Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
How Many Languages in Typological Study?
References
All Topics
Psychology
Cognitive Science

Typology and Universals

Profile image of Anthony AristarAnthony Aristar

1994, Language

visibility

…

description

22 pages

link

1 file

Abstract
sparkles

AI

This work explores the typological approach to understanding language universals, contrasting it with generative and functionalist methods. It emphasizes the comparative nature of typology, which seeks to discern universal properties by studying variation across a wide range of languages. The paper proposes a dynamic evolutionary model, asserting that language universals arise from cognitive and social factors influencing language structure, with the potential for significant advancements in linguistic theory through this integrated perspective.

Related papers

Linguistic Typology
Dorothea Hoffmann

This course explores the core assumptions and methods of the field of linguistic typology, describing, classifying, and defining the relationships between forms and functions in the world’s estimated 7,000 languages. This view of typology is based on the assumption that linguistic diversity needs to be studied in a cross-linguistic context, and this study must be based on a reliable empirical database coming from solid descriptive work. Topics will include a review of typologies based on word order and morphology and an examination a variety of grammatical and conceptual categories and constructions including case, clause structures, parts of speech, spatial language, predicative and inflectional systems, among others. We will examine a wide variety of languages from across the globe and take interfaces with language change and language documentation into consideration. Against the background of a corpus of data, we will examine the limits of linguistic variation and the explanations proposed for typological patterns, including information management, cognitive processing, and interactional language use and examine the relationship of typology to genetic and areal linguistics. At the end of the course, students will have a comprehensive understanding of cross-linguistic variation, theoretical approaches, and contemporary issues and debates within the field of linguistic typology.

View PDFchevron_right
Linguistic Typologies and Functional Theories
Zehra Yavaş
View PDFchevron_right
Language Typology and Historical Contingency
Lenore Grenoble

Typological studies in language, 2013

View PDFchevron_right
Forward to the Past: Modernizing Linguistic Typology by Returning to its Roots
Randy J . LaPolla

Asian Languages and Linguistics, 2020

This paper argues that linguistic typology, and linguistics more generally, got off to a good start in the 19th century with scholars like Wilhelm von Humboldt and Georg von der Gabelentz, where the understanding that a language manifests a world view, and it is important to study and compare those world views. This tradition is still alive, but was sidelined and even denigrated for many years due to the rise of Structuralism, which attempted to study language structures divorced from their linguistic and socio-cultural contexts. The paper reviews the understandings the early scholars had and points out their similarities with cutting edge current views in cognitive linguistics, construction grammar, and interactional linguistics, which had to be rediscovered due to the influence of Structuralism for so many years. It then argues that we should make linguistic typology more modern, scientific and empirical by returning to our roots.

View PDFchevron_right
THE USE OF LINGUISTIC TYPOLOGY IN UNDERSTANDING LANGUAGE UNIVERSALS
Muhammad Shahbaz

Journal of Applied Linguistics and TESOL, 2025

Categorizing languages goes a long way toward helping us understand language universals and how they develop in the human language acquisition process, what roles are there for the structural and functional characteristics. Typology is a comparative linguistic approach in which shared patterns and constraints across languages can be identified and how human cognition can shape linguistic structures studied as a comparative linguistic. Knowledge of language universals, whether they are absolute or implicational, serves to analyze recurring grammatical, phonological and syntactic features in various linguistic systems. Linguistic typology provides, in turn, a basis for classifying languages according to their respective morphological, syntactic, and phonological types, thus revealing deep seated principles organic to the diversity and convergence of languages. Linguists can through typological analysis find out why some linguistic features are more widespread among languages and if the explanation for these features lie in historical, cognitive or environmental factors. Moreover, linguistic typology plays a role in linguistic relativity more generally as it relates to how structural variations affect cognitive processing and communication strategies. Linguistic typology is not simply a concern for theoretical linguistics but has also far reaching implications for fields such as artificial intelligence, language acquisition, and translation studies. Through an investigation of cross-language patterns, natural language processing models can be optimized and language pedagogy can be tuned, while supporting multilingual communication in the international context. A strong argument is made in this study for the importance of linguistic typology in understanding universally shared principles of language evolution and structure, leading to a more integrated understanding of linguistic diversity.

View PDFchevron_right
Review of Silvia Luraghi and Vit Bubenik, Continuum Companio to Historical Linguistics
Juan Antonio Álvarez-Pedrosa

Journal of Historical Linguistics 1/2 (2011) 305-311

View PDFchevron_right
Universal typological dependencies should be detectable in the history of language families
Michael Dunn

2011

We claim that making sense of the typological diversity of languages demands a historical/evolutionary approach. We are pleased that the target paper (Dunn et al. 2011a) has served to bring discussion of this claim into prominence, and are grateful that leading typologists have taken the time to respond (commentaries denoted by boldface). It is unfortunate though that a number of the commentaries in this issue of LT show significant misunderstandings of our paper.

View PDFchevron_right
PAPER 7 (HISTORICAL LINGUISTICS) TYPOLOGICAL CLASSIFICATION OF LANGUAGE
Johana Luque
View PDFchevron_right
Systematic typological comparison as a tool for investigating language history
Michael Dunn

2012

Similarities between languages can be due to 1) homoplasies because of a limited design space, 2) common ancestry, and 3) contact-induced convergence. Typological or structural features cannot prove genealogy, but they can provide historical signals that are due to common ancestry or contact (or both).

View PDFchevron_right
Review of: D. Brown, M. Chumakina & G.G. Corbett (eds.), Canonical morphology and syntax. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013
Leonid Kulikov

2014

View PDFchevron_right

References (39)

  1. Baker, Mark. 2003. Lexical categories: verbs, nouns and adjectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  2. Bybee, Joan L. 2006. Frequency of use and the organization of language. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  3. Bybee, Joan L., Revere D. Perkins & William Pagliuca. 1994. The evolution of grammar: tense, aspect and modality in the languages of the world. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  4. Chomsky, Noam. 1976. Reflections on language. London: Fontana.
  5. Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris.
  6. Comrie, Bernard. 1989. Language universals and linguistic typology (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  7. Croft, William. 1991. Syntactic categories and grammatical relations: The cognitive organization of information. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  8. Croft, William. 2000. Explaining language change: an evolutionary approach. Harlow, Essex: Longman.
  9. Croft, William. 2003. Typology and universals, 2nd edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  10. Croft, William. 2008. Methods for finding language universals in syntax. Universals of language today, ed. Sergio Scalise, Elisabetta Magni and Antonietta Bisetto, 145-64. Berlin: Springer.
  11. Croft, William and Keith T. Poole. 2008. Inferring universals from grammatical variation: multidimensional scaing for typological analysis. Theoretical Linguistics 34.1-37.
  12. Dahl, Östen. 1985. Tense and aspect systems. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
  13. Dik, Simon C. 1997. The theory of functional grammar, ed. Kees Hengeveld (2 vol.). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
  14. Dryer, Matthew S. 1989. Large linguistic areas and language sampling. Studies in Language 13.257-92.
  15. Dryer, Matthew S. 1992. The Greenbergian word order correlations. Language 68:81- 138.
  16. Givón, Talmy. 2002. Bio-linguistics: the Santa Barbara lectures. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
  17. Greenberg, Joseph H. 1966. Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. Universals of Grammar, ed. Joseph H. Greenberg, 2nd edition, 73-113. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. (Reprinted in Greenberg 1990, 40- 70.)
  18. Greenberg, Joseph H. 1969. Some methods of dynamic comparison in linguistics. Substance and Structure of Language, ed. Jan Puhvel, 147-203. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. (Reprinted in Greenberg 1990, 71-118. Stanford: Stanford University Press.)
  19. Greenberg, Joseph H. 1979. Rethinking linguistics diachronically. Language 55.275-290. (Reprinted in Greenberg 1990, 673-91.)
  20. Greenberg, Joseph H. 1990. On language: selected writings of Joseph H. Greenberg, ed. Keith Denning & Suzanne Kemmer. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  21. Haiman, John. 1978. Conditionals are topics. Language 54.564-589.
  22. Haiman, John. 1983. Iconic and economic motivation. Language 59.781-819.
  23. Haiman, John. 1985. Natural syntax: iconicity and erosion. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  24. Hawkins, John A. 1994. A performance theory of order and constituency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  25. Hawkins, John A. 2004. Efficiency and complexity in grammars. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  26. Heine, Bernd. 1997. Possession: cognitive sources, forces, and grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  27. Holden, Clare Janaki and Ruth Mace. 2003. Spread of cattle led to the loss of matrilineal descent in Africa: a coevolutionary analysis. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B 270.2425-33.
  28. Hopper, Paul & Elizabeth Traugott. 2003. Grammaticalization (2nd edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  29. Joos, Martin (ed.). 1957. Readings in Linguistics I. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  30. Justeson, John S. & Laurence D. Stephens. 1990. Explanations for word order universals: a log-linear analysis. Proceedings of the XIV International Congress of Linguists, vol. III, ed. Werner Bahner, Joachim Schildt and Dieter Viehweger, 2372-76. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
  31. Keenan, Edward L. & Bernard Comrie. 1977. Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 8:63-99.
  32. Lehmann, Christian. 1982. Thoughts on grammaticalization: a programmatic sketch, Vol. I, Arbeiten des Kölner Universalien-Projekts, 48, Köln: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft. (Revised edition published by LINCOM Europa, München, 1995. Revised edition reprinted as Arbeitspapiere des Seminars für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität Erfurt, 9. Erfurt: Seminar für Sprachwissenschaft der Universität.)
  33. Levinson, Stephen C., Sérgio Meira, and the Language and Cognition Group. 2003. 'Natural concepts' in the spatial topological domain-adpositional meanings in crosslinguistic perspective: an exercise in semantic typology. Language 79.485-516.
  34. Majid, Asifa, Melissa Bowerman, Miriam van Staden and James S. Boster. 2007. The semantic categories of cutting and breaking events: a crosslinguistic perspective. Cognitive Linguistics 18.133-52.
  35. Maslova, Elena. 2000. A dynamic approach to the verification of distributional universals. Linguistic Typology 4.307-33.
  36. Maslova, Elena. 2003. A case for implicational universals. Linguistic Typology 7.101- 108.
  37. Pagel, Mark and Andrew Meade. 2005. Bayesian estimation of correlated evolution across cultures: a case study of marriage systems and wealth transfer at marriage. The evolution of cultural diversity: a phylogenetic approach, ed. Ruth Mace, Clare J. Holden and Stephen Shennan 235-56. London: UCL Press.
  38. Stassen, Leon. 1997. Intransitive predication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  39. Van Valin, Robert D. Jr. & Randy J. LaPolla. 1997. Syntax: structure, meaning and function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Related papers

The relationship between typology, descriptive and formal linguistics
Vasiliki Vita
View PDFchevron_right
A note on linguistic theory and typology
Guglielmo Cinque

Linguistic Typology, 2007

View PDFchevron_right
Review of Jae Jung Song (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Typology. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 2011
Peter Arkadiev

25PM by peterarkadiev@yandex.ru via Peter Arkadiev chapter entitled "Typology and formal grammar" by Maria Polinsky, is not unobjectionable, but does at least faithfully represent the current parlance of linguists.

View PDFchevron_right
What diachronic typology can tell us about language universals and variation
Andrea Sansò

Paper presented at the workshop "Variation and universals in language - The implications of typological evidence for formal grammar", Crecchio (PE), Italy, 9-11 June 2017, https://www.robertadalessandro.it/crecchio-workshop

Functional approaches account for language universals and patterns of cross-linguistic variation by deriving them from more general aspects of language use. The most important factors that are responsible for universals and variation include:

View PDFchevron_right
COMPARATIVE AND HISTORICAL LINGUISTICS
olcay akyuz
View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • Cognitive Science
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2025 Academia. All rights reserved