Sorry if this question has been answered before, I have been unable to find anything remotely adequate on this website.
What I want: to learn patterns that allow to be better at guessing (and/or remembering) which words and when should be used as count or uncount nouns.
How I want to achieve my goal: by learning about semantics of count vs uncount distinction in English. I don't want to rely too much on my intuition or rote memorization about which noun is countable or uncountable.
Possible ways to achive my goal and why they fail:
1."Just read about count vs uncount distinction aimed at English learners". What sources I have found so far are too simplistic. Examples:
Like Grammar Monster says that a mass noun is "A mass noun (or non-countable noun or noncount noun as it's also known) is a noun without a plural form". Objection:Word "dog" can normally be plural, yet if I blow up dogs I can say "There is dog all over the place", using "dog" as an uncountable noun. Word "lamb" can normally be plural, yet if I will throw lambs in a big cauldron and start cooking them, then later I can say "I have too much lamb in this soup", using "lamb" as an uncountable noun.
Proofed.com says "A mass noun refers to something that can’t usually be counted.". Objection: Rice is uncountable, yet we absolutely can count grains of rice. And "Grains of rice" IS countable. Meaning that uncountability isn't some objective quality of given thing, but rather a way given object is presented or perceived.
Gramarly says: "Uncountable nouns, or mass nouns, are nouns that come in a state or quantity that is impossible to count; liquids are uncountable, as are things that act like liquids (sand, air). Abstract ideas like creativity or courage are also uncountable.". Objection: We have things as liters, meters, etc for a reason. Even abstract things as bravery can be counted in a way. Like a solider can get a medal for "displaying multiple ACTS OF bravery", meaning that there is nothing fundamentally unmeasurable about bravery or liquids.
study-english-grammar.com says that "furniture" is uncountable because "When you have a group of different items together (one table, two chairs, three sofas) it makes the uncountable group - e.g. furniture.". Objection: I can say something like "Zoo animals were set free by radical animal rights activists". And zoo animals are very different, from penguins to lions. Yet word "zoo animals" is still countable despite its heterogeneous nature.
glossary.sil.org says that mass noun is "a noun whose referents are not thought of as separate entities.". Objection: According to oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com "mob" is countable. What makes "mob" different from "furniture" or "water" ? How do we even tell that we have multiple mobs running in the same direction, instead of one big mob? This is clearly difficult to perceive mobs as separate entities, especially if they are close to each other. Yet "mob" is still countable.
A Student's introduction into English grammar says: "A count noun generally denotes a class of individual entities of the same kind. The count noun table, for example, denotes the whole class of tables (one table provides a way of referring to a single member of the class, two tables talks about two members, and so on). An individual member of this class cannot be divided into smaller entities of the same kind as itself. That is, a table can be chopped up into smaller parts, but those parts are not themselves tables. Likewise, if you cut a loaf in half, what you have is not two loaves, but two halves of a loaf. Non-count nouns typically have the opposite property. A good number of them denote physical substances that can be divided into smaller amounts of the same kind. If you cut up some bread, the pieces can still be described by the non-count noun bread. If you take some wood and cut it into shorter lengths, these can still be referred to by means of the non-count noun wood - the same noun is applicable to the same stuff in smaller quantities." Objection: "Water" is uncountable, yet we can split water into non-water. Namely, by using electrolysis we can split water into oxygen and hydrogen. Although maybe we could interpret this passage as "things referred by uncountable nouns can, in principle, split in such way, that split parts belong to the same kind as the original thing." Okay, then how about abstract nouns like "bravery" ("bravery" in uncountable)? How are you even going to split one big bravery into several smaller "braveries"? Why do we even think that "bravery" is uncountable if it doesn't follow outlined principle of splitting into the same kind of thing due to sheer absurdity of this principle in context of abstract nouns?
2."Just try to figure it out yourself" I tried, but I can't make sense of this mess so far. When I try to think about this topic (as seen above) it makes things even more confusing.
3."Just read books that linguists wrote about the distinction". I found one book that claims to be for wide readership (namely "Semantics for Counting and Measuring" by Susan Rothstein) but it claims that the book is aimed at linguists who lack solid knowledge of formal semantics, instead of lay people. I neither know formal semantics nor I am a linguist. Ideally I would prefer a book that doesn't require me to become a budding linguist in order to understand semantics of uncountable vs countable distinction. Native English speakers somehow understand this distinction without becoming linguists. Also, as I a person I have a flaw of overcomplicating things. Maybe this is an instance of my flaw of overcomplicating things and I just need relatively short but detailed explanation about nitty-gritty details of this topic, instead of cracking open textbooks on basics of linguistics (including formal semantics) in order to be able to understand a book about the topic written by a professional linguist for (probably not very educated) linguists.
P.S. About allegedly duplicate question Can I use the word "milks" when discussing KINDS of milk
I already know that uncount nouns that are perceived as substances (like "wine") can be countified if we speak about kinds of substance, like in phrase "France is known for its great wines"(here we assume different brands of wine). I also know that we can make uncounted nouns plural by using quantifiers. The only new thing is pluralization of uncount nouns by poets to show wastness of something (although poets are eccentric bunch, they are artistic people who love to play fast and loose with languages and we probably should treat poetic language practices with caution). But even this new piece of information while appreciated, doesn't answer my question.
I'm sorry if my question is too confusing, so let me approach it from a different angle. Currently, I have a practical way to detect if my question has been resolved or not. I have a half-finished flash card that asks about meaning of term "uncountable noun" and currently I don't know what to write as the answer for said flash card. In my question in this thread I started with attacking various definitions. This shows that I was interested in definitions from the the very start. Why? Because definitions are useful for helping to distinguish several closely related things, like "countable nouns" and "uncountable nouns". Having an adequate definition for "uncountable noun" and knowing the difference between terms "countable noun" and "uncountable noun" is the same thing for me, because if a definition of "uncountable noun" is adequate, then the difference between "uncountable noun" and "countable noun" will become clear. Or the other way around, I can cook up my own adequate definition of "uncountable noun" if I understand the real difference between "countable noun" and "uncountable noun".
That being said, I wouldn't be satisfied with defining "uncountable noun" as purely grammatical difference with "countable noun". Categories of countability are NOT merely meaning-neutral categories of English grammar that need to be mindlessly memorized on case-by-case basis for each word. Definitions and explanations that I quoted in this topic are illustrations of the fact that categories of countability are not just purely grammatical categories, but categories of meaning too. My real problem with the previously mentioned definitions and explanations is that they are akin to blind men from the old story about blind people trying to explain what "elephant" is by touching different parts of the elephant. In other words, these attempts at defining/explaining semantics of distinctions between countable and uncountable nouns are contradictory and incomplete.
I would like to get something like one of following answers to my question (Starting from the most optimistic/desirable to the least desirable/optimistic):
1.Here you go:[semantical definition of "uncounable noun" that covers all different uncounable nouns. Probably some kind of Frankenstein's monster definition, synthesis of definitions and explanations that I criticized in this thread, but with weak spots and inconsistencies eliminated.
2.[Gives explanations of differences between meanings of "countable noun" and "uncountable noun"]
3.[Refers to an hour-long video, as an adequate answer is too long to fit character limit of this website.]
4.[Refers to a book for lay people that explains in details this topic]
5.[Gives reference to a book made by a professional linguist, but said book requires knowledge of the basics of linguistics and formal semantics. Can also include references to recommended books about the basics of linguistics and formal semantics]
6."KarmaPeasant, this is your funeral. The concept of "uncounable noun" is understood crudely, inconsistently, and intuitively, with all attempts to define it for lay people falling apart under the smallest attempts at scrutiny even by amateurs like you. As for experts, they have somewhat consistent accounts of what constitutes "uncounable noun", but they have entire holy wars about this, with each fraction sticking to their pet theory and condemning everybody else as heretics. Your best bet is to get a relevant PhD degree and then choose your side in the aforementioned holy war"
P.P.S. In feedback the question remained closed because my objections against definitions were seen as dubious. First of all, even if my objections ARE dubious, this is not a reason to treat this question as a duplicate. At the worst, this question would need to be considered of being of subpar quality and stay closed for being subpar.
And I also have further objections against objection being dubious.
Most of your objections are just hairsplitting. For example, your objection: "Water" is uncountable, yet we can split water into non-water. Response: noncountability doesn't have anything to do with splitting things into things of different types. Your excerpt from your Student's Introduction says An individual member of this class cannot be divided into smaller entities of the same kind as itself. But hydrogen and oxygen are different kinds of things than water.
I myself noticed that that was questionable objection, thus I supplied stronger objection about splitting abstract nouns. "Happiness" is both abstract and uncountable, yet I would really want to see how I am supposed to split one big happiness into smaller instances of happiness.
Similarly, your objection: Rice is uncountable, yet we absolutely can count grains of rice. You could make the same objection to water: Water is uncountable, yet we can count atoms of water. But nobody actually counts grains of rice or atoms of water, despite its theoretically being possible, so we consider rice (or sand) as uncountable.
Meaning that some of mass nouns can be understood as "something that could be in principle counted, but doing so would be too bothersome under ordinary circumstances and thus treated as substance". Yet the same is true for "ant". Surely people normally don't care to count ants, yet "ant" is countable! Or how about word "grain"? Again, normally people don't care to count grains, yet "grain" IS countable!
You don't need to memorize everything. Just unusual uncountable nouns, like fruit, furniture, homework, news, advice.
How would you define these "unusual uncountable nouns"? What thing in common do they have? What sets them apart from ordinary uncountable nouns? Without such definition advice "Just memorize unusual uncountable nouns" is not very useful.
Also "news" can be split into news, "homework" can be split into homework, "furniture" can be split into furniture. If you endorse the principle from "Student's introduction" there should be nothing unusual about these uncountable nouns for you. Just your regular law-abiding uncountable nouns.
