The Quantifiers and the Quantified in Philippine English: A Corpus-Based Study

Abstract

One of the linguistic aspects in which Filipino non-native speakers of English

deviate from the Standard English is the use of quantifiers with respect to count nouns
and non-count nouns, as observed. As such, this study investigated the selected
quantifiers and the nouns (i.e. count or non-count) they quantify, utilizing the Philippine
components of the international Corpus of English (ICE-PHI). The quantifiers many, few,
a little, much, lots of and enough were chosen and analysed using AntConc 3.5.7. This
study revealed variations of the English Language particularly on the use of quantifiers.
The quantifiers many, few, a little, much, lots of, and enough are used both with count
and non-count nouns. However, the quantifiers many, few, a little, much, lots of and
enough are mostly used with count nouns while much and enough are mostly used with
non-count nouns. Nevertheless, Filipinos generally show proficiency in the use of
quantifiers.

1. Introduction

Variation of the English language has been one of the exploratory studies across World

Englishes (henceforth WE). Numerous studies in WE showed clear variations of the English

such as lexicography, phonetics and phonology, morphology, and syntax (see Gonzales, 1985;

Bautista, 2011, to mention a few). English in this sense is localized according to the structure of

convention of the national language(s) of a certain country (see Gonzales, 2017; Malicsin.d.).

This means that linguistic features of the native languages have transferred to the English.Outer

circle(e.g., India, Africa and Nigeria)and expanding circle(e.g.,China, Japan and

Turkey)countries have been observed to have deviated from how English is used in the inner

circle(e.g.,England, USA and Canada) according to Kachru (1997).

In the Philippines the use of quantifiers for count nouns and non-count nouns are among

the linguistic items that are observed to be used differently by Filipinos from the Americans

Standard English. However, no formal study has been conducted on this even more sostudy that

used the Philippine component of the International Corpus of English.

 There’s this corpus that provides naturally occurring data.A corpus consists of a databank

of natural texts, compiled from writing and/or a transcription of recorded speech.The main focus

of corpus linguistics is to discover patterns of authentic language use through analysis of actual

usage. The aim of a corpus based analysis is not to generate theories of what is possible in the

language, such as Chomsky's phrase structure grammar which can generate an infinite number of

sentences but which does not account for the probable choices that speaker actually make.

Corpus linguisticsonly concern is the usage patterns of the empirical data and what that reveals

to us about language behavior.

The study therefore, is an attempt to elucidate about the use of quantifiers by users of

English in the Philippines.

1.1 The Quantifiers

Quantifiers are expressions whose meanings involve the concept of quantity. The basic semantic

structure of quantification is divided into two categories, consisting of the quantifier itself plus

the expression that it quantifies. Quantifiers are words or phrases that tell us something about

quantity.Quantifiers are used to give someone information about the number of something,

e.g.how much, how many, etc.In most cases,a quantifier is used in the place of a determiner –

pre-determiners and post-determiners (Quirk, et al., 1985). Examples are cited below:

(1) Most children start school at the age of five.

(2) We ate some bread and butter.

(3) We saw lots of birds.

 Quantifier is interpreted as a determiner or a pronoun that expresses quantity, such as all

and both (Hornby, 2005).It was noted that when a quantifier is followed by a noun, it is a

determiner, but if not, then it is a pronoun. In example (4), all functions as a determiner while in

example (5), all functions as a pronoun.

(4) Hand me all the books on the table.

(5) I want all.

Quirk, et al. claimed that quantifiers are used with both count and non-count nouns.

Quantifiers which are used for count nouns include many, few, several, both, each, a few,among

others. Non-count quantifiers include much, a little, a bit of, a great deal of, a large amount of,

etc. Quantifiers used for both types of nouns include all,enough, more, most, none, some, any a

lot of, lots of, plenty of, etc. Other forms of quantifiers are colloquial, e.g. plenty of, heaps of, a

load of, tons of, etc.

Quirk, et al. classified quantifiers into two – closed-class quantifiers and open-class

quantifiers. In the closed class quantifiers, two small groups function as post determiners: 1)

Many, (a) few, and several co-occur only with plural count nouns while 2) much, and (a) little

co-occur only with non-count nouns(pp.262). Examples are cited below:

(6) There are (too many, only a few, very few, several) people inside the gym.

(7) My parents don’t have much money for an iPhone X.

On the other hand, most open-class quantifiers consist of noun of quality (e.g. lot, deal

amount, etc.) followed by of and often preceded by the indefinite article (i.e. a oran). Other

open-class quantifiers function semantically like closed-class quantifiers. Some quantifiers (e.g.

great deal, good deal, large quantity, small amount) preceded by indefinite article and followed
by preposition of are restricted to quantifying only non-count nouns(8) or plural count nouns (9).

(pp.264).Examples are given below:

(8) The chest contained a (great deal, good deal, large quantity, small amount) of

money.

(9) The room contained (plenty of, a lot of, lots of) students.

In this study, Crystal (2008: 398) explains that “quantifier is a term used in semantic or

logical analysis, referring to a set of items which expresses contrasts in quantity, such as all,

some, and each.” It is, therefore, concluded that quantifier is a word such as some or many or a

phrase such as a few and a lot showing how much or how many we are talking about. Moreover,

quantifiers belong to the wider class of determiners that precede a noun phrase to tell us

something about its quantity.

1.2 Studies in Quantifiers

On various perspectives and interests have emerged among semanticists, logicians, and

philosophers of language, considering its ‘logical’ or ‘mathematical’ nature of the meanings

involved. For instance, Crystal (2008:398) explains that “quantifier is a term used in semantic or

logical analysis, referring to a set of items which expresses contrasts in quantity, such as all,

some, and each.” For example:

(10) Each has his own worries.

(11) Some students didn’t answer any question.

The Feiman and Snedeker (2016) on quantifiers employing different experimental

approaches revealed large systematic differences in preference and priming effect for all

quantifiers. The study also revealed that changing verb between the prime and the target sentence
does not reduce the priming effect. Further, it showed that one case where there is priming across

quantifiers (when one number like three) is in the prime, and a different one (e.g. four) is in the

target. They claimed that a systematic ambiguity occurs when two quantifiers are in the same

clause.

The study therefore, is an attempt to elucidate about the use of quantifiers by users of

English in the Philippines. Specifically it investigated the used of quantifiers for count, non-

count nouns and for both such as (e.g., many, few, a little, much, lots of and enough) and

described how the use of these quantifiers resemble or deviate from standard American English.

2. Method

This study utilized both qualitative and quantitative methods and qualitative design. Also, this

study utilized the Philippine component of the International Corpus of English (ICE-PHIL) using

all the registers. The Philippine ICE Corpus was compiled by Dr. Ma. Lourdes S. Bautista, Ms.

Jenifer Loy Lising, and Dr. Danilo T. Dayag of the Department of English and Applied

Linguistics.

This study used the Philippine component of the International Corpus of English (ICE-

PHIL). The lists of quantifiers weretakenfrom Quirk’s et al. (1985) A Comprehensive Grammar

of the English Language. However, considering that the topic on quantifiers is vast, this study

limits its scope to the target list of two quantifiers for count nouns, two for non-count nouns and

two for both types of nouns. The two most frequent quantifiers in ICE-PHI will also be included

in case they are not part of the target list.

The study utilized AntConc 3.5.7 that provides frequency and concordances. Each

quantifier will be individually searched in the ICE-PHI. The syntactic features of the quantifiers
will be analysed in terms of their quantified, i.e. nouns they quantify and in terms of types, i.e.

closed-class and open-class quantifiers.

Quantifiers which are used for count nouns include many, few, several, both, each, a few,

among others,a number of.Non-count quantifiers include much, little, a bit of, a great deal of, a

large amount of, etc.Quantifiers used for both types of nouns include enough, none, some, a lot

of, lots of, plenty of, etc.

This study revealed variations of the English Language particularly on the use of

quantifiers. The quantifiers many, few, a little, much, lots of, and enough are used both with

count and non-count nouns. However, the quantifiers many, few, a little, much, lots of and

enough are mostly used with count nouns while much and enough are mostly used with non-

count nouns. Nevertheless, Filipinos generally show proficiency in the use of quantifiers.

3. Results and Discussion

Table 1

Frequency distribution of quantifiers and the quantified

Quantifiers Count Nouns Non-count Nouns

Many 762 60
Few 276 7
Little 232 23
much 22 175
lots of 18 12
Enough 17 53
3.1 many

Table 1 presents the frequency and percentage distribution of the quantifiers and the type of

nouns they quantify. It shows that the quantifier many is generally used for count nouns with 762

occurrences (1 and 2), and rarely for non-count nouns with 60 occurrences (3). In some cases, it

is used for non-count nouns in the plural form with the bound morpheme <s> (4). According to

Alexander (1998), the quantifier many is used for plural countable nouns.Since it is a common

process to pluralize nouns by adding <s> or <es>, the non-count noun architecture is pluralized

without knowing that, prescriptively, it should not. This implies that Filipinos are prone to do

such practice in many other non-count nouns (e.g. equipments, musics, homeworks, etc.). Some

linguists like Quirk etal, 1973 among many others, Biberetal (1999) argue that with only plural

count nouns many, (a) few and several are used and that many indicates a large number of

quantity which affirms the claim of Alexander (1998).

(1) The Spaniards brought manycrops here but mango was not one of them

contrary to Ochse<foreign> et al. </foreign> 's ( 1961) claim that

Spanishvoyagers introduced mangoes from India to Manila.<ICE-PHI:W2A-

030#71:1>

(2) So many judgements we do in ordinary life is synthetic <foreign> a posteriori

</foreign> okay. <ICE-PHI:S1B-002#114:1:A>

(3) De la Cruz, the past decades, has produced many equipment for food

processing and other light industries, but was unlucky as he worked

withpartners who pirated his know-how. </p>. <ICE-PHI:W2B-032#104:2>

 (4) Although many architectures have been proposed for IntelligentTutoring

Systems, a few components seem to be present in all.<ICE-PHI:W2A-

040#11:1>

3.2 few

Based on the occurrences of the quantifier few,it shows that it is commonly used for count nouns

with 276 occurrences (5 and 6) and rarely used for non-count nouns with 7occurrences (7). There

were some instances that few was used for non-count noun like sampling it was pluralized by

adding <s> (8) same with the case number (4) architecture. few co-occur only with plural count

nouns according to Quirk etal, (1973). Thus, this means that Filipinos do not strictly observe the

usage of the quantifiers.

(5) The Philippines remains among the very few countries still stickingto the

unwieldy home consumption value system which relies on some phantomprice

set by bureaucrats. <ICE-PHI:W2E-002#79:3>

(6) Okay what if you 're uh in this situation <,> uh you had a few drinks few

laughs listen to music <ICE-PHI:S1A-060#159:1:A>

(7) as one of the few democracies in the Asian continent, thePhilippines seems to

stand out as a major United Nations concern as itannounced renewed efforts to

revive its ailing economy from tremendouschallenges. <ICE-PHI:W2E-

004#37:3>

(8) Well I think that thefew samplings that was done on the screen are reflective

of what the people out in the countryside are saying ICE-PHI:S1B-

024#61:1:D>
3.3 little

For the quantifieralittle the table shows that it is seldom used for non-count nouns (9 and 10)

with 23 occurrences which deviate from the study of Quirk etal. (1973) which suggested

that(a)littlecooccur only with non-count nouns which were also supported by the claims of

Alexander (1998) thatalittle is used with (singular) uncountables. However, in most cases

quantifieralittle is mostly used for noncount nouns (11 and 12) with 232 occurrences.

(9) Church workers bewail the brash attitude of some Muslims,especially those

who have had alittle education.<ICE-PHI:W2B-014#91:1>

(10) So now I am going to demonstrate a little bit <indig>naman 'no </indig> so

alittle showmanship of how to walk for the ladies <&> the speaker

demonstrates and laughter from audience <ICE-PHI:S2A-060#124:1:A>

(11) Deep inside in the very core of his being is a little woman dyingto come out

<O> Speakers B and C laugh <ICE-PHI:S1A-088#200:1:A>

(12) He sounded like a little boy who 's just got a star in class likeyou know what I

told my best friend we were dating and Trish was like oh myGod that is really

sweet <ICE-PHI:S1A-015#117:1:A>

3.4 much

Result for quantifier much also revealed that it is used both in the count nouns (13 and 14) with

22 occurrences and non-count nouns (15 and 16) with 175 occurrences. It showed that much is

mostly used for non-count nouns. Much indicates a large quantity. It is usually followed by

uncountable nouns according to Jawad 2005. This means that some Filipinos do not pay attention

on the correct usage of the quantifiers.

(13) Abroad there is no need for so much talk.<ICE-PHI:W2A-015#82:1>

 (14) And then we found that we had so much things in common ICE-PHI:S1A-

019#148:1:B>

(15) Well we had our drinking <,> time <{><[>out </[> there and we had so much

fun<ICE-PHI:S1A-031#15:1:B>

(16) Even foods you don't think contain much water also contribute to yourfluid

intake. <ICE-PHI:W2B-028#80:2>

3.5 lots of

For the quantifier lots of it showed that it is used both in count nouns (17 and 18) with 18

occurrences and non-count nouns (19 and 20) with 12 occurrences. There is not much difference

on the number of the quantified.Lots of can co-occur equally with noncount and plural count

nouns according to Alexander (1998) which is correctly followed by the Filipino users of

quantifiers.

(17) Uh I 'm currently indulged in reading lots of books mostly analytical

books<ICE-PHI:S1A-062#16:1:B>

(18) It had audiotapes of interviews with the survivors, and of courselots of

pictures and mementos. <ICE-PHI:W1B-011#191:2>

(19) We 're gonna drink lots of beer<ICE-PHI:S1A-063#164:1:B>

(20) We had lots of food, and the taste was quite good <indig>naman<ICE-

PHI:W1B-011#47:1>

3.6 enough

The figure below also shows that the quantifier enough is used for both plural countable

nouns(21 and 22) with 17 occurrences and singular uncountable nouns (23 and 24)with 53

occurrences. In this case quantifier enough is frequently used for non-count

nouns.Quantifierenough is defined by Alexander (1998) as 'adequate in quantity or number'

whichcan be used infront of plural countable nouns and (singular) uncountable nouns in allkinds

of utterances: (e.g. statements, questions or negatives.

(21) Does Philippine Airlines have enough seats enough aircrafts enough

flights<ICE-PHI:S1B-027#120:1:C>

(22) Well if we don't have enough supplies for materials <ICE-PHI:S1A-

006#18:1:B>

(23) Many chronically constipated people do not drink enough water and donot

eat enough fiber-rich foods ( fruits, vegetables and grains). <ICE-PHI:W2B-

028#85:2>

(24) many of the ordinary folk who attended itsbirth 12 years ago, I have trouble

summoning enough spirit to celebrateanother Edsa anniversary. <ICE-

PHI:W2B-012#49:2>

4. Conclusion

This study attempted to investigate some variations that Filipino non-native speakers of

English face when using quantifiers in their written performance. English quantifiers create

problems for native language learners. It is assumed that quantifiers are applicable for both count

and non-count nouns in the Philippines and that Filipinos are not fully aware of using quantifiers;

therefore, they use them randomly for count nouns and non-count nouns. Through the study, the

researcher found out that there are Filipinos who deviates from Standard English in using the

quantifiers. English quantifiers are also not easy to learn since Filipinos almost usually meet

unanswered questions associated with many exceptions of using specific quantifiers in spite of
hard grammatical English rules.Differences in language have a contributing factor for non-

native speakers of English that doesn’t conform to that of Standard English.

The study concludes that some Filipinos do not conform to the standard American usage of

quantifiers because choosing the correct quantifier is somewhat not easy, especially on the part

of learners of English language as a foreign tongue because of the close similarity of many

indefinite quantifiers. The findings and conclusions arrived at in this study are expected to be

worthy to pedagogical planners and planning and for other academic purposes.It should be

emphasised that when teaching, both differences and similarities between the native and the

target language should be taken into account. Making learners aware of cross-linguistic

similarities could enhance the learning process: if students can draw parallels with their own

native language(s), the feeling of familiarity can help them adopt certain language properties

more easily. The need for further research in this area is needed. Further, more qualitative

analyses of quantifiers’ avoidance are still needed and are certain to provide new insightful

evidence on this issue.

References

Alexander, L.G. (1988).Longman English grammar. London:Longman.

Biber, D.,Stig, Geoffrey,Conard&Finegan(1999).Longman grammar of spoken and written

English . London:Longman.

Close, R. A.(1975). A reference grammar for students of EnglishLondon: Longman.

Eastwood, John. (2005).Oxford learner’s grammar finder.Oxford: OUP.

Eckersley, C.E & J. M. Eckersley (1960).A comprehensive English grammar.London: Longman.

Ramkishan, G.(1997). Syntactic properties of quantifier phrases in English and Telugu.CIEFL.

India.

Graham Lock. (1996). Functional English grammar.Cambridge University Press.

Hewings, Martin (2005).Advanced English grammar in use .Cambridge: CUP.

Hornby, A. S (2005). Oxford Advanced learner’s Dictionary. Oxford:Oxford University Press.

Leach, Geoffrey, &SvartvikJ.(1994).A communicative grammar of English.London: Longman

May, R. C. (1977).The Grammar of quantification.(Doctoral Dissertation).MIT.Cambridge.

Massachusesst.

Maysaa R. Jawad (2015).A contrastive study of quantifiers in English and Arabic. IJHSSE 2(5),

pp: 285-308.

Quirk, R and Greenbaum, S. (1973). A university grammar of English. London: Longman.

Quirk, R., GreenbaumS., Leech G., &Svartvik, J. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the

English language. London:Longman.

Cowan, R. (2008). The teacher's grammar of English: A Course Book and Reference Guide.

Cambridge University Press.

Swan, M. (2005).Practical English usage.Oxford :OxfordUniversity Press.

Thomson, A. J., &Marient, A.(1986).A practical English grammar. Oxford: Oxford University

press.

Yule, G. (2006).Oxford practice grammar (Advanced).Oxford University Press.

Madrunio,M.R., & Martin, I.P. (2018).Purposive communication: Using English in Multilingual

context. Manila, Philippines:C&E Publishing.

Kachru, B. (Ed.). (1985). Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realm: The English

language in the outer circle. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.