Proforms vs. Classifiers

[Dan Parvaz]

> As I'm not a linguist (yet), please forgive me for this question if the
> answer is evident for everybody on this list: what is the real ifference
> between the terms proform and classifier?

(Dredging up forgotten syntax lessons...)

As far as I recall, proforms can replace phrasal level stuff; in the
quoted sentence above, "the terms proform and classifier" can be replaced
with "them." It's one of the tests for constituency, and one of the
reasons for positing phrasal constituents like N' and V' (much of the rest
of the X-bar madness having something to do with "theoretical elegance"
:-)

Classifiers, at the broadest level, are words that stand for semantic
classes of objects, so the "3" classifier (thumb, index, and middle
fingers extended) in ASL represents vehicles, Japanese "hon" has something
to do with measure (although it's more complicated than that), and so on.
Different languages use classifiers in different morphosyntactic
environments, and Colette Grinevald (at one point, Craig) has created a
typology of classifiers based on those environments.

I guess there is a commonality: proforms stand for syntactic entities, and
classifiers for semantic categories.

I welcome any refinements to this really sketchy beginning.

Cheers,

Dan.