Talk:Grammatical category

message: "Grammatical categories are often expressed by affixes, but clitics and particles are also common." 
I believe tone can do this as well - I can't give any specific examples but I remember coming across a language in western africa where verbal tense was indicated by a change in tone - 
and what about syntactically? has anybody came across a grammatical category being expressed by word order?? that would be interesting indeed! 112ddd211 (talk) 11:07, 7 May 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: expression of grammatical category (tone, syntax?)

message: this obviously needs help. – ishwar  (speak) 22:40, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: help

message: I've added a disambiguation tag to this page. At the time I added it, the article consisted of no more than a skimpy definition of what a grammatical category might be, and a list of links to other articles that grammatical category might mean. That looks a lot like a disambiguation page to me.
I guess that if it's possible to distinguish the concept of grammatical categories from the things that this article links to, and build a proper encyclopedia article around it that consists of more than just a definition, then this will no longer be a disambiguation page. But at the moment, I think that trying to make other wikipedia articles which talk about grammatical categories more specific is the right thing to do. Squashy 09:56, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  disambiguation page 

message: Is countability a grammatical category?  Although languages can have both countable and uncountable nouns, I haven't seen any examples of languages where individual nouns can be marked as countable or uncountable.  If there are no examples of this, I don't think it meets the criteria for a grammatical category.  —Umofomia (talk) 22:40, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: There are some examples, but how to categorize them seems a bit iffy. In Central and South-Central Italy there is a large area in which a remnant of the Latin neuter contrasts with what is presumably masculine (the two are sometimes referred to as subclasses of non-feminine). So-called neuter lo vinu is the general mass noun, 'the wine', and has no plural. Presumably masculine lu vinu is used to refer to a specific type or instance of wine, and can take a sortal plural, li vini, used to express, for example, 'the wines of this region' or 'the [various] wines we tasted'. Is there one noun vinu that is marked by article selection as count or non-count, and once that's selected, possibility of pluralization is decided (or locks in)? Or are there two phonologically identical nouns vinu, each assigned its article, one pluralizable, one not? (Details and discussion here: Haase, Martin. 2000. Reorganization of a gender system: The Central Italian neuters. in Gender in Grammar and Cognition, ed. by Barbara Unterbeck et al., pp. 221-236. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.)      — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.42.57.164 (talk) 16:55, 28 April 2017 (UTC)

text: I think it is a semantic category, which has some repercussions on other forms in the sentence (agreement, classifiers, sortal plural). I agree that it is not in the textbook lists of grammatical categories. I will remove it for now. Jasy jatere (talk) 11:53, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

text: While it's definitely semantic, a grammatical category is, by definition, a semantic category with a morphological manifestation. Even English implicitly marks all words as count or non-count, since the latter doesn't ever take a plural morpheme (a defeasible rule, but it's still a difference in marking). However, a more general consideration is quantization, which helps to explain the count/non-count distinction, as well as telicity, bounded/unbounded, etc. See below. 66.59.249.107 (talk) 20:42, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Countability? 

message: I was going to put telicity up for suggestion as a grammatical category, but after running across the above, now I wonder whether it would be worthwhile to skip both telicity and countability, and put quantization instead. I think it's valid to put it up, since it does have morphosyntactic consequences (e.g. the plural doesn't apply to non-count nouns; telicity can be interpreted as aspectual, which often does have morphological marking). Or all three could be included as a grammatical category, though I think quantization is probably best alone, since it explains both. The articles for count and telicity could be merged into the quantization article, which would beef up the stub, too. What do others think? 66.59.249.107 (talk) 20:42, 27 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Telicity and/or quantization? 

message: First sentence: "A grammatical category is an analytical class within the grammar of a language, whose members have the same syntactic distribution and recur as structural unit throughout the the language..." - but it doesn't say what the members are! Are they words and phrases? (This is interpreting "categories" and "classes" as something with members, which may be completely wrong. As you can see, I find this confusing.) For example, what are the members of the category "grammatical number"? Count Truthstein (talk) 23:29, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article is unclear and confusing 

message: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Linguistics#Propose_move_of_certain_articles_from_Grammatical_Categories_to_Lexical_Categories Count Truthstein (talk) 23:49, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Related discussion