We discussed how idealization explains the use of khan with entities such as a river, a sea, or an ocean. It is logical to assume that the same idealization will hold for entities such as pukhuri (pond) or hrad (lake). But, it does not. In Assamese, it is syntactically malformed to say pukhuri-khan (the pond) or hrad-khan (the lake). The proper classifier to use is pukhuri-to and hrad-to. We are not sure why this is the case. This situation is all the more baffling because the correct classifier to use with a swamp is khan and not to, as in bil-khan (the swamp). Our long-term goal in this research is to be able to characterize such exceptions.