@article{oai:minpaku.repo.nii.ac.jp:00004297,
 author = {八杉, 佳穂 and Yasugi, Yoshiho},
 issue = {1},
 journal = {国立民族学博物館研究報告, Bulletin of the National Museum of Ethnology},
 month = {Aug},
 note = {Generally speaking, languages have both cardinal and
ordinal forms in their numeral systems. But not all languages
make a morphological distinction between cardinal and ordinal
numerals.
In Mayan languages the ordinals are derived from the
corresponding cardinals by an addition of a possessive pronominal
(PN). But in some of these languages, —il or other suffixes can
be added. The formation of ordinals in Western Lowland Maya
languages is PN-Cardinal-Numeral Classifier (NC) —Vl. This
appears to be a linguistic innovation. In Classical Huastec,
—il was a suffix for forming ordinals from cardinals. It was also
used to count "times." In modern dialects, the ordinals are
derived from the cardinals by adding —tal (the Veracruz dialect)
or -ei:l(the Potosino dialect), although both dialects use —il
to count "times." This would appear to indicate that Huastec
created new forms as ordinals to distinguish the "times" expression
from ordinals. This speculation can be supported by
postulating a primitive stage in some Uto-Aztecan languages
where ordinals are not distinguished from cardinals.
In Otomanguean, numerals precede nouns, but in some
Southern Otomanguean forms, when a numeral is used as an
ordinal number, the numeral follows the noun. Southern
Otomanguean languages, however, demonstrate not only N
(noun)-0 (ordinal=cardinal) and N-X (definitive morpheme)-
0 order but also X-O-N order. These variations can be explained
by integrating textual data with typological data.
Numeral-noun word order is typologically aberrant because
Southern Otomanguan languages are head-modifier languages.
If the order were noun-numeral, it would match with the glyphnumeral
order of textual data in Monte Alban I—IV (500 B.C.—
A.D. 900). After Monte Alban IV, speakers might have begun
to distinguish cardinals from ordinals, putting numerals before
the noun, when numerals were used with cardinal meaning.
However, in some of these languages, even the ordinal came to
precede the noun, whose process might have been motivated
by the systematization of word ordering. If this inference is
correct, Mixtec languages, such as Atatlahuca and Silacayoapan
Mixtec, might be regarded as the most conservative; and the
Noun-ku-Numeral word order in Jamiltepec Mixtec and ku-
Numeral-Noun in San Juan Colorado Mixtec seem to provide
typical examples of linguistic innovation from a Noun-Ordinal
to an Ordinal-Noun order.
Ordinals are derived from cardinals and are therefore
regarded as a marked category, with cardinals unmarked.
Markedness or definiteness is morphologically expressed in
three ways in Middle American languages, (1) preposed
morpheme, (2) postposed morpheme, or (3) both. These are
all attached to the cardinals. Preposed morphemes are either
definitives or possessive pronominals. Yet another method of
indicating the ordinal, that is, by a change of word order, can
be observed. Each device of formation is summarized in
Table 1.},
 pages = {205--263},
 title = {中米諸語の序数詞},
 volume = {15},
 year = {1990},
 yomi = {ヤスギ, ヨシホ}
}