Editing Chinese classifier (section)

===Neutralization===
In addition to the numerous "specific" count-classifiers described above,<ref group=note>Also called "sortal classifiers" ({{Harvnb|Erbaugh|2000|p=33}}; {{Harvnb|Biq|2002|p=531}}).</ref> Chinese has a ''general classifier'' {{lang|zh|个}} ({{lang|zh|個}}), pronounced {{Transliteration|zh|gè}} in Standard Chinese.<ref group=note>Kathleen Ahrens claimed in 1994 that the classifier for animals—{{lang|zh|只}} ({{lang|zh|隻}}), pronounced {{Transliteration|zh|zhī}} in Stamdard Chinese and {{lang|nan-Latn|chiah}} in [[Taiwanese Hokkien]]—is in the process of becoming a second general classifier in the Mandarin spoken in [[Taiwan]], and already is used as the general classifier in Taiwanese itself {{Harv|Ahrens|1994|p=206}}.</ref> This classifier is used for people, some abstract concepts, and other words that do not have special classifiers (such as {{zhi|c=汉堡包}} {{Transliteration|zh|hànbǎobāo}} 'hamburger'),<ref name=Hu12>{{Harvnb|Hu|1993|p=12}}</ref> and may also be used as a replacement for a specific classifier such as {{lang|zh|张}}&nbsp;({{lang|zh-Hant-TW|2=張}})&nbsp;{{Transliteration|zh|zhāng}} or {{lang|zh|条}}&nbsp;({{lang|zh-Hant-TW|2=條}})&nbsp;{{Transliteration|zh|tiáo}}, especially in informal speech. In Mandarin Chinese, it has been noted as early as the 1940s that the use of {{lang|zh|个}} is increasing and that there is a general tendency towards replacing specific classifiers with it.<ref name=Tzeng193>{{Harvnb|Tzeng|Chen|Hung|1991|p=193}}</ref> Numerous studies have reported that both adults and children tend to use {{lang|zh|个}} when they do not know the appropriate count-classifier, and even when they do but are speaking quickly or informally.<ref name=Zhang57>{{Harvnb|Zhang|2007|p=57}}</ref> The replacement of a specific classifier with the general {{lang|zh|个}} is known as classifier ''neutralization''<ref name=Ahrens212>{{Harvnb|Ahrens|1994|p=212}}</ref> ({{lang|zh|量词个化}} in Chinese, literally 'classifier {{zhi|c=个}}-ization'<ref name=He165>{{Harvnb|He|2001|p=165}}</ref>). This occurs especially often among children<ref name=ErbaughHu>{{Harvnb|Erbaugh|1986}}; {{Harvnb|Hu|1993}}</ref> and [[Aphasia|aphasics]] (individuals with damage to language-relevant areas of the brain),<ref name=Ahrens227-32>{{Harvnb|Ahrens|1994|pp=227–32}}</ref><ref>{{Harvnb|Tzeng|Chen|Hung|1991}}</ref> although normal speakers also neutralize frequently. It has been reported that most speakers know the appropriate classifiers for the words they are using and believe, when asked, that those classifiers are obligatory, but nevertheless use {{lang|zh|个}} without even realizing it in actual speech.<ref name=Erbaugh404-6Ahrens202-3>{{Harvnb|Erbaugh|1986|pp=404–406}}; {{Harvnb|Ahrens|1994|pp=202–203}}</ref> As a result, in everyday spoken Mandarin the general classifier is "hundreds of times more frequent"<ref name=Erbaugh404-6>{{Harvnb|Erbaugh|1986|pp=404–406}}</ref> than the specialized ones.<!-- He Jie, however, claims that this is only a trend in spoken language, and that specific classifiers are still frequent in written Chinese.<ref name=He336>{{Harvnb|He|2001|p=336}}</ref>-->

Nevertheless, {{lang|zh|个}} has not completely replaced other count-classifiers, and there are still many situations in which it would be inappropriate to substitute it for the required specific classifier.<ref name=Tzeng193/> There may be specific patterns behind which classifier-noun pairs may be "neutralized" to use the general classifier, and which may not. Specifically, words that are most prototypical for their categories, such as ''paper'' for the category of nouns taking the 'flat{{\}}square' classifier {{lang|zh|张}}&nbsp;({{lang|zh-Hant-TW|2=張}})&nbsp;{{Transliteration|zh|zhāng}}, may be less likely to be said with a general classifier.<ref name=Ahrensall>{{Harvnb|Ahrens|1994}}</ref>