That's from "A Student's Introduction to English Grammar" (pp. 250-251):
"(a) Indefinite NPs
With indefinite NPs there is a preference for the existential construction.
In fact sometimes only the existential is acceptable:
i a. A policeman is here.
i b. There's a policeman here.
ii a. *Two holes were in my sock.
ii b. There were two holes in my sock.
In both version are possible, but the second is considerably more likely.
In [ii] the basic version is unacceptable (this is generally the case with NPs denoting abstract entities)."
My questions are:
Why is the NP two holes classified as the indefinite noun phrase?
Does the NP two holes denote the abstract entity?
anonymous In both version are possible Correction: the clause above should be - In both versions are possible .
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
anonymousIn both version are possible
Correction: the clause above should be - In both versions are possible.
anonymousWhy is the NP two holes classified as the indefinite noun phrase?
Because that is its classification by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definiteness#English
In English, definiteness is usually marked by the selection of determiner.
anonymousWhy is the NP two holes classified as the indefinite noun phrase?
The definite noun phrase would be "the two holes". I'm going to repair the two holes in my sock.
anonymousDoes the NP two holes denote the abstract entity?
Yes, that's what Huddleston is referring to when he uses the expressio