Implicational hierarchy
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Implicational hierarchy is a chain of implicational universals. A set of chained universals is schematically shown as in (1):
(1) A > B > C > D
It can be reformulated in the following way: If a language has property D, then it also has properties A, B, and C; if a language has a property C, then it also has properties A and B, etc. In other words, the implicational hierarchy defines the possible combinations of properties A, B, C, and D as listed in matrix (2):
| A | B | C | D | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Type 1: | + | + | + | + |
| Type 2: | - | + | + | + |
| Type 3: | - | - | + | + |
| Type 4: | - | - | - | + |
| Type 5: | - | - | - | - |
Implicational hierarchies are a useful tool in capturing linguistic generalizations pertaining the different components of the language. They are found in all subfields of grammar.
Contents |
[edit] Phonology
(3) is an example of an implicational hierarchy concerning the distribution of nasal phonemes across languages, which concerns dental/alveolar, bilabial, and palatal voiced nasals, respectively:
(3) / n / > / m / > / ɲ /
This hierarchy defines the following possible combinations of dental/alveolar, bilabial, and palatal voiced nasals in the phoneme inventory of a language:
(4)
| / n / | / m / | / ɲ / | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Type 1: | / n / | / m / | / ɲ / |
| Type 2: | / n / | / m / | - |
| Type 3: | / n / | - | - |
In other words, the hierarchy implies that there are no languages with / ɲ / but without / m / and / n /, or with / ɲ / and / m / but without / n /.
[edit] Morphology
Number marking provides an example of implicational hierarchies in morphology.
(5) Number: singular < plural < dual < trial / paucal
On the one hand, the hierarchy implies that no language distinguishes a trial unless having a dual, and no language has dual without a plural. On the other hand, the hierarchy provides implications for the morphological marking: if the plural is coded with a certain number of morphemes, then the dual is coded with at least as many morphemes.
[edit] Syntax
Impicational hierarchies also play a role in syntactic phenomena. For instance, in some languages (e.g. Tangut) the transitive verb agrees not with a subject, or the object, but with the syntactic argument which is higher on the person hierarchy.
(5) Person: first < second < third
See also: animacy.
[edit] Bibliography
- Comrie, B. (1989). Language universals and linguistic typology: Syntax and morphology. Oxford: Blackwell, 2nd edn.
- Croft, W. (1990). Typology and universals. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.
- Whaley, L.J. (1997). Introduction to typology: The unity and diversity of language. Newbury Park: Sage.
