Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter Mouton November 16, 2018

Cardinal numerals and complex numerals as specifiers

Jacek Witkoś and Dominika Dziubała-Szrejbrowska


The goal of this study is to argue for a more widespread application of a uniform representation of Numeral Noun Constructions (NNCs) which captures both patterns with higher numerals (≥5, NumH) agreeing in case with the modified noun (case matching pattern) or bearing a distinct case from a noun (case independence pattern) in Polish and in other languages. Our account draws on the analysis of cardinal numerals in Bailyn (2004) in which both agreeing and non-agreeing numerals are placed within the projection (QP) of the functional head FQ, but contrary to Bailyn (2004), it advocates a predominant cardinal-as-specifier representation of NNCc and complex NNCs in Polish, a language whose numeral/quantificational system is fairly challenging. We propose that many cases discussed in Bošković (2006), Ionin and Matushansky (2006), Kayne (2010), Danon (2012), Norris (2014) and Willim (2015) may have a uniform representation. In short, both the case matching and the case independence patterns are represented as equivalent to the cardinal-as-specifier representation. This serves to preserve derivational and structure building transparency and avoids the issue of look-ahead and the No Tampering ban (Chomsky 2000, 2001; Stepanov 2001, 2007). In the spirit of Burzio’s (1986) Generalization we submit that the case valuation capacity of FQ is conditioned directly by an independent case (feature) of NumP occupying FQ’s specifier position. Our proposal receives further support from recent work on the structure of complex numerals in Di Sciullo (2015, 2017) and Kayne (2016), where their component parts are combined in asymmetric structures involving silent functional projections.

Jacek Witkoś Faculty of English Adam Mickiewicz University Collegium Novum al. Niepodległości 4 61-874 Poznań Poland


Babby, L. 1986. “The locus of case assignment and the direction of percolation”. In: Brecht, R. and J. Levine (eds.), Case in Slavic Columbus, OH: Slavica Publishers. 91–117.Search in Google Scholar

Babby, L. 1987. “Case, prequantifiers, and discontinuous agreement in Russian”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 5. 91–138.10.1007/BF00161869Search in Google Scholar

Bailyn, J.F. 2004. “The case of Q”. In: Arnaudova, O. (ed.), Proceedings of Formal Approaches to Slavic Linguistics: The Ottawa Meeting 2003 Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications. 1–36.Search in Google Scholar

Bondaruk, A. 2013. Copular clauses in English and Polish. Structure, derivation and interpretation Lublin: KUL.Search in Google Scholar

Bošković, Ž. 2006. “Case and agreement with genitive of quantification in Russian”. In: Boeckx, C. (ed.), Agreement systems Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 99–120.10.1075/la.92.07bosSearch in Google Scholar

Burzio, L. 1986. Italian syntax Dordrecht: Reidel.10.1007/978-94-009-4522-7Search in Google Scholar

Caha, P. 2009. Nanosyntax of case. (PhD dissertation, University of Tromsø.Search in Google Scholar

Caha, P. 2010. The parameters of case marking and Spell-Out driven movement. <> (accessed 15 Feb 2011).Search in Google Scholar

Caha, P. 2013. Czech numerals and no bundling. <> (accessed 10 Feb 2013).Search in Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. 1995. The Minimalist Program Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. 2000. Minimalist inquiries In: Martin, M., D. Michaels, J. Uriagereka and S.J. Keyser (eds.), Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 89–156.Search in Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. 2001. “Derivation by phase”. In: Kenstowicz, M. (ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 1–52.Search in Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. 2013. “Problems of projection”. Lingua 130. 33–49.10.1075/la.223.01choSearch in Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. 2015. “Problems of projection: Extensions”. In: Di Domenico, E., C. Hamann and S. Matteini (eds.), Structures, strategies and beyond: Studies in honor of Adriana Belletti Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 1–16.Search in Google Scholar

Chomsky, N., A. Gallego and D. Ott. 2017. Generative Grammar and the faculty of language: insights, questions and challenges. (Ms., MIT.)Search in Google Scholar

Cinque, G. 2005. “Deriving Greenberg’s Universal 20 and its exceptions”. Linguistic Inquiry 36. 315–332.10.1162/0024389054396917Search in Google Scholar

Cinque, G. 2010. The syntax of adjectives: a comparative study Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9780262014168.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Collins, C. 2007. “Home sweet home”. NYU Working Papers in Linguistics 1. 1–27.Search in Google Scholar

Corver, N. and J. Zwarts. 2006. “Prepositional numerals”. Lingua 116(6). 811–835.10.1016/j.lingua.2005.03.008Search in Google Scholar

Danon, G. 2012. “Two structures for numeral-noun constructions”. Lingua 122. 1282–1307.10.1016/j.lingua.2012.07.003Search in Google Scholar

Di Sciullo, A.M. 2015. “On the domain specificity of the human language faculty and the effects of principles of computational efficiency: contrasting language and mathematics”. Revista Linguistica 11(1). 28–56.Search in Google Scholar

Di Sciullo, A.M. 2017. “Asymmetry and the language faculty”. Revista Linguistica 13(2). 88–107.10.31513/linguistica.2017.v13n2a14030Search in Google Scholar

Franks, S. 1994. “Parametric properties of numeral phrases in Slavic”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 12. 597–674.10.1007/BF00992929Search in Google Scholar

Franks, S. 1995. Parameters of Slavic morphosyntax New York: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Franks, S. 2002. “A Jakobsonian feature based analysis of the Slavic Numeric Quantifier Genitive”. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 10. 141–181.Search in Google Scholar

Giusti G. and N. Leko. 2004. “The categorial status of quantity expressions”. Lingvistički Vidici 34(5). 121–183.Search in Google Scholar

Ionin, T. and O. Matushansky. 2006. “The composition of complex cardinals”. Journal of Semantics 23. 315–360.10.1093/jos/ffl006Search in Google Scholar

Kayne, K. 2010. “A note on the syntax of numerical bases”. In: Kayne, R., Comparisons and contrasts Oxford: Oxford University Press. 57–72.Search in Google Scholar

Kayne, R. 2016. Some thoughts on One and Two and other numerals. (Ms., New York University.)Search in Google Scholar

Klemensiewicz, Z., T. Lehr-Spławiński and S. Urbańczyk. 1965. Gramatyka historyczna języka polskiegoi [A historical grammar of Polish]. Warsaw: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.Search in Google Scholar

Klockmann, H. 2015. “What are categories? Adjective-like and noun-like semi-lexical numerals in Polish”. In: Błaszczak, J., D. Klimek-Jankowska and K. Migdalski (eds.), How categorical are categories? New approaches to the old questions of Noun, Verb and Adjective Boston: Walter de Gruyter. 236–271.Search in Google Scholar

Klockmann, 2017. The design of semi-lexicality: Evidence from Case and Agreement in the nominal domain. (PhD dissertation, LOT, the Netherlands.)Search in Google Scholar

Landau, I. 2008. “Two routes of control: evidence from case transmission in Russian”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 26(4). 877–924.10.1007/s11049-008-9054-0Search in Google Scholar

Łoś, J. 1927. Gramatyka polskaCzęść 3. Odmiennia (fleksja) historyczna) [A Polish grammar. Part 3. Historical inflection]. Lwów: Wydawnictwo Zakładu Narodowego Imienia Ossolińskich.Search in Google Scholar

Miechowicz-Mathiasen, K. 2014. “Numeralization of numeral nouns in Polish”. In: Veselovská, L. and M. Janebová (eds.), Nominal structures: All in complex DPs Olomouc: Palackỳ University. 48–68.Search in Google Scholar

Norris, M. 2014. A theory of nominal concord. (PhD dissertation, University of California, Santa Cruz.)Search in Google Scholar

Pereltsvaig, A. 2006. “Small nominals”. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 24. 433–500.10.1007/s11049-005-3820-zSearch in Google Scholar

Pereltsvaig, A. 2007. “The universality of DP: A view from Russian”. Studia linguistica 61(1). 59–94.10.1111/j.1467-9582.2007.00129.xSearch in Google Scholar

Pesetsky, D. 1982. Paths and categories. (PhD dissertation, MIT.)Search in Google Scholar

Pesetsky, D. 2013. Russian case morphology and the syntactic categories Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.10.7551/mitpress/9780262019729.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Pesetsky, D. and E. Torrego. 2001. “T-to-C movement: Causes and consequences”. In: Kenstowicz, M. (ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. 355–426.Search in Google Scholar

Pesetsky, D. and E. Torrego. “2007. The syntax of valuation and the interpretability of features”. In: Karimi, S., V. Samiian and W. Wilkins (eds.), Phasal and clausal architecture: Syntactic derivation and interpretation Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 262–294.10.1075/la.101.14pesSearch in Google Scholar

Przepiórkowski, A. 1999. Case Assignment and the complement-adjunct dichotomy: A non-configurational constraint-based approach. (PhD dissertation, Universität Tübingen.)Search in Google Scholar

Przepiórkowski, A. 2004. “O wartości przypadka podmiotów liczebnikowych”. Bulletin de la société polonaise de linguistique LX. 133–143.Search in Google Scholar

Przepiórkowski, A. and A. Patejuk. 2012. “The puzzle of case agreement between numeral phrases and predicative adjectives in Polish”. In: Butt, M. and T.H. King (eds.), The Proceedings of the LFG’12 Conference Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. 490–502.Search in Google Scholar

Rizzi, L. 1990. Relativized Minimality Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Search in Google Scholar

Rutkowski, P. 2007. Hipoteza frazy przedimkowej jako narzędzie opisu składniowego polskich grup imiennych [The Determiner Phrase hypothesis as a tool for the syntactic description of Polish nominal phrases]. (PhD dissertation, Uniwersytet Warszawski.)Search in Google Scholar

Stavrou, M. and A. Terzi. 2008. Cardinal numerals and other numerical expressions. GLOW 2008 presentation.Search in Google Scholar

Stepanov, A. 2001. “Late adjunction and Minimalist Phrase Structure”. Syntax 4, 94–125.10.1111/1467-9612.00038Search in Google Scholar

Stepanov, A. 2007. “The end of CED? Minimalism and extraction domains”. Syntax 10. 80–126.10.1111/j.1467-9612.2007.00094.xSearch in Google Scholar

Willim, E. 2015. “Case distribution and φ-agreement with Polish Genitive of Quantification in the feature sharing theory of Agree”. Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics 51(2). 315–57.10.1515/psicl-2015-0013Search in Google Scholar

Witkoś J. and D. Dziubała-Szrejbrowska. 2016. “Numeral phrases as subjects and agreement with participles and predicative adjectives”. Journal of Slavic Linguistics 24(1). 225–260.10.1353/jsl.2016.0005Search in Google Scholar

Witkoś J., D. Dziubała-Szrejbrowska, P. Cegłowski and P. Łęska. 2018. The syntax of numeral noun constructions: A view from Polish Berlin: Peter Lang.10.3726/b12901Search in Google Scholar

Zabbal, Y. 2005. The syntax of numeral expressions. (Ms., University of Massachusetts, Amherst.)Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2018-11-16
Published in Print: 2018-11-27

© 2018 Faculty of English, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland

Scroll Up Arrow