Indefinite vs Quantity Pronouns

[Untaught88]

What is the difference between indefinite pronouns and quantity pronouns? "Many" is both Indefinite pronoun as well as quantity pronouns.

 

[Tarheel]

What is the difference between indefinite pronouns and quantity pronouns? "Many" is both AN Indefinite pronoun as well as A quantity pronoun.

I want to know the answer to that one too.

 

[Untaught88]

I want to know the answer to that one too.

Quantitative

 

[PaulMatthews]

What is the difference between indefinite pronouns and quantity pronouns? "Many" is both Indefinite pronoun as well as quantity pronouns.

The simple answer to your question is that "many" is not a pronoun but a degree determinative. This is the case whether it is functioning independently, as in Ed made a few mistakes, but I made many, or dependently, as in I made many mistakes.

Like most determinatives, "many" expresses quantification.

 

[Tarheel]

Well, I have certainly made many mistakes.

The grammar term "determinative" is a new one for me. I guess I've been using determinatives without having a name for them.

 

[5jj]

The grammar term "determinative" is a new one for me.

Some grammarians today use it for what we used to label 'determiner'. (I still do).

 

[PaulMatthews]

Well, I have certainly made many mistakes.

The grammar term "determinative" is a new one for me. I guess I've been using determinatives without having a name for them.

It's been quite some time since the term 'determinative' found its way into Standard English grammar. Note that 'determinative' is the word class (POS) and 'determiner' is the corresponding function (though some older grammars used those terms the other way round).

 

[5jj]

It's been quite some time since the term 'determinative' found its way into Standard English grammar.

I don't think it's found its way into standard English grammar yet

Note that 'determinative' is the word class (POS) and 'determiner' is a function

For some.

(though some older grammars used those terms the other way round).

As do some modern grammars.

 

[PaulMatthews]

I don't think it's found its way into standard English grammar yet

Yes, it has. We stopped calling words like "many" pronouns some time ago.

For some.

I covered that point.

As do some modern grammars.

None that I use.


You are going off-topic as far as the OP's question is concerned.

 

[5jj]

We stopped calling words like "many" pronouns some time ago.

Is that the royal 'we'? Many (!) dictionaries label 'many' a pronoun in such sentences as 'Many of my friends are grammarians'.

There is little agreement among grammarians on the labels used for word classes/parts of speech. This is something I think we need to accept.

 

[PaulMatthews]

Many (!) dictionaries label 'many' a pronoun in such sentences as 'Many of my friends are grammarians'.

Yes, that's true. But dictionaries are fine for meanings, not for grammar. For example, they cannot handle the word class/function distinction, and they are not exactly greased lightning when it comes to adopting changes and additions. For example, expect dictionaries to extend the word class 'determiner' to the independent use of words like "many" in… oh, about fifty years or so.

Incidentally, for the uninitiated, the reason that independent "many" is best classed as a determinative (as opposed to a pronoun) is because it functions as a fused determiner-head. Thus, in a partitive construction like the one in your example, "many" combines (or fuses) the determiner and head, and is followed by the partitive complement "of my friends". We understand it to mean "many friends from the set of my friends".

There is little agreement among grammarians on the labels used for word classes/parts of speech. This is something I think we need to accept.

I wouldn't go that far. The POS of a very small number of words may be in dispute, but in general there is agreement. Logic and evidence usually prevail, as it does with "many" (see above).

 

[Tarheel]

It's been quite some time since the term 'determinative' found its way into Standard English grammar. Note that 'determinative' is the word class (POS) and 'determiner' is the corresponding function (though some older grammars used those terms the other way round).

Is that a subtle way of saying I'm ignorant? Because if it is then that applies to most native speakers of English. I would bet $100 that If you asked 100 random people that none of them would know what a "determinative" is.

 

[PaulMatthews]

Is that a subtle way of saying I'm ignorant? Because if it is then that applies to most native speakers of English. I would bet $100 that If you asked 100 random people that none of them would know what a "determinative" is.

Anyone who takes a serious interest in grammar, particularly modern grammar, should be well aware of the terminology. Any decent grammar book will provide the relevant information.

 

[5jj]

expect dictionaries to extend the word class 'determiner' to the independent use of words like "many" in… oh, about fifty years or so.

You're probably right - unless fashions in terminology change, as they so often do.

Incidentally, for the uninitiated

... which probably includes 99% of those native speakers of English who haven't studied linguistics at university level.

We understand it to mean "many friends from the set of my friends".

There' the royal 'we' again. It doesn't include me.

Anyone who takes a serious interest in grammar, particularly modern grammar, should be well aware of the terminology.

I agree. However, most of the members of this forum are more interested in how to communicate effectively in English than on the finer points of English grammar as discussed by academics.

Any decent grammar book will provide the relevant information.

Most of the grammar books used by our members will not.

 

[Tarheel]

Anyone who takes a serious interest in grammar, particularly modern grammar, should be well aware of the terminology. Any decent grammar book will provide the relevant information.

That's like saying that anybody who takes a serious interest in chess should be a grandmaster.

 

[PaulMatthews]

That's like saying that anybody who takes a serious interest in chess should be a grandmaster.

That's a ridiculous thing to say.

Knowing word classes (POS) and their functions is a fundamental part of understanding English grammar. If your knowledge of descriptive English grammar doesn't extend to that level, then perhaps you should stay way from it, or at least try to grasp it.

Posting negative answers about your personal knowledge is unhelpful and off-topic.

Your profile says that you are "interested in language", So show an interest!

 

[PaulMatthews]

You're probably right - unless fashions in terminology change, as they so often do.

It's not about 'fashions', but about research, syntactic evidence and corpus work. As it happens, terminology hasn't changed much in the last twenty years or so.

... which probably includes 99% of those native speakers of English who haven't studied linguistics at university level.

They can learn can't they? The OP seems to have a keen interest in grammar (as do quite a few of the other questioners) hence their perfectly reasonable question.

There' the royal 'we' again. It doesn't include me.

Well, perhaps you need to study modern descriptive English grammar.

I agree. However, most of the members of this forum are more interested in how to communicate effectively in English than on the finer points of English grammar as discussed by academics.

Perhaps, but you seem to have lost sight of the fact that the OP asked specifically about a point of grammar, to which they were entitled to an answer. My answer addressed their question.

Most of the grammar books used by our members will not.

It's not up to you to second-guess what books members may or may not have.

If you're not interested in, or knowledgeable about, descriptive English grammar, then I suggest you stay away from such questions. Posting negative comments is helpful to no one.

 

[Tarheel]

Knowing word classes (POS) and their functions is a fundamental part of understanding English grammar.

Most native speakers hardly ever talk about grammar, but somehow we muddle through.

 

[emsr2d2]

Can we please calm it down here? Responses are becoming less friendly than they should be. In the 13 years I've been on this site, one thing has been a constant - native speakers who are very knowledgeable about grammar don't always agree on terminology.

 

[probus]

This topic is becoming like Frankenstein's monster: it just won't die. I wish I could drive through its heart.

Why is whose called a relative pronoun?

Actually, I'm doing no such thing. And I have already explained to you that the possessive morpheme has the syntactic status of determiner, that the possessive morpheme is the head of "whose," and that therefore "whose" has the word class (POS) of determiner (in surface structure, where it...

www.usingenglish.com