
Collective nouns such as committee, family, or team are conceptually (and in English also syntactically) complex in the sense that they are both singular (‘one’) and plural (‘more than one’): they refer to a multiplicity that is conceptualised as a unity. In this article, which focuses on Dutch collective nouns, it is argued that some collective nouns are rather ‘one’, whereas others are rather ‘more than one’. Collective nouns are shown to be different from one another in member level accessibility. Whereas all collective nouns have both a conceptual collection level (‘one’) and a conceptual member level (‘more than one’), the latter is not always conceptually profiled (i.e. focused on) to the same extent. A gradient is sketched in which collective nouns such as bemanning (‘crew’) (member level highly accessible) and vereniging (‘association’) (member level scarcely accessible) form the extremes. Arguments in favour of the conceptual phenomenon of variable member level accessibility derive from an analysis of property distribution, from corpus research on verbal and pronominal singular-plural variation, and from a psycholinguistic eyetracking experiment.
Language & Linguistics, 1702 Cognitive Sciences, 4704 Linguistics, Social Sciences, Linguistics, 2004 Linguistics, NUMBER AGREEMENT, Languages and Literatures, 400, The mutual intelligibility of language varieties in the Low Countries. Linguistic and attitudinal determinants, Languages & Linguistics, Language in Time and Space
Language & Linguistics, 1702 Cognitive Sciences, 4704 Linguistics, Social Sciences, Linguistics, 2004 Linguistics, NUMBER AGREEMENT, Languages and Literatures, 400, The mutual intelligibility of language varieties in the Low Countries. Linguistic and attitudinal determinants, Languages & Linguistics, Language in Time and Space
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 25 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Top 10% | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
