Abstract
Nominal classification remains a fascinating topic; to move forward we need to rethink our approach to the typology of this linguistic domain. We must move beyond the assumption that gender and classifiers are opposites, which has often hampered previous typologies of nominal classification. Empirical work over the last decades has turned up an increasing number of languages (i) with intermediate systems, which combine properties typically associated with gender and classifiers, and (ii) having more than one system of nominal classification. We propose a typology based on four relevant criteria, which cover the logical space. Each criterion is carefully defined, and then illustrated with data from a wide range of languages. This approach is designed to capture gender and classifier systems in a single coherent typology; it allows for intermediate cases, and thus facilitates comparisons of apparently widely differing systems. X.1 Introduction Despite the long tradition of studying and thinking about nominal classification, a term under which the traditional labels 'gender' and 'classifiers' are commonly subsumed, and the large body of literature that has accumulated over the decades, there is still much confusion in this area. Typological works on the topic often launch into a discussion of the various types of classification system that we find in the languages of the world without clarifying the underlying assumptions. As a result, analyses of gender systems and analyses of classifiers 1 The support of the ESRC (UK) under grant ES/R00837X/1 'Optimal categorisation: the origin and nature of gender from a psycholinguistic perspective' is gratefully acknowledged. We are grateful to Michael Franjieh, Niels Schiller and Tanja Kupisch (editors), Camil Staps, Jurriaan Wiegertjes and an anonymous referee for helpful comments on a draft. We thank colleagues at the MultiGender project workshop " The typology of gender systems " (Centre for Advanced Study, Oslo, 3–4 March 2020) for useful discussion of our paper 'Typology meets reality: nominal classification systems', an earlier version of the current paper. We are grateful to Penny Everson and Lisa Mack for their help in the preparation of the manuscript. We follow the Leipzig Glossing Rules, and use the following conventions and abbreviations: