Citations:duale tantum


 * 1909,, Wishram Texts (Publications of the , ed. , volume II), Leyden: Late E. J. Brill, page 4, footnote 1:
 * The second -c- refers to icgaʹkwal “eel” (duale tantum), a form used alongside of igaʹkwal (masc.).
 * 1989, Frans Plank, “On Humboldt on the Dual” in Linguistic Categorization (Amsterdam studies in the theory and history of linguistic science; series IV: Current issues in linguistic theory, ISSN 0304‒0763; volume 61), eds. Roberta Corrigan, Fred R. Eckman, and Michael Paul Noonan, :, ISBN 9027235589, part III: «Cross-linguistic categorization», § 2: ‘Extensions’, sub-§ 2.5, :
 * In Ancient Greek, like Greenlandic and Nama of extensional class (c), the dual, precariously holding out against the plural, found significantly less favor with the class of natural-pair nouns than with other nouns (Cuny 1906:362,496,507, Meillet 1922, Diver 1987). Here the nouns denoting that prototypical dyad, parents (τοκεῖς, γονεῖς), shun the dual completely; and the only natural-pair noun consistently preferring the dual over the plural, ὄσσε, virtually a duale tantum, refers to the eyes not as mere sense-organs but as ‘windows of the soul’, which invests this noun with the thematic prominence that entitles it to be highlighted by maximally precise number marking (as has been argued by Diver 1987 for Homer’s Iliad).
 * 2000, Greville G. Corbett, Number (Cambridge textbooks in linguistics), :, ISBN 0521640164 (hardback), ISBN 0521649706 (paperback), chapter v: “The expression of number”, § 5.8.2, :
 * Generally singularia tantum are the most common; we find instances with just the plural or with dual and plural but lacking the singular; dualia tantum are quite rare.