| Like a descriptive adjective the quantifying limiting adjectives have three forms: positive, comparative, and superlative. We array these forms on figure 2. These adjectives also agree with the noun being determined, whether singular or plural, whether count or mass. Two of the forms, less and more are also adverbs of degree. We discuss other uses of three of the forms, little, few, and many, below in ¶15-4-1, where we take up quantitive nouns. The corresponding superlative forms of the first two, least and fewest, do not appear as quantifiers (most does!), but we include them here to make the chart more comprehensive. Most never appears with reference to a specific instance. |
| (1) | a. | There is not much milk in this jar. | [+Specific] | |
| b. | *There is (not) most milk in this jar. | ?[–Specific] |
|
| Figure 2 uses the feature [+Mass] to apply to non-count nouns [–Count]. Though it may cause some confusion, we also apply it to nouns with the feature [±Abstract] and to nouns in the singular [+Count,–Plural] derived from count nouns, when they refer to non-individuated mass [–Abstract]. |
| (2) | a. | There is so much onion in my soup. | [+Mass] [–Count,–Abstract] | |
| b. | There is so little honesty in the world. | [+Mass] [–Count,+Abstract] |
| Like many the limiting adjective several also appears with plural count nouns, but does not allow comparison. There is also an adverb of extent enough that has the same distribution as limiting adjectives when they are pronominalized. We will discuss this word below. |
| (3) | a. | There are many marbles in this jar. | [+Extensive] | |
| b. | There are several marbles in this jar. | [–Extensive] |
Agreement with the noun.As should be clear from figure 2, the quantifying limiting adjectives agree with the meronymic noun, whether a count noun in the singular or in the plural, or a non-count (mass) noun. Thus we have the following segment structure rules with the first case being for much and many and the second case being for several: |
 |
| Little and few also undergo [S81], but there is something more that is related to their syntax. This can also be said of the comparative forms: less, fewer and more. We discuss these words in the following paragraphs. |
Negative quantifiers little & few.The quantifying limiting adjectives little and few are negative in the sense that they include the idea of not. As pointed out by Klima (1964:276) they display the identical syntax of the phrases not much and not many respectively. For instance, negative sentences may be easily tagged onto sentences containing them. |
| (1) | a. | Little rain fell, and neither did much snow. | |
| b. | Not much rain fell, and neither did much snow. | ||
| c. | *A little rain fell, and neither did much snow. | ||
| (2) | a. | Few writers accept suggestions, and neither do many publishers. | |
| b. | Not many writers accept suggestions, and neither do many publishers. | ||
| c. | *A few writers accept suggestions, and neither do many publishers. |
| In my own dialect the equivalence in meaning is even better expressed when little is set against not very much and few is set against not very many. Furthermore, very little and very few refer to an even smaller amount. In figure 2, above, these words are called mitagative. |
 |
| There is some evidence that the negative particle may migrate, even after amalgamation. We mentioned the use of prepositive quantifiers with verbs above in ¶15-1-4. When we consider the use of the negative particle with verbs, it seems to migrate in the same way. In (3) the emphatic complement to the negative particle, at all seems to mark the position before migration and amalgamation. Even though it may explain the word order, it does not seem that these quantifiers themselves normally occur in any other use with the verb. |
| (3) | a. | Little rain at all fell. | [use with quantifier] | |
| b. | Little rain fell at all. | [use with verb] | ||
| (4) | a. | Not much rain at all fell. | [use with quantifier] | |
| b. | (?)Rain fell not much at all. | [use with verb] | ||
| c. | *Rain fell little at all. | [use with verb] |
Adverbs of extent with the quantifiers.PS-rule 28 introduced the adverb of extent and PS-rule 30 the quantifying limiting adjective. |
![[P28] The Post-positive Limiter](gif/bnf/bnf28.gif)
![[P30] The Adverb of Extent](gif/bnf/bnf30.gif)
| Syntactically there are three kinds of adverb of extent: 1) singular demonstratives which point out: this, that, 2) adverbial nouns of number (Noun Phrase), and 3) adverbs of degree. Description of this use of the demonstrative requires a context sensitive segment structure [S75b] introduced in ¶14-1-2: |
 |
| We cover the adverbial nouns of number below in §15-4. There are at least two types of adverbs of degree that appear with the quantifying limiting adjectives. Perhaps the most common such adverb is very. The English user may often use this adverb, like how and so, with verbs to indicate the extent of the manner, e.g., very quickly. Another type comprise those that are complemented with an adverb clause, which may reduce to a phrase: so (resultive), enough (sufficient), too (excessive), as (equlpollent), less (infrapollent), and more (extrapollent). |
| (1) | a. | They had this much rain followed by that much snow. | ||
| b. | So much snow fell! | |||
| c. | How little rain fell! | |||
| d. | So few writers accept suggestions that your plan is impossible. | [result clause, cf. §19-4] | ||
| e. | Too many writers have worked on the play to allow us to determine its true authorship. | [excessive comparison, cf. §19-6] | ||
| f. | As many writers have contributed as reason would allow. | [equipollent comparison, cf. §19-1] | ||
| g. | More writers have contributed than the rules permit. | [extrapollent comparison, cf. §19 1] | ||
| h. | Less snow fell than I predicted. | [infrapollent comparison, cf. §19-1] | ||
| i. | Enough snow fell that we can ski. | [sufficient comparison, cf. §19-6] |
 |
| Complemented adverbs of degree have individual features of meaning as indicated on figure 4 and described in segment structure rules (more about [S82c], [S82e], and [S82h] below): |
 |
Amalgamation with adverbs of degree.When we drew figure 3 to show the amalgamation of not with much and many to form little and few, we anticipated another instance of amalgamation. There are three so called comparison adverbs more, less, and enough that appear to be amalgamations of adverbs of degree more, less, and enough with much and many becoming three additional quantifying limiting adjectives. It is necessary to give three additional rules (cf. [S82c], [S82e], and [S82h] above) introducing an ad hoc feature [+Amalgamation] to make the condition on the the transformation easier to state. |
| Notice that both [–Comparative,–Superlative,–Mitigative] much and many become less when modified by the adverb of degree less [+Infrapollent] and more [+Comparative] when modified by more [+Extrapollent] (Hence the need for [+Amalgamation] since [–Infrapollent,–Sufficient] is not necessarily [+Extrapollent]). |
Adverbs of approximation.We met up with adverbs of approximation in our discussion of the prepositive quantifier in ¶15-2-3. These are adverbs whose effect is to approximate the degree of a quantifier: just (adverb particle, approximative), about (approximative), just about (adverb particle + approximative), almost (approximative), nearly (approximative), very nearly (adverb particle + approximative), not (negative particle). These adverbs appear with the prepositive quantifier in PS-rule 27, and as an approximative phrase to the adverb of extent in PS-rule 32. |
![[P27] The Prepositive Quantifier Phrase](gif/bnf/bnf27.gif)
![[P32] The Approximative Phrase](gif/bnf/bnf32.gif)
| (1) | a. | Just about as little rain fell today as yesterday. | |
| b. | Almost too many writers have contributed. | ||
| c. | Not very many writers have contributed. | ||
| d. | John ate very nearly half the pie. |
 |
| We have provisionally put an identifier in PS-rule 20, but it might as easily go in PS-rule 21. The negative particle is now only available from PS-rule 28. |
| This analysis leaves unexplained why it is the pronoun form of the negative particle none that appears before too (but not before adjectives) and the article or why it is the identifier form no that appears before more (and -er with adjectives). Some does not occur with too, and when it appears with more the extrapollent degree clause must be left unexpressed (hence, we put it in that context in PS-rule 30). |
| (2) | a. | Arthur has no more pencils. | |
| b. | *Megan has some more pencils than she had yesterday. | ||
| c. | Megan has some more pencils. |
Modifier recursion.Much and many as an adverb of extent before more and too may themselves be modified by more and too as adverbs of extent. This is the motivation for the recursion of PS-rule 30. Number agreement carries through the recursive adverb of extent. The recursion can lead to a multiple embedding somewhat like that of the relative adjective clause (cf. chapter 16). Compare (3) and (4). These sentences might well be fully grammatical, only they are just hard to comprehend logically. Figure 6, below, shows the structure of (5) without the clausal complements. |
| (3) | ?This is the house wherein the malt that the mouse that the cat chased ate lay. | |
| (4) | ?There was so much more too much support for our candidate for us to lose than I thought there would be that I expressed some suspicions. | |
| (5) | ?Megan had so much more too much sand for them to build with than he planned that he quit playing with her. |
| Perhaps it is the variety of embedded clause types in (4) and (5) that prevents the drastic reduction in intelligibility that is so evident in (3). This general problem is discussed by Chomsky (1965:10-12). |
 |
Amalgamation with other adverbs.We mentioned in ¶8-5-5 that there were at least four kinds of adverbs which might be modified by means of an adverb of extent. These were introduced in [P10] as the gradable adverbs of frequency (many times), degree (much), distance (far), and duration (long). |
![[P10] The Adverb Phrase](gif/bnf/bnf10.gif)
![[P13] The Extent Phrase](gif/bnf/bnf13.gif)
 |
 |
 |
| The present analysis of the adverbs of extent in [P30] provides that the quantifying limiting adjective be obligatory. Hence, we would require another instance of QLA-amalgamation to incorporate these adverbs into this analysis. In the first two cases the quantifying limiting adjective becomes an adverb, in the last two it is absorbed. The verbs are all ergative. These are mentioned again in ¶17-1-1. |
| (1) | The bell sounded eight (many) times (much) (?often). (cf. "How often?") | |
| [ … [EXT + QLA]EXT + … N ]EXT + {QLA+AVB(Ø)} | ||
| (2) | The bell weighed fourteen (many) pounds (much) (?heavy). (cf. "How heavy?") | |
| [ … [EXT + QLA]EXT + … N ]EXT + {QLA+AVB(Ø)} | ||
| (3) | The race extended eight (many) miles (much) (far). (cf. "How far?") | |
| [ … [EXT + QLA]EXT + … N ]EXT + {QLA(Ø)+AVB} | ||
| (4) | The race lasted fourteen (many) hours (much) (long). (cf. "How long?") | |
| [ … [EXT + QLA]EXT + … N ]EXT + {QLA(Ø)+AVB} |
