Combining Dem–Num–Adj with unit, sort, and n

Turning to the classifiers, it is clear that the unit classifier is below numerals; it is presumably the same category identified by Szabolcsi (1994) as Num[ber], by Julien (2005) as Card[inality], or by Schwarzschild (2006) as Mon[otonicity]. Word order facts suggest that the unit classifier is above adjectives (see below). The n, on the other hand is lower, just above N; it comes close to being a gender or noun class marker (compare also Truswell’s 2004 category Same). Sort can probably be conflated with Pl; it can be compared with Delfitto and Schroten’s (1991) treatment of the plural marker, or Borer’s (2005a) Cl[assifier]. This gives an extended hierarchy as in (1):

(1) Dem> Art > Num > unit > Pl/sort > Adj > n > N

Muromatsu (2001) argues, in effect, that adjectives can be split into two classes, those which are sensitive to shape and merge above classifiers (here, sort classifiers) and those which are not sensitive to shape and merge below. I will argue below for the same conclusion, and furthermore that adjectives can appear not only above and below Pl/sort but also above and below n. For example, although in general adjectives follow classifiers in Chinese, certain adjectives can precede certain classifiers (examples from Cheng and Sybesma 1999: 516).

The adjective da ‘big’ in (2) follows the unit classifier zhi but precedes zhang ‘sheet’ which would be a sort classifier. However, most adjectives, even in Chinese, are lower in the hierarchy than most classifiers, as suggested by (1).

Before going into detail regarding the different attachment sites for different classes of adjectives, I turn to some issues regarding word order.