What makes some countable and some uncountable?

[lolwhites]

My assertion that "any noun can be used in a mass or individual sense where the context demands" is based on my experience of how I hear and see the language used. I don't think my example, taken from a consumer magazine, was a typo as the term was repeated throughout the page. Furthermore, I've often come across the term "office furnitures" or "bedroom furnitures" in catalogues.

I think that some people here have failed to appreciate the second part of my proposed rule, so I'll take the liberty of repeating myself: ...where the context demands. This is absolutely vital. I never suggested that speakers could choose willy-nilly which one to use, simply that contexts may come up where it is possible to use a given noun in a sense where it would not "normally" be used.

I'm fully aware that Spanish speakers say "informaciones" and "muebles". As an exercise in comparison, that's all very well but I don't see how it gets us anywhere with English. All it shows us is that the concepts encapsulated by the Spanish word informacion are subtly different from the English word information, and explains where the L1 interference of the Spanish speaker who says "I'd like some informations about London" is coming from.

As for treating "two coffees" as some form of ellipsis, I don't think it stands up because there will be situations where the utterance would be inappropriate:

"I know you want two coffees," said the hard-pressed waiter in Fastbucks Coffee Shop, "but do you want medium, large, skinny, with chocolate, decaf or what?"

In other words, it all comes down to context again. I've never denied that most nouns, by their nature, will tend to be used in one sense rather than the other. I've just said that that doesn't rule out other possible, albeit less frequent, uses from time to time.

The moral of this story? Whatever your view, take great care how you teach countable vs uncountable. That way my colleagues and I may not have to spend half our time justifying "incorrect" English to the students who come to the UK to learn it.

[Stephen Jones]

--" I've never denied that most nouns, by their nature, will tend to be used in one sense rather than the other. "---

In that case we are in total agreement. And I agree with you over coffees.

I think you are failing to understand the reason I keep referring to other languages here. It is to attempt to demonstrate that the quality of countable or uncountable often does not reside in the concept itself, but rather is a purely arbitrary quaity of the lexis.

Words change. I doubt if "informations" is ever going to catch on but "furnitures" well might ( the influence of tens of millions of Spanish speakers on Ameridan English should not be underestimated, nor should the influence of "furnishings"). Most drinks, with the interesting exception of "water", should be considered both countable and uncountable, just as we do with the reverse with animals when there is no separate word for the meat.

The thing I am wary of is throwing the baby out with the bathwater. That is to say you find difficulties with one "rule" and either get rid of it altogether, or substitute an alternative that has not been properly thought through, and creates even more loopholes.

In computer programming when you allocate time for fixing bugs, you also alllocate time for testing and fixing the new bugs that the bug fix has introduced. The same peinciple applies to grammatical explanations.

[Stephen Jones]

And to really mess up the uncountable/countable rule look at the word "honour" . It can be uncountable, referring to "ggod name" and it can be countable referring to MBE's, Knightoods, baronetcies and the Order of the Brown Nose, but it must be the only word that is uncountable but prefixed by a singular article in the phrase "it's an honour to meet you sir".

[LarryLatham]

Stephen, it is not your argument that peeves me, it's your attitude. No one here would say that you don't know what you're talking about. But your obviously intelligent and informed arguments are delivered with a kind of sneer suggesting that you believe the rest of us are buffoons. I don't think any of us really appreciate that.

I don't know where you have gotten the idea that any of us, lolwhites or anyone else, is arguing that there is no distinction between count nouns and noncount nouns. You seem to be refusing to understand that what we dislike is the dismissal of the idea that special uses of certain nouns allow for them to be used in unusual ways as regards their countability...hence rules that specify rigid adherence to "X is countable, and Y is not" notions can mislead or misinform students about how English can be used. If native speakers can use them that way, why not learners of English?

Larry Latham

[Duncan Powrie]

Thanks for the quick feedback, Stephen! I'm aware that form does not dictate meaning, and that many words' forms are mere matters of convention - I just wanted to focus on areas in which counting would seem to be a matter of choice, and would be seen to (beneficially and correspondingly) affect form. It would hardly lead to confusion for students...if anything, they could count the obviously countable (2 cupS of tea) and retain the "dictionary" or usual form for C/U nouns (e.g. We have a large range of TEAs). Hey, lolwhite baby, I didn't quite understand why you wouldn't think "2 coffees" is a kind of ellipsis, but then again, it is 5:30 am here in Japan (this forum is becoming strangely addictive!). Ooh one last thing, Larry, I don't think Stephen is saying that learners of English can't bend the rules, he's just trying to demonstrate that we teachers need to be aware of and try to formulate the rules clearly enough for ourselves in the first place...but it is very hard to tell if people are being entirely consistent in an area of grammar such as this! (and perhaps they shouldn't try to be?!).

[Duncan Powrie]

Aha I understand about the coffees now! Sure, you could MODIFY them like Frasier does...but I still reckon you could ellipt the "cups of"!

[lolwhites]

And to really mess up the uncountable/countable rule look at the word "honour" . It can be uncountable, referring to "ggod name" and it can be countable referring to MBE's, Knightoods, baronetcies and the Order of the Brown Nose, but it must be the only word that is uncountable but prefixed by a singular article in the phrase "it's an honour to meet you sir".

In other words, it depends on the context. That's what I've always said.

[lolwhites]

Aha I understand about the coffees now! Sure, you could MODIFY them like Frasier does...but I still reckon you could ellipt the "cups of"!

Or mugs, tumblers...
According to Grice's Maxims, we avoid saying more information than necessary. So, "two cups of coffee" in a context where you have a choice of cups, mugs or whatever is one thing. But it might actually sound odd in another context e.g. making coffee & tea for your guests.

Which of these sound more natural?
"So that's two coffees and three teas"
"So, you would like two cups of coffee and three cups of tea" Correct, but sounds a bit long winded to me.

"I would like one cup of coffee with some milk and a teaspoonful of sugar".
"A coffee, milk and one sugar".

[Duncan Powrie]

Lolwhite, imagine I am Dr Frasier Crane, an expert in Psychology, but not that sharp when it comes to Linguistics (Grice...who he?! ). And today, in your coffee shop, all I want is, let's say, two cuppas of bog-standard coffee (no lattes or frappucinos etc). Niles, my troubled brother, has decided to be difficult and wants his white, whereas I will settle for it black, two sugars thank you very much. And if I don't get them pronto regradless of what I say, I will pull out my huge magnum (this is America, remember) and make if not "your day", then at least the damn coffees myself. So, if I say, "Two coffees, one black with two sugars, one white", (perhaps also "One black coffee with two sugars, and one white coffee, my good man" would be okay, but sounds a bit twatty doesn't it) you'd better just serve them like I ordered! That is, I go for the minimum necessary and would only really use the partative to get the STUDENT noticing counting, countable/uncountable etc.

[Stephen Jones]

I don't know where you have gotten the idea that any of us, lolwhites or anyone else, is arguing that there is no distinction between count nouns and noncount nouns.

Sorry to have to say it again Larry, but I've got it from here.

----"Rather, English doesn't divide nouns into two classes, with a few that fall into both. Rather, any noun can be used in a mass or individual sense where the context demands (note the emphasis).2---

and you commented "Precisely! A wonderful explanation."


Now perhaps you could tell me where you got the idea below from:
You seem to be refusing to understand that what we dislike is the dismissal of the idea that special uses of certain nouns allow for them to be used in unusual ways as regards their countability

I acccepted this; I accept that you can do this with any noun. My position however is that this tends to fall into one of two categories; a deliberate transgression of the rule for effect (as in lolwhites "drowning in cat" where the drowning is also metaphorical) and a shift in the rule, where the count or uncount attribute of the noun changes in common usage (though offhand I cannot thnk of an example, unless we accept "furnitures"). Neither of these are sufficient to say that the two classes don't exist, which is what lolwhite said, and you stated you agreed with entirely.

.hence rules that specify rigid adherence to "X is countable, and Y is not" notions can mislead or misinform students about how English can be used.

Not if the rules are correct. What is happening here is that many of lolwhites students have been given incorrect rules. As you stated in a previous post the third class of nouns that can be count or non-count, is much larger, and possibly more porous, than many imagine. Coffee, tea, and sugar can be countable or uncountable (but rice never can be and I don't see how we are misleading students by telling them so). It is not an over rigid application of the rule that lolwhites is complianing about, it is a wrong application of the rule.[/i]

[lolwhites]

I think we're on the same wavelength here, Duncan. Going for the minimum necessary is pretty much how natural language works, and I endeavour to point this out to the students. That way, when you've ordered your coffees, you don't get tapped on the shoulder by the foreign tourist who was standing behind you in the queue, who feels compelled to tell you that your English is incorrect as you failed to say "one cup of black coffee and one cup of white coffee", which is what his teacher back home told him to say.

Unfotunately he didn't notice you were carrying a Magnum....

[Stephen Jones]

Lolwhites, you've not got the point about "it's an honour". "An" is a singlular arlticle, but "honour" here is uncountable, and therefore shouldn't be preceded by an article that indidates number.

No doubt the phrase is fossilized, but it is the only example of the anomaly I can think of in English.

[lolwhites]

I'm not arguing that a count/uncount distinction doesn't exist, but that English nouns, as a rule, don't fall into boxes marked "countable", "uncountable" and "both". It's the meaning of the word, and the context it's used in, that determines how it gets treated in the sentence.

If, for the sake of argument, we presuppose the existence of these three boxes, we'd find that the "both" box was the norm and the few others that keep coming up were the exception rather than the rule.

That doesn't mean to say I teach my students an incorrect rule. I simply approach the topic with some caution, draw their attention to words that appear to fit into both and see if they can account for them. Why? Because I want them to grasp concepts, not regurgitate rules unthinkingly. The student who can do a gap completion exercise which has been designed to fit the rule s/he has been taught hasn't necessarily grasped the concept.

[Stephen Jones]

Let's explore a little more.

In a cafe when we order "two cokes" we are asking for two glasses of coke, or two cans of coke. But in a shop if we ask for two cokes we are quite likely to get two big bottles of coke. Yet we can't say two coffees in a shop and get two packets of coffee.

Two sugars, is two teaspoonfuls or two cubes of sugar, but three firied rice is three separate portions of fried rice.

Now the last example here is interesting, because it appears to contradict what I said before about rice being uncountable. But wait; in the same restaurant we would ask for three fried chicken, though if we were really hungry we would ask for three fried chickens. Therefore it seems that the idea of ellipsis is strong here in "three fried rice" or "two braised whale". But wait again. There would be nothing wrong in ordering "two spaghettis" or "three macaronis" though the uncountable form would also be correct.

The ramiifications of countablity are truly uncountable![/code]

[lolwhites]

"An" is a singlular arlticle, but "honour" here is uncountable, and therefore shouldn't be preceded by an article that indidates number.

In that context, I would take "honour" to mean "something that reflects well on me", not the more abstract concept of "my/your/the family honour", so the singular article is quite properly used.