number or tense. Overall, English determiners show no verbal tense marking, distinguishing them from inflected categories like nouns or verbs. Certain determiners form compounds, particularly indefinite ones that blend with pronouns or s to create fused forms like somebody, anyone, everyone, and . These compounds function as indefinite pronouns but originate from bases (some-, any-, every-, no-) combined with suffixes like -body, -one, or -thing, allowing reference to unspecified entities without a following . In regional varieties, such compounds vary; for instance, older speakers in rural and northeast prefer -body forms (e.g., somebody over someone), reflecting historical influences from 19th-century British dialects. Gradable determiners, often quantifiers functioning in determiner positions, are exceptional in allowing comparative and superlative degrees, unlike non-gradable articles such as the or a. Quantifiers like many (countable) and much (uncountable) form comparatives as more and superlatives as most, as in more of the books or most people, expressing relative quantity on a scale. Similarly, few (countable) and little (uncountable) yield fewer/less and fewest/least, enabling constructions like fewer apples to compare decreasing amounts. This gradability treats these determiners as scalar, akin to adjectives, and permits modification by degree words like too or as ... as. Regional and fused variants further diversify determiner morphology. In Scots English, the demonstrative those appears as thae, a survival from older forms used in plural contexts like thae days. Dialectal contractions produce fused forms such as some o' the for some of the, common in informal Scottish and Irish English, where o' elides of for phonetic ease. These variants highlight how adapt morphologically across English dialects without altering core syntactic roles.

Semantics

Quantification

Quantifiers within English determiners express quantity, , and distributivity by relating a restricted domain (typically a ) to a predicate, often formalized as binary relations between sets. These include universal quantifiers such as "all" and "every," which denote that the predicate holds for every element in the domain; existential quantifiers such as "some," which indicate at least one element satisfies the predicate; and cardinal quantifiers including numerals ("two") and scalar terms ("few"), which specify exact or approximate numbers within the domain. For instance, "two dogs barked" asserts exactly two dogs in the domain performed the action, while "few students passed" implies a small relative to expectations. In formal semantics, determiners function as generalized quantifiers, a framework pioneered by Montague (1973), where noun phrases are interpreted as higher-order functions over properties rather than simple referential terms. Under this approach, a determiner like "every" combines with a (e.g., "") to form a quantifier that applies to a (e.g., "barked"), yielding a meaning equivalent to the logical formula ∀x\forall x (Dog(x)→(x) \rightarrow Bark(x))(x)), meaning for all xx, if xx is a , then xx barked. Similarly, "some" corresponds to ∃x\exists x (Dog(x)∧(x) \land Bark(x))(x)), asserting there exists at least one that barked. This treatment unifies the semantics of quantificational determiners, allowing them to interact systematically with other linguistic elements. Distributivity arises when a quantifier requires the predicate to apply individually to each member of the plural domain, contrasting with collective readings possible under non-distributive determiners. For example, "both dogs barked" enforces a distributive interpretation, where each dog barked separately, whereas "the dogs barked" permits either a distributive (each barked) or (they barked together) reading. Universal quantifiers like "every" and "each" typically mandate strict distributivity over individuals, ensuring the predicate holds for each element independently. Quantifiers also interact through scope ambiguities, where the relative ordering of their domains affects interpretation, often resolved via quantifier raising in . In "Some of the boys read every book," a wide-scope reading for "some" yields ∃x\exists x ((x)∧∀y(x) \land \forall y ((y)→(y) \rightarrow Read(x,y)))(x,y))), meaning there are boys who each read all the books, while a narrow-scope reading for "some" (wide scope for "every") gives ∀y\forall y ((y)→∃x(y) \rightarrow \exists x ((x)∧(x) \land Read(x,y)))(x,y))), meaning for every book, some boys read it (possibly different boys per book). Such ambiguities highlight how determiners' semantic contributions extend beyond simple to complex relational meanings.

Definiteness and Reference

In English, determiners play a central role in encoding , which distinguishes phrases that refer to specific, identifiable entities from those that do not. The definite article "the" signals that the is unique or familiar within the discourse context, as in "the book on the table," implying a particular book known to the speaker and listener. Similarly, such as "this" and "that," and possessives such as "my" and "his," also encode by indicating a specific, contextually salient, or possessed . In contrast, the indefinite article "a" or "an" introduces a non-specific or novel , as in "a book on the table," where the entity is one among many without presupposing uniqueness or prior identification. Additionally, the zero article appears in generic statements, such as "dogs bark," where the refers to the kind or class as a whole rather than specific instances, conveying a general property without definite or indefinite marking. Specificity further refines the referential properties of determiners, particularly with indefinites, by indicating whether the is intended as identifiable by the speaker, even if not by the hearer. For example, "the book I read" uses the definite article to denote a specific, unique tied to the speaker's experience, whereas "a I read" can be non-specific, referring to any such without emphasizing . This distinction highlights how determiners contribute to referential precision, with definites often carrying a stronger commitment to a particular entity. Anaphoric uses of determiners, especially "the," facilitate reference to previously mentioned or inferable entities, enabling cohesive discourse. In the sequence "I saw a cat. The cat was black," the definite article bridges to the antecedent "a cat," presupposing its and uniqueness in the context for the to hold. Such bridging anaphora relies on the definite to signal referential continuity without repeating the full description. Semantically, theories of definiteness center on how determiners manage reference and uniqueness. Bertrand Russell's 1905 analysis treats definite descriptions as asserting existence and uniqueness, analyzing "the king of France is bald" as implying there exists exactly one king of France and that he is bald, reducing the phrase to a quantificational structure rather than a presupposition. In response, P.F. Strawson's 1950 presuppositional view argues that definite descriptions presuppose rather than assert existence and uniqueness; thus, "the king of France is bald" fails to refer if no such king exists, rendering the statement neither true nor false but presuppositionally defective. These contrasting accounts underscore the debate on whether definiteness involves truth-conditional assertions or pragmatic presuppositions in English referential semantics.

Pragmatics and Usage

Discourse Roles

Determiners play a crucial role in discourse management by facilitating tracking, coherence, and speaker-hearer alignment across utterances. In English, they contribute to the flow of by signaling how entities relate to prior or upcoming , thereby reducing ambiguity and enhancing textual unity. This relational function allows determiners to link nominal expressions relationally, often through or by invoking shared knowledge, as seen in frameworks treating determiners as discourse-linking elements. Anaphoric uses of determiners refer backward to previously mentioned entities, reinforcing continuity, while cataphoric uses point forward to establish in . For instance, the definite article the in "the aforementioned plan" anaphorically recalls a prior , assuming hearer familiarity to maintain cohesion. Cataphoric instances, such as the in complex determiners like " chapter," preview upcoming content, often in instructional or texts to guide reader expectations. Complex determiners like the same or another extend these functions by emphasizing coreferentiality (e.g., "She read the same book again") or introducing type-related instances (e.g., "Another example illustrates this point"), adding layers of comparison and retrievability in extended . Determiners also mark topics by distinguishing given (hearer-old) from new (hearer-new) , aiding structure in . Indefinite determiners like a or an typically introduce new entities (e.g., "A problem arose"), signaling novelty and placing them in non- positions like post-verbal slots for focus. In contrast, the definite the denotes given , assuming uniqueness and familiarity (e.g., "The problem was solved"), often in topic-prominent positions to exhaustively reference shared knowledge. This binary signaling supports progression, with violations (e.g., new in topic position) occurring for emphasis but adhering to patterns in about 92% of given cases and 52% of new ones in spoken English. In formal , determiners contribute to and focus by softening references or highlighting contrasts. determiners like this or that enable contrastive focus (e.g., "That idea, not this one, is flawed"), directing and clarifying distinctions without direct . In parliamentary or ceremonial contexts, elaborate forms such as "the honorable " use the to convey , presupposing mutual and framing the positively to mitigate face threats. Such usages leverage for social alignment, appearing frequently in cohesive academic where this/these as determiners (75% of occurrences) link to abstract or shell nouns for polite elaboration. Cross-sentence tracking relies heavily on the definite article the, which presupposes familiarity and unique identifiability to sustain reference across utterances. For example, in a sequence like "I saw a cat. The cat was black," the invokes the prior indefinite as a discourse referent, ensuring continuity without reintroduction. This presupposition accommodates both familiarity (from explicit mention) and bridging inferences (from context), with uniqueness sufficient but not always necessary for felicity, as in "The beer was cold" following a picnic supplies mention. Such tracking unifies discourse referents, preventing referential gaps and supporting pragmatic inference in ongoing interaction.

Contextual Variations

In certain English dialects, such as , non-standard possessive determiners emerge through morphological innovations, including the addition of an "-n" suffix to forms like "hern" (hers), "yourn" (yours), and "theirn" (theirs) in partitive genitive constructions. These variants reflect retained features from earlier English varieties and are used to express possession without the standard apostrophe-s form, as in "That's hern book." Such patterns highlight dialectal divergence from while maintaining functional clarity in local communication. Register influences determiner selection, with formal contexts favoring specialized forms for precision and economy. In legal and official writing, "said" functions as a postdeterminer or standalone to anaphorically refer to previously introduced nouns, as in "the said agreement shall be binding," avoiding redundancy and upholding a concise, authoritative style. This usage, rooted in 19th-century legal conventions but persisting in modern formal registers, contrasts with informal speech, where like "that" often replace articles for casual reference, such as "pass that salt" instead of "pass the salt" to convey immediacy and familiarity. Social shapes determiner use amid evolving norms for inclusivity. The "their" has gained prominence in singular gender-neutral constructions, as in "Someone left their umbrella," to avoid binary assumptions associated with "his" or "her." This shift, driven by broader movements toward equitable since the late , extends to determiners in professional and public discourse, promoting politeness through non-assumptive reference. Politeness implicatures may also arise from article choice; for instance, the definite article can signal shared and in interactions, while the indefinite article softens introductions to mitigate . Historical reveals shifts in application, particularly with mass nouns. By the , the definite article "the" was routinely paired with mass nouns to denote specific instances, as in "the water in the glass," mirroring present-day patterns and reflecting efforts in early modern grammars that codified article usage for clarity in abstract and uncountable references. This post-18th-century consistency underscores how pragmatic needs for specificity influenced the article's role in distinguishing general from particular uses of mass terms.

References

  1. https://opentextbooks.library.arizona.edu/languageawareness/chapter/adjectives-determiners/
  2. https://www.sjsu.edu/faculty/pmaster/Determiners%20in%20EST.pdf
  3. https://repository.upenn.edu/bitstreams/f877c3da-bfc5-4d71-832b-7c078cc36f85/download
  4. https://opentext.ku.edu/syntax/chapter/chapter-2-parts-of-speech/
  5. https://faculty.georgetown.edu/rtk8/AHS%2007%20clean%20copy.pdf
  6. https://www.academia.edu/6938174/On_the_notion_determiner
  7. https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10101595/1/out.pdf
  8. https://hiphilangsci.net/2014/10/08/non-universality-of-word-classes-and-words-the-mid-20th-century-shift/
  9. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.4324/9780203715857/essentials-english-grammar-otto-jespersen
  10. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/english-today/article/determiners-a-class-apart/497ED09A46765B517ADE9C2CB8441A7A
  11. https://www.glossa-journal.org/article/id/5331/
  12. http://www.ai.mit.edu/projects/dm/theses/abney87.pdf
  13. https://akjournals.com/view/journals/2062/68/3/article-p274.xml
  14. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1467-9582.2007.00129.x
  15. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/cambridge-grammar-of-the-english-language/A78402ABF5176AD283494180BCA2046F
  16. https://web.stanford.edu/~jurafsky/slp3/18.pdf
  17. https://oxfordre.com/linguistics/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.001.0001/acrefore-9780199384655-e-338
  18. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/357910279_Determiners_and_Pronouns_in_English
  19. https://opentextbooks.library.arizona.edu/languageawareness/chapter/pronouns/
  20. https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/grammar/british-grammar/determiners-the-my-some-this
  21. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/quantification/
  22. https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/15132
  23. https://courses.umass.edu/kbj/601/content/601_chap5.pdf
  24. https://compass.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2008.00091.x
  25. https://pressbooks.cuny.edu/englishsyntax/chapter/chapter-7/
  26. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1045117.pdf
  27. https://iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JLLL/article/download/51533/53255
  28. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1362628.pdf
  29. https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/essentialsoflinguistics2/chapter/5-7/
  30. https://cla-acl.ca/pdfs/actes-2012/Russell_2012.pdf
  31. https://linguistics.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/quantity-words-3.pdf
  32. https://www.open.edu/openlearncreate/mod/oucontent/view.php?id=147479&section=6
  33. https://www.languagereach.com/scotlands-linguistic-launscape-scottish-staunart-english-and-scots/
  34. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/generalized-quantifiers/
  35. https://www.cs.rhul.ac.uk/~zhaohui/montague73.pdf
  36. https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-011718-012528
  37. https://www.semanticsarchive.net/Archive/DA3YTY3N/Tunstall_Chapter_4.pdf
  38. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118358733.wbsyncom005
  39. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/342134575_Quantifier_Scope_Ambiguities
  40. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/descriptions/
  41. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/generics/
  42. https://idsl1.phil-fak.uni-koeln.de/sites/clip/user_upload/vonHeusinger2019.pdf
  43. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/anaphora/
  44. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/strawson/
  45. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280718312_Discourse-linking_function_of_determiners
  46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.04.013
  47. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(02)00018-0
  48. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/147573646.pdf
  49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2009.11.003
  50. https://faculty.wcas.northwestern.edu/ward/BLS94.pdf
  51. https://files.commons.gc.cuny.edu/wp-content/blogs.dir/2721/files/2019/04/bernsteintortora2005.pdf
  52. https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/155186/astevens_1.pdf
  53. https://liberalarts.oregonstate.edu/wlf/what-gender-neutral-language-oregon-state-guide-grammar
  54. https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA95571787&sid=googleScholar&v=2.1&it=r&linkaccess=abs&issn=00816272&p=LitRC&sw=w
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.