zerologyThere is no apple in the basket.
There are no apples in the basket.
Dear speakers of English: Is there a difference in meaning/use between the two sentences?
Dear linguists: Are there languages with a distinct grammatical number for zero things?
Dr. Angus Andrea Grieve-Smith@zerology I don't have an answer to the second question, but to me as an English speaker, the first example implies that the speaker only expected one apple in the basket. The second implies that the basket can hold more than one apple.
@grvsmth Ah. Thank you!
Elisabeth M@zerology
You would say the second one in English. You could say the first one, but it would seem to reference a specific context ... like if the person you were speaking with had just told you that if there's even one apple in the basket it will trigger the reactor so I ask you again, is the basket empty
You would say the second one in English. You could say the first one, but it would seem to reference a specific context ... like if the person you were speaking with had just told you that if there's even one apple in the basket it will trigger the reactor so I ask you again, is the basket empty
@zerology
On the linguistics question, for English at least it seems to vary based on whether the noun is countable: there is zero sand here; there are zero birds here
On the linguistics question, for English at least it seems to vary based on whether the noun is countable: there is zero sand here; there are zero birds here
@independentpen Ah, right. Indeed, „There are no sands here.“ sounds illegal :)
Obscuredavid@Cameleopard @zerology Yeah, I guess that's another use case; if you're making it relative to a single thing, than it would use the singular
@independentpen Thank you!
woke 2.0This sounds plausible.
Yet. Woud you argue the same if I reformulate: Are there languages with a distinct grammatical number for no things/missing things?
@zerology yea I’d stick to my argument on that. Lots of things are grammaticalized: shape, possibilities, pairs of things, but I’ve never heard of a language that grammaticalizes absence—at least not beyond negation.
Would be cool to be wrong though—it’s hard to prove a negative, and the future is a long time.
@thedansimonson Thank you.
Petra Steiner@zerology not a native-speaker but the presuppositions are slightly different. The sentences "frame" the option of singularity or of plurality. The "no" is not relevant for this. "Don't think of an elephant" (Lakoff).
There are many languages who are using a different case at least for "no xy", e.g. Polish (and Russian?), and Farsi/Dari.
There are many languages who are using a different case at least for "no xy", e.g. Polish (and Russian?), and Farsi/Dari.
@PetraSteiner Thank you!