Therefore we think it unjustified to speak of units like to the student, of the student, etc. as of analytical cases. They are combinations of nouns in the common case with prepositions.
The morpheme -'s, on which the category of case of English nouns depends (§ 83), differs in some respects from other grammatical morphemes of the English language and from the case morphemes of other languages.
As emphasized by B. A. Ilyish [12], -'s is no longer a case inflexion in the classical sense of the word. Unlike such classical inflexions, -'s may be attached
a) to adverbs (of substantival origin), as in yesterday's events,
b) to word-groups, as in Mary and John's apartment, our professor of literature's unexpected departure,
c) even to whole clauses, as in the well-worn example the man I saw yesterday's son.
В. A. Ilyish comes to-the conclusion that the -'s morpheme gradually develops into a "form-word"[13], a kind of particle serving to convey the meaning of belonging, possession[14].
G. N. Vorontsova does not recognize –‘s as a case morpheme at all[15]. The reasons she puts forward to substantiate her point of view are as follows:
1) The use of -'s is optional (her brother's, of her brother).
2) It is used with a limited group of nouns outside which it occurs very seldom.
3) -'s is used both in the singular and in the plural (child's, children's), which is not incident- to case morphemes (cf. мальчик-а, мальчик-ов).
4) It occurs in very few plurals, only those with the irregular formation of the plural member (oxen's but cows').
5) -'s does not make an inseparable part of the structure of the word. It may be placed at some distance from the head-noun of an attributive group.
"Been reading that fellow what's his name's attacks in the 'Sunday Times'?" (Bennett).
Proceeding from these facts G. N. Vorontsova treats -'s as a 'postposition', a 'purely syntactical form-word resembling a preposition', used as a sign of syntactical dependence[16].
In keeping with this interpretation of the -'s morpheme the author denies the existence of cases in Modern English.
At present, however, this extreme point of view can hardly be accepted [17]. The following arguments tend to show that -'s does function as a case morpheme.
1. The -'s morpheme is mostly attached to individual nouns e, not noun groups. According to our statistics this is observed in 96 per cent of examples with this morpheme. Instances like The man I saw yesterday's son are very rare and may be interpreted in more ways than one. As already mentioned, the demarcation line between words and combinations of words is very vague in English. A word-combination can easily be made to function as one word.
Cf. a hats-cleaned-by-electricity-while-you-wait establishment (O. Henry), the eighty-year-olds (D. W.).
In the last example the plural morpheme -s is in fact attached to an adjective word-combination, turning it into a noun. It can be maintained that the same morpheme –‘s likewise substantivizes the group of words to which it is attached, and we get something like the man-1-saw-yesterday's son.
2. Its general meaning — "the relation of a noun to an other word" — is a typical case meaning.
3. The fact that -'s occurs, as a rule, with a more or less limited group of words bears testimony to its not being a "preposition-like form word". The use of the preposition is determined, chiefly, by the meaning of the preposition itself and not by the meaning of the noun it introduces (Cf. оn the table, in the table, under the table, over the table etc.)
4. The fact that the possessive case is expressed in oxen — oxen's by -'s and in cows — cows' by zero cannot serve as an argument against the existence of cases in English nouns because -'s and zero are here forms of the same morpheme
a) Their meanings are identical.
b) Their distribution is complementary.
5. As a minor argument against the view that -'s is "a preposition-like word", it is pointed out[18] that -'s differs phonetically from all English prepositions in not having a vowel, a circumstance limiting its independence.
Yet, it cannot be denied that the peculiarities of the -'s morpheme are such as to admit no doubt of its being essentially different from the case morphemes of other languages. It is evident that the case system of Modern English is undergoing serious changes.
2.1.2. The Category of Number of English Nouns.
The category of number of English nouns is the system of opposemes (such as girl — girls, foot — feet, etc.) showing whether the noun stands for one object or more than one, in other words, whether its grammatical meaning is 'oneness' or 'more-than-oneness' of objects.
The connection of the category with the world of material reality, though indirect, is quite transparent. Its meanings reflect the existence of individual objects and groups of objects in the material world.
All number opposemes are identical in content: they contain two particular meanings of 'singular' and 'plural' united by the general meaning of the category, that of 'number'. But there is a considerable variety of form in number opposemes, though it is not so great as in the Russian language.
An English noun lexeme can contain two number opposemes at most (toy — boys, boy's — boys'). Many lexemes have but one opposeme (table — tables) and many others have no opposemes at all (ink, news).
In the opposeme boy — boys 'singularity' is expressed by a zero morpheme and 'plurality' is marked by the positive morpheme /-z/, in spelling -.s. In other words, the 'singular' member of the opposeme is not marked, and the 'plural' member is marked.
In the opposeme boy's — boys' both members have positive morphemes –‘s, -s’, but these morphemes can be distinguished only in writing. In the spoken language their forms do not differ, so with regard to each other they are unmarked. They can be distinguished only by their combinability (cf. a boy's head, boys' heads).
In a few noun lexemes of foreign origin both members of a number opposeme are marked, e.g. symposium — symposia, genus — genera, phenomenon—phenomena, etc. But in the process of assimilation this peculiarity of foreign nouns gets gradually lost, and instead of medium — media a new opposeme develops, medium — mediums; instead of formula — formulae, the usual form now is formula — formulas. In this process, as we see, the foreign grammatical morphemes are neglected as such. The ‘plural’ morpheme is dropped altogether. The 'singular' morpheme becomes part of the stem. Finally, the regular -s ending is added to form the 'plural' opposite. As a result the 'singular' becomes unmarked, as typical of English, and the 'plural' gets its usual mark, the suffix -s.
Since the 'singular' member of a number opposeme is not marked, the form of the opposeme is, as a rule, determined by the form of the 'plural' morpheme, which, in its turn, depends upon the stem of the lexeme.
In the overwhelming majority of cases the form of the 'plural' morpheme is /-s/, /-z/, or /-z/, in spelling -(e)s, e. g, books, boys, matches.
With the stem ox- the form of the 'plural' morpheme is -en /-n/.
In the opposeme man—men the form of the 'plural' morpheme is the vowel change /æ > e/. In woman — women ii is /u > i/, in foot — feet it is /u — i:/, etc.
In child — children the form of the 'plural' morpheme is complicated. It consists of the vowel change /ai > i/ and the suffix -ren.
In sheep — sheep the 'plural' is not marked, thus coinciding in form with the 'singular'. They can be distinguished only by their combinability: ‘one sheep’, ‘five sheep’, ‘a sheep was ...’, ‘sheep were ...’, ‘this sheep’, ‘these sheep’. The 'plural' coincides in form with the 'singular' also in ‘deer, fish, carp, perch, trout, cod, salmon’, etc.[19]
All the 'plural' forms enumerated here are forms of the same morpheme. This can be proved, as we know , by the identity of the 'plural' meaning, and the complementary distribution of these forms, i.e. the fact that different forms are used with different stems.
As already mentioned [20], with regard to the category of number English nouns fall into two subclasses: countables and uncountables. The former have number opposites, the latter have not. Uncountable nouns are again subdivided into those having no plural opposites and those having no singular opposites.
Nouns like milk, geometry, self-possession having no plural opposites are usually called by a Latin name — singularia tantum. Nouns like outskirts, clothes, goods having no singular opposites are known as pluralia tantum.
As a matter of fact, those nouns which have no number opposites are outside the grammatical category of number. But on the analogy of the bulk of English nouns they acquire oblique (or lexico-grammatical) meanings of number. Therefore singularia tantum are often treated as singulars and pluralia tantum as plurals.
This is justified both by their forms and by their combinability.
Cf. This (table, book, milk, love) is ...
These (tables, books, clothes, goods) are ...
When combinability and form contradict each other, combinability is decisive, which accounts for the fact that ‘police’ or ‘cattle’ are regarded as plurals, and ‘measles’, ‘mathematics as singulars.
The lexico-grammatical meaning of a class (or of a subclass) of words is, as we know, an abstraction from the lexical meanings of the words of the class, and depends to a certain extent on those lexical meanings. Therefore singularia tantum usually include nouns of certain lexical meanings. They are mostly material, abstract and collective nouns, such as sugar, gold, butter, brilliance, constancy, selfishness, humanity, soldiery, peasantry.
Yet it is not every material, abstract or collective noun that belongs to the group of singularia tantum (e. g. a plastic, a feeling, a crowd) and, what is more important, not in all of its meanings does a noun belong to this group.
As we have already seen[21], variants of the same lexeme may belong to different subclasses of a part of speech. In most of their meanings the words joy and sorrow as abstract nouns are singularia tantum.
E.g. He has been a good friend both in joy and in sоггоw. (Hornby).
But when concrete manifestations are meant, these nouns are countables and have plural opposites, e. g. the joys and sorrows of life.
Likewise, the words copper, tin, hair as material nouns are usually singularia tantum, but when they denote concrete objects, they become countables and get plural opposites: a copper — coppers, a tin — tins, a hair — hairs.
Similarly, when the nouns wine, steel, salt denote some sort or variety of the substance, they become countables.
E. g. an expensive wine — expensive wines.
All such cases are not a peculiarity of the English language alone. They are found in other languages as well. Cf. дерево — деревья and дерево .is a material noun, платье — платья and платье as a collective noun.
‘Joy’ and ‘a joy’, ‘beauty’ and ‘a beauty’, ‘copper’ and ‘a copper’, ‘hair’ and ‘a hair’ and many other pairs of this kind are not homonyms, as suggested by some grammarians[22] , but variants of lexemes related by internal conversion.
If all such cases were regarded as homonyms, the number of homonyms in the English language would be practically limitless. If only some of them were treated as homonyms, that would give rise to uncontrolled subjectivity.
The group of pluralia tantum is mostly composed of nouns denoting objects consisting of two or more parts, complex phenomena or ceremonies, e. g. tongs, pincers, trousers, nuptials, obsequies. Here also belong some nouns with a distinct collective or material meaning, e.g. clothes, eaves, sweets.
Since in these words the -s suffix does not function as a grammatical morpheme, it gets lexicalized and develops into an inseparable part of the stem [23]. This, probably, underlies the fact that such nouns as mathematics, optics, linguistics, mumps, measles are treated as singularia tantum.
Nouns like police, militia, cattle, poultry are pluralia tantum, judging by their combinability, though not by form [24].
People in the meaning of 'народ' is a countable noun. In the meaning of 'люди' it belongs to the pluralia tantum. Family in the sense of "a group of people who are related" is a countable noun. In the meaning of "individual members of this group" it belongs to the pluralia tantum. Thus, the lexeme family has two variants:
Sg. PL
1) family families
2) — family
E. g. Almost every family in the village has sent a man to the army. (Hornby).
Those were the oldest families in Jorkshire. (Black).
Her family were of a delicate constitution. (Bronte).
Similar variants are observed in the lexemes committee, government, board, crew, etc.
Colour in the meaning "red, green, blue, etc." is a countable noun. In the meaning "appearance of reality or truth" (e. g. His torn clothes gave colour to his story that lie had been attacked by robbers. A. Hornby.) it has no plural opposite and belongs to the singularia tantum. Colours in the sense of "materials used by painters and artists" has no singular opposite and belongs to the pluralia tantum.
Thus, the lexeme has three variants:
Sg. Pl.
1) colour colours
2) colour —
3) — colours.
When grammarians write that the lexical meanings of some plurals differ from those of their singular opposites [25], they simply compare different variants of a lexeme.
Sometimes variants of a lexeme may belong to the same lexico-grammatical subclass and yet have different forms of number opposemes.
Cf. brother (son of same parents) — brothers
brother (fellow member) — brethren
fish — fish (e.g. I caught five fish yesterday.)
fish — fishes ('different species', e. g. ocean fishes).
A collective noun is a word that designates a group of objects or beings regarded as a whole, such as "flock", "team", or "corporation". Although many languages treat collective nouns as singular, in others they may be interpreted as plural. In British English, phrases such as the committee are meeting are common (the so-called agreement in sensu "in meaning", that is, with the meaning of a noun, rather than with its form). The use of this type of construction varies with dialect and level of formality.
All languages are able to specify the quantity of referents. They may do so by lexical means with words such as English a few, some, one, two, five hundred. However, not every language has a grammatical category of number. Grammatical number is expressed by morphological and/or syntactic means. That is, it is indicated by certain grammatical elements, such as through affixes or number words. Grammatical number may be thought of as the indication of semantic number through grammar.
Languages that express quantity only by lexical means lack a grammatical category of number. For instance, in Khmer, neither nouns nor verbs carry any grammatical information concerning number: such information can only be conveyed by lexical items such as khlah 'some', pii-bey 'a few', and so on.
Most languages of the world have formal means to express differences of number. The most widespread distinction, as found in English and many other languages, involves a simple two-way number contrast between singular and plural (car / cars; child / children, etc.). Other more elaborate systems of number are described below.
2.2 Structural Semantic Characteristics of English Nouns
2.2.1 Morphological Characteristics of Nouns
Due to the following morphological characteristics nouns can be classified in following ways:
1. Nouns that can be counted have two numbers: singular and plural (e. g. singular: a girl, plural: girls).
2. Nouns denoting living beings (and some nouns denoting lifeless things) have two case forms: the common case and the genitive case.