"This monograph proposes a comparative approach to all the ways of denoting 'more than one' entity, from collective and aggregate nouns (with the first-ever typology), to count plurals, partly substantivised adjectives and conjoined NPs. This semantic feature approach to plurality, which cuts across number, the count/non-count distinction, and lexical/NP levels, reveals a very consistent Scale of Unit Integration, which establishes clear-cut boundaries for collective nouns, and accommodates cases such as three elephant, cattle or a chain of islands. The study also offers a refined understanding of aggregate nouns (a category nearly as large as that of collective nouns) and quantification in pseudo-partitives, develops Guillaume's notion of 'internal plurality', and proposes the innovative concept of 'hyperonyms of plural classes' (e.g. furniture). The Animacy Hierarchy is also found to be influential, beyond hybrid agreement. The book is meant to be accessible to scholars of any theoretical background interested in these topics"--.

• SEMANTIC PLURALITY
• Editorial page
• Title page
• Copyright page
• Table of contents
• Chapter 1. Introduction: Why study semantic plurality and pluralities of entities?
  • 1.1 What is a plurality of entities?
    • 1.1.1 ‘Plurality’ compared with ‘aggregate’ and ‘set’
    • 1.1.2 Do collective nouns denote pluralities?: The concept of ‘internal plurality’
    • 1.1.3 Do plural NPs denote pluralities?: The singularist approach
    • 1.1.4 List of linguistic means available to denote pluralities of entities
  • 1.2 Advantages of a semantic /plurality/ feature over the /number/ feature
  • 1.3 Why take collective nouns as a starting point?
    • 1.3.1 Collective nouns as the problematic backbone of references to pluralities
    • 1.3.2 A long tradition of deceptively simple descriptions in grammars and dictionaries
    • 1.3.3 A number of unsolved issues in recent studies
    • 1.3.4 Leading questions for this volume
  • 1.4 A preliminary list of pre-requisites for ‘collective nouns’
    • 1.4.1 A relation between ‘units’ and a ‘collective whole’
    • 1.4.2 A plurality resulting from a grouping operation
    • 1.4.3 A specific type of part/whole relation
      • 1.4.3.1 Unprototypical meronymy
      • 1.4.3.2 Collective wholes distinguished from particulate masses
      • 1.4.3.3 Meronymy distinguished from taxonomy, despite the shared notion of ‘members’
    • 1.4.4 A /plurality/ feature at lexical level – from whole sense to facet of meaning
  • 1.5 Outline of the book
• Chapter 2. Hybrid agreement: Motivations, nature and constraints
  • 2.1 The boundary issue: Hybrid agreement as a defining feature of collective nouns?
  • 2.2 The nature of hybrid agreement as an argument against the status of defining feature
    • 2.2.1 Description of hybrid agreement with animate count collective nouns
    • 2.2.2 The argument of hybrid agreement in gender systems
    • 2.2.3 Hybrid agreement as a superimposed effect of the universal Animacy Hierarchy
    • 2.2.4 Consequence: The singular as the default agreement pattern
  • 2.3 Construal with hybrid agreement: Motivation and factors of opacification
    • 2.3.1 Fundamental motivation: A double layer of conceptualisation
    • 2.3.2 Opacification factor 1: The status of default number of the singular
    • 2.3.3 Opacification factor 2: Differences in the behaviour of individual nouns
    • 2.3.4 Opacification factor 3: cross-regional differences
      • 2.3.4.1 American English vs. British English
      • 2.3.4.2 Other varieties of English
    • 2.3.5 Opacification factor 4: Genre and stylistic variation
    • 2.3.6 Opacification factor 5: Assessing the hypothesis of a diachronic evolution towards more singular
  • 2.4 Conclusion on hybrid agreement in relation to the definition of collective nouns
• Chapter 3. Establishing the boundaries of ‘collective nouns’ for count nouns
  • 3.1 Further construal characteristics of collective nouns that license hybrid agreement
    • 3.1.1 Cohesion of the units
    • 3.1.2 A bounded plurality
    • 3.1.3 Non additivity considered further: Extreme heterogeneity in the degrees of permeability
    • 3.1.4 Collective nouns, senses and facets: Hybrid agreement does not guarantee a collective ‘noun’
      • 3.1.4.1 Distinction between lexicon-based and discourse-based collective reference
      • 3.1.4.2 Exclusions from the class of collective nouns
      • 3.1.4.3 Summary: Types of ‘collectiveness’ and consequences for hybrid agreement
    • 3.1.5 ‘Units of the same type’ not found to be a prerequisite
  • 3.2 Boundaries of the class of count collective nouns for humans
    • 3.2.1 Exclusion of ‘enemy’
    • 3.2.2 Exclusion of the taxon/exemplar relation: The case of ‘race’
    • 3.2.3 Inclusion of underdetermined nouns (e.g. ‘group’)
    • 3.2.4 A list of human count collective nouns
      • 3.2.4.1 Data collection procedure
      • 3.2.4.2 A list of count collective nouns for humans
  • 3.3 Boundaries of the class of count collective nouns for animals
    • 3.3.1 From flocks and herds to ‘auroras’ of polar bears: Are all these collective?
      • 3.3.1.1 Preliminary overview of count nouns used to denote pluralities of animals
      • 3.3.1.2 Only a minority of these nouns are actually collective
    • 3.3.2 Exclusion of the taxon/exemplar relation: The case of breed and species
      • 3.3.2.1 Literal uses for animals
      • 3.3.2.2 Metaphorical extensions: Comparison with kind and generation
    • 3.3.3 Inclusion of count uses of fauna
    • 3.3.4 A list of count collective nouns for animals
  • 3.4 Count collective nouns that denote pluralities of inanimates
    • 3.4.1 Inclusions and exclusions: A closer look at potential problem cases
      • 3.4.1.1 Books and other written documents (e.g. ‘anthology’)
      • 3.4.1.2 Nouns that denote networks
      • 3.4.1.3 Durations (e.g. ‘week’)
      • 3.4.1.4 ‘Alphabet’
    • 3.4.2 A list of inanimate count collective nouns that may occur without an of-complement
    • 3.4.3 A comparison between inanimate and animate count collective nouns
  • 3.5. The boundaries of collective nouns among N1s in binominal NPs
    • 3.5.1 From ‘pseudo-partitives’ to the ‘organised plurality construction’
    • 3.5.2 Meaning relations when N1 is uncontroversially collective
    • 3.5.3 Extension 1: Collective nouns in metaphorical uses are still collective
    • 3.5.4 Extension 2: Loss of collective status in rare cases of reanalysis of the construction
    • 3.5.5 Application to N1s that are not of collective origin: Rejection of collective status
  • 3.6 Conclusion
• Chapter 4. A comparison between NPs headed by count collective nouns and NPs whose /plurality/ feature is acquired in discourse
  • 4.1 NPs headed by a count noun in the plural
    • 4.1.1 The morphosyntactic plural: Discourse feature or component of lexical matter?
    • 4.1.2 Construal of pluralities when the plural morpheme is -s: Distinction between ‘collective’ and ‘cohesive’
    • 4.1.3 Construal of pluralities with the zero plural morpheme: A form of collectivisation?
      • 4.1.3.1 ø as a morpheme: (These) elephant, aspirin, (ten) crew and others
      • 4.1.3.2 The result of two different coercion processes: Rejection of the notion of ‘internal plural’
      • 4.1.3.3 These pluralities are not collective – resulting labels
  • 4.2 Other ways of denoting pluralities of units through discourse-acquired features
    • 4.2.1 Conjoined NPs
    • 4.2.2 Partly substantivised adjectives
      • 4.2.2.1 A four-stage gradient of nominalisation
      • 4.2.2.2 The result of pressure to categorise individuals
      • 4.2.2.3 What construal of the pluralities?: A gradient from aggregates to groupings
      • 4.2.2.4 Competing solutions for the same adjectives
    • 4.2.3 Quantifier + singular count noun
  • 4.3 Conclusion
• Chapter 5. Non-count singular nouns with a /plurality/ feature
  • 5.1 A note on terminological choices
    • 5.1.1 ‘Non-count’ as a matter of variety of English
    • 5.1.2 ‘Non-count’ rather than ‘mass’
    • 5.1.3 Non-count nouns as carrying number: ‘lexical’ vs. ‘morphosyntactic’ number
  • 5.2 The terms of the debate: Construal differences between furniture nouns and count collective nouns
    • 5.2.1 Introduction: Historical perspective
    • 5.2.2 Construal differences between furniture nouns and other singular non-count nouns
    • 5.2.3 Construal differences between furniture nouns and count collective nouns
    • 5.2.4 Construal differences between furniture nouns and N-s
  • 5.3 Furniture nouns as superordinate aggregate nouns: non-taxonomic hyperonyms of plural classes
    • 5.3.1 Superordinate aggregates
    • 5.3.2 Non-taxonomic hyperonyms
    • 5.3.3 The ‘hyperonym of plural classes’ hypothesis
    • 5.3.4 A typology of nouns that denote aggregates of heterogeneous entities
      • 5.3.4.1 Tentative list
      • 5.3.4.2 A note on number variation: Reanalyses
  • 5.4 Extension to other non-count nouns that denote pluralities of entities
    • 5.4.1 Other inanimates: Pluralities of homogeneous entities
    • 5.4.2 Animals
    • 5.4.3 Humans
      • 5.4.3.1 Management and other departments?
      • 5.4.3.2 Mankind, humankind and humanity?
  • 5.5 Conclusion
• Chapter 6. Lexical plurals that denote pluralities of entities
  • 6.1 Overview and typology of lexical plurals that denote pluralities of entities
    • 6.1.1 Crew, people and other originally count collective nouns
    • 6.1.2 Morphologically-marked lexical plurals
      • 6.1.2.1 Nouns with a lexical plural marker -s
      • 6.1.2.2 Nouns with a Latin plural ending
      • 6.1.2.3 Remarkable lack of stability of the plural number
    • 6.1.3 Cattle as an odd-one-out?
  • 6.2 These lexical plurals as aggregate nouns
    • 6.2.1 Cattle: An aggregate noun resulting from coercion of a singular aggregate noun
    • 6.2.2 Other nouns that denote entities of different kinds
      • 6.2.2.1 Hyperonyms of plural classes
      • 6.2.2.2 Lack of interest in the individual units: Aggregate nouns
  • 6.3 Lexical plurals vs. N-s or singular non-count nouns: Construal and morphological ‘attractors’
    • 6.3.1 Preference for lexical plurals over N-s
    • 6.3.2 Preference for lexical plurals over non-count singular nouns
  • 6.4 Conclusion
• Chapter 7. General conclusion
  • 7.1 The Scale of Unit Integration for pluralities of entities
  • 7.2 Challenges for further research
    • 7.2.1 The relation of morphosyntactic number to the lexical level
    • 7.2.2 Other types of pluralities
• References
• General index
• Lexical index