Language universals
(Language) universals are properties that are common to all natural languages . These properties are also the basis for attempts to explain the origin and spread of language. The investigation of possible linguistic universals is one of the subject areas of general linguistics . Pioneers of linguistic research on universals include Charles F. Hockett , Joseph Greenberg and, in another line of tradition, Noam Chomsky .
Certain simple properties of languages can be universal, but in linguistics the determination of implicative universals of the form: " If a language has property A, then (more than randomly ) also property B" (although property A is not is universal).
Causes of universals
With universals, a distinction can be made between whether a statement is made about the properties of the languages themselves (substantial universals) or whether it is a statement that must apply to every correct linguistic description system (i.e. a grammar in the broadest sense) (formal universals). The former are the universals in the proper sense.
- Depending on the theory and the considered universal property, one suspects the reason for the existence of universals, for example, in neurobiological or psychological basic constants, which, since they apply to all people, are reflected equally in all languages (example: the effects of limits of perception, of size the short-term memory , the speed of movement of the articulation organs, etc.).
- Other theories assume that abstract grammatical foundations of natural languages are innate in humans and are therefore already present in the brain before any experience that a child has ( universal grammar ). The properties of this universal grammar must therefore necessarily apply to all languages.
- A third approach postulates universal properties in the mapping of linguistic forms to their counterparts in human thinking or logic in general (example: “Just as thinking is differentiated between objects and processes, every language has some form of distinction between nouns and verbs. ").
- And finally, it is possible to understand universals as emergent properties that necessarily result under natural conditions in a system of mutually influencing language users (example: "If there are only similar-sounding vowels in a language, the vowels inevitably drift over time, without conscious action of the speaker apart in the direction of greater differentiation. From this it follows: There is no language with exclusively similar-sounding vowels, although this would not contradict any physiological law, for example. ")
Separate universals are also proposed for language change and language acquisition .
Types of universals and their problems
General statements
Many of the proposed universals are, if they take the form of general statements (that is, statements of the type “Every language has the property X”), either controversial or, on closer inspection, turn out to be trivial or circular. The latter is especially the case when properties that are already contained in the definition of language are identified as universals: "All languages consist of units with a symbolic character." However, symbolism is already one of the essential definition criteria of a word , and only what has words would be called language. It follows from the definition of words and languages that all languages consist of symbols . The same applies to the statement "The complexity of a natural language is limited by its learnability". This statement only applies to “natural languages”, i.e. languages that are actually learned and spoken by humans. As a result, the phrase means nothing more than: "Languages that can be learned and used must be able to be learned."
An example of a controversial universal is the sentence “All languages consist of at least verbs and nouns ”. Here it depends strongly on the definition of verbs and nouns whether this statement is true for certain languages that are critical in this regard. If one is of the opinion that the parts of speech in these languages are to be classified as verbs or nouns, and if a correspondingly broad definition is chosen, the validity of this universal results automatically. If, on the other hand, one chooses a narrow definition, the universal validity of this sentence can be determined do not exhibit.
Some general statements that can most likely be regarded as generally accepted are listed below as examples.
Implications
Less problematic than general statements are implication relationships of the form “If a language has a dual , then also a plural ”. There are a number of relatively undisputed statements of this type. Implications are weaker universals than general statements, since they only make statements about a subset of all languages, namely those languages for which the if-condition is fulfilled.
A chain of such implications often results in hierarchies of implications. So not only is “if a language has a trial , then also a plural”, it can also be concluded that when it has a trial it also has a dual. On the basis of the number , the following hierarchy of implications can be formed: Singular> Dual> Trial (Paukal)> Quadral . In other words: If a language has a certain number, then it also has all numbers lower in the hierarchy. Other hierarchies of implications relate, for example, to the so-called “ animatedness ” of actants (roughly 1st & 2nd person> 3rd person> people> living beings> inanimate things ) or their semantic role .
Statistical statements
Universals, which claim only limited validity, are the statistical statements (“With a few exceptions, all languages have voiced and unvoiced plosives ”). They are the weakest universals, but still give an impression of the laws that language itself is subject to. Statements of this type of universals are formed by the comparative analysis of many languages - conclusions about the conditions in a certain language are usually not possible, i. H. This kind of universals can be used to describe relationships and tendencies that are common to all languages. An assertion such as "The word order object-verb-subject is extremely unusual and rare" is useful despite its seemingly trivial content, as it can serve as a reference point for hypotheses about the function of different word order patterns.
More examples of putative universals
- Languages are not inherited, but learned.
- Languages are always changing.
- Every human community has a language
- All languages have at least two vowels .
- All phoneme systems can be described in terms of a small number of universal distinctive features .
- All languages have an intonation system .
- All languages have terms that have no meaning of their own (functional words, for example articles).
- All languages have elements with a deictic character (e.g. demonstrative pronouns ).
- All languages have proper names.
- Every language with a future tense also has a past tense , but not the other way around.
- The total number of sounds actually used in a natural language is limited and their number is less than the number of sounds that are fundamentally possible (i.e., phonetically unambiguously reproducible and perceived as differently) sounds.
- There are preferences, i. H. significantly different frequencies of the basically conceivable word orders.
- If question words in a sentence have a position that differs from normal clauses, then they are at the beginning of the sentence (never at the end of the sentence).
literature
- Noam Chomsky : Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. MIT Press, Cambridge MA 1965, ( Research Laboratory of Electronics of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology: Special technical report 11).
- Bernard Comrie : Language universals and linguistic typology. Syntax and morphology. Blackwell, Oxford 1981, ISBN 0-631-12971-5 .
- Joseph H. Greenberg (Ed.): Universals of Language. MIT Press, Cambridge MA 1963, (Report of a conference held at Dobbs Ferry NY, April 13-15, 1961).
- Joseph Greenberg: Language Typology. A Historical and Analytical Overview . Mouton, The Hague et al. 1974, ISBN 90-279-2709-X , ( Janua linguarum Series minor 184).
- Hansjakob Seiler (ed.): Language Universals. Papers from the Conference held at Gummersbach / Cologne, Germany, October 3-8, 1976. Narr, Tübingen 1978. ISBN 3-87808-111-1 .
- Hansjakob Seiler (Ed.): Linguistic Workshop. Volume I: Preparatory work for a universals project , Fink, Munich 1973; Volume II: Work of the Cologne Universals Project 1973/4 , Fink, Munich 1974; Volume III: Work of the Cologne Universals Project 1973/4 . Fink, Munich 1975, ISBN 3-7705-1235-9 .
Web links
- Universals Archive of the University of Konstanz (English)
- World Atlas of Language Structures (English)