Mechanisms of harmony and the ordering of word order : consistencies and inconsistencies in language change and acquisition
The thesis is based on the learning of word-orders in a cross-lingUistic and historic perspective. In linguistics, a certain hannony is expected in word order. X-bars of a language are supposed to be right-branched or left-branched. So, a language, which is right-branched has its head usually first, and a language, which is left-branched has its head usually last. In the generative framework, linguists argue that when a child encounters a structure where the head is to the right, she will assume that the whole language is constructed this way. Cognitive scientists like Christiansen argue that inconsistencies, that means a mixture of right- and left- branching are more difficult to learn because of recursive embeddings, and thus inconsistencies should simply die out or never come into existence in the first place. Greenberg established language universals after having considered forty languages. These universals would show consistencies in an X-bar branching, but Greenberg also cited exceptions and spoke of statistical universals. We are interested in these inconsistencies. If they are really more difficult to learn, why do they evolve in the first place and why are they often quite consistent in language evolution,
Gonitzke, Markus
BF Psychology ; P Philology. Linguistics
Mechanisms of harmony and the ordering of word order : consistencies and inconsistencies in language change and acquisition. The thesis is based on the learning of word-orders in a cross-lingUistic and historic perspective. In linguistics, a certain hannony is expected in word order. X-bars of a language are supposed to be right-branched or left-branched. So, a language, which is right-branched has its head usually first, and a language, which is left-branched has its head usually last. In the generative framework, linguists argue that when a child encounters a structure where the head is to the right, she will assume that the whole language is constructed this way. Cognitive scientists like Christiansen argue that inconsistencies, that means a mixture of right- and left- branching are more difficult to learn because of recursive embeddings, and thus inconsistencies should simply die out or never come into existence in the first place. Greenberg established language universals after having considered forty languages. These universals would show consistencies in an X-bar branching, but Greenberg also cited exceptions and spoke of statistical universals. We are interested in these inconsistencies. If they are really more difficult to learn, why do they evolve in the first place and why are they often quite consistent in language evolution,
mechanisms harmony order word_order consistency inconsistency language_change acquisition base learn word orders cross_linguistic historic perspective linguistics certain expect word_order language suppose right left language right head usually first_language left head usually last generative_framework linguists argue child encounter structure head right assume whole language construct way cognitive scientist like argue inconsistency mean mixture right left difficult learn recursive thus inconsistency simply die never come_existence first_place establish language_universal consider forty language universal would show consistency x_bar also cite exception speak statistical universal interested inconsistency really difficult learn evolve first_place often quite consistent language_evolution