Grammar vs. Syntax

[Anonymous]

I want to teach the use of cardinal and ordinar numbers, as a part of my grammar class. Ex: Your are number one. You are the first one in line. You are number two. You are the second one in line.
My partner argues that we can't do that since the use of cardinal & ordinal numbers is a SYNTAX lesson, not GRAMMAR lesson. What is the technically correct?

 

[MikeNewYork]

I want to teach the use of cardinal and ordinar numbers, as a part of my grammar class. Ex: Your are number one. You are the first one in line. You are number two. You are the second one in line.
My partner argues that we can't do that since the use of cardinal & ordinal numbers is a SYNTAX lesson, not GRAMMAR lesson. What is the technically correct?

I'm not sure I accept a complete distinction between grammar and syntax.

 

[Casiopea]

I want to teach the use of cardinal and ordinar numbers, as a part of my grammar class. Ex: Your are number one. You are the first one in line. You are number two. You are the second one in line.
My partner argues that we can't do that since the use of cardinal & ordinal numbers is a SYNTAX lesson, not GRAMMAR lesson. What is the technically correct?

Well, it depends on what your 'partner' means by 'grammar'. In general, Grammar refers to the rules of a language. Syntax, Morphology, Phonology, Phonetics, Sematics, Pragmatics, all have rules. "first, second, third, etc" are words. Words fall under Morphology. Morphology has rules, so Morphology is a part of Grammar. If you can show your partner that cardinal and ordinal numbers have rules, then you might have a winning case; but, again, it all depends on your partner's definition of 'grammar'.

All the best,

 

[Tdol]

Given that Cardinal and Ordinal numbers are labels, I'd say the distinction between them could be viewed as grammatical. Would the use of articles with Ordinal numbers be enough to say they have rules, Cas? ;-)

 

[Casiopea]

Given that Cardinal and Ordinal numbers are labels, I'd say the distinction between them could be viewed as grammatical. Would the use of articles with Ordinal numbers be enough to say they have rules, Cas? ;-)

labels (i.e. nominal numbers?) are different from cardinal numbers and ordinal numbers:

Cardinal numbers (i.e. one, 7, four, three, etc) tells "how many." Cardinal numbers are also known as "counting numbers," because they show quantity. Here are some examples using cardinal numbers: 8 puppies, 14 friends.

Ordinal numbers (i.e. first, 2nd, third, 4th, etc) tell the order of things in a set. Ordinal numbers do not show quantity. They only show rank or position. Here are some examples using ordinal numbers: 3rd fastest, 6th in line.

Nominal numbers names something—a telephone number, a player on a team. Nominal numbers do not show quantity or rank. They are used only to identify something. Here are some examples using nominal numbers: jersey number 4, zip code 02116.

Source

8) Here's some distributional evidence:

Cardinal Rules

A Little League team's players, the article said, "picked up their third World Series victory in as many days." There's an extremely common error there. As many as what? As many as third? No, obviously. "Third" is an ordinal number, denoting the position of something in a sequence. "As many as" needs to refer to a quantity, not a position, and that requires a cardinal number — here, "three." If the sentence had said "picked up three World Series victories in as many days," that would have been fine. (But for all that, "as many as" smacks a little of elegant variation. What's wrong with "their third World Series victory in three days"?)

— CJR, Nov./Dec. 1998

Source

 

[Tdol]

I meant labels like 'adjectives' or 'proper nouns'. ;-)