How Valid Are the Implicational Relationships between Plosives? (파열음의 함의 관계는 얼마나 유효한가?)

Lee Jin-Ho (이진호)

doi:10.17326/jhsnu.79.1.202202.497

How Valid Are the Implicational Relationships between Plosives?

Journal of Humanities, Seoul National University
2022, 79(1), pp.497-524
DOI : 10.17326/jhsnu.79.1.202202.497
Publisher : Institute of Humanities, Seoul National University
Research Area : Humanities > Other Humanities
Received : January 3, 2022
Accepted : February 8, 2022
Published : February 28, 2022

Lee Jin-Ho ¹

¹서울대학교

Accredited

ABSTRACT

It is widely known that the implicational relationship, which plays an important role in universal grammar, is not absolute. However, the extent to which it is valid has been rarely studied on the basis of large-scale language data. In this paper, I analyzed the plosive inventories of 4,356 languages in Lee (2020) and examined the validity of some implicational relationships. First, although voiced plosives have a high rate of implying the presence of voiceless plosives, they show considerable variation depending on the language family or types of plosives. Second, complex plosives accompanying various secondary articulations imply the existence of plain plosives at a high rate. In addition, complex voiced plosives imply not only the corresponding plain plosives but also a four-way contrasts. Third, regarding the place of articulation, some implicational relationships are established depending on the voicedness of plosives. Finally, it is examined whether it is valid even if the implicational relationships are changed into the form of contraposition. On the surface, the contrapositions of some implicational relationships are valid at a very high rate. However, since its validity is absolutely determined only by the frequency of individual plosives, it has little to do with the contraposition. Therefore, it is difficult to assign linguistic significance to the contraposition of implicational relationship.

KEYWORDS

Plosive, Implicational Relationship, Universal, Unmarked, Marked, Secondary Articulation, Contraposition

Citation status

* References for papers published after 2023 are currently being built.

[book] Battistella, E. / 1990 / Markedness: The Evaluative Superstructure of Language / SUNY Press

[book] Blevins, J. / 2004 / Evolutionary Phonology: The Emergence of Sound Patterns / Cambridge University Press

[book] Bybee, J. / 2001 / Phonology and Language Use / Cambridge University Press

[confproc] Daumé, H. / 2007 / A Bayesian Model for Discovering Typological Implications / Proceedings of the 45th Annual Meeting of the Association of Computational Linguistics, Prague: Association for Computational Linguistics : 65~72

[confproc] Dryer, M. S. / 1998 / Why Statistical Universals Are Better Than Absolute Universals / Proceedings of the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society : 123~145

[journal] Evans, N. / 2009 / The Myth of Language Universals: Language Diversity and Its Importance for Cognitive Science / Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32(5) : 429~492

[journal] Gamkrelidze, T. / 1975 / On the Correlation of Stops and Fricatives in a Phonological System / Lingua 35(3) : 231~261

[book] Greenberg, J. H. / 1978 / Universals of human language (I): Method and theory / Stanford University Press : 61~92

[journal] Greenberg, J. H. / 1966 / Synchronic and Diachronic Universals in Phonology / Language 42(2) : 508~517

[journal] Gurevich, N. / 2001 / A Critique of Markedness-based Theories in Phonology / Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 31(2) : 1~29

[book] Hayes, B. / 1999 / Functionalism and Formalism in Linguistics (I): General Papers / John Benjamins : 243~285

[journal] Hyman, L. / 2008 / Universals in Phonology / The Linguistic Review 25 : 81~135

[book] Jacobson, R. / 1963 / Universals of Language / MIT Press : 263~278

[book] Lee, J. / 2020 / Inventories of the Plosive in the World’s Languages / Jipmoondang

[journal] Maddieson. I. / 1991 / Testing the Universality of Phonological Generalizations with a Phonetically Specified Segment Database: Results and Limitations / Phonetica 48(2-4) : 193~206

[book] Maddieson, I. / 1984 / Patterns of sounds / Cambridge University Press

[journal] Moreton, E. / 2008 / Analytic Bias and Phonological Typology / Phonology 25(1) : 83~127

[journal] Nartey, J. / 1979 / A Study in Phonemic Universals: Especially Concerning Fricatives and Stops / UCLA Working Papers in Phonetics 46 : 1~89

[thesis] Nchare, A. / 2012 / The Grammar of Shupamem / Doctor / New York University

[journal] Pericliev, V. / 2008 / Implicational Phonological Universals / Folia Linguistica 42(1) : 195~225

[book] Pinkerton, S. / 1986 / Experimental phonology / Academic Press : 125~139

[book] Rice, K. / 2007 / The Cambridge handbook of phonology / Cambridge University Press : 79~97

[journal] Sherman, D. / 1975 / Stop and Fricative Systems: A Discussion of Paradigmatic Gaps and the Question of Language Sampling / Working Papers in Language Universals 17 : 1~31

[thesis] Watts, E. / 2018 / Markedness and Implicational Relationships in Phonological Development: A Longitudinal, Cross-linguistic Investigation / Doctor / Memorial University of Newfoundland

[thesis] Woodland, A. / 1998 / A Grammatical Description of the Kachi Gujerati Language of Sindh, Pakistan / Master / Canadian Institute of Linguistics and Trinity Western Seminary

KJCKorea
Journal Central

Journal of Humanities, Seoul National University 2023 KCI Impact Factor : 0.89

How Valid Are the Implicational Relationships between Plosives?

ABSTRACT

KEYWORDS

Citation status

* References for papers published after 2023 are currently being built.

Journal of Humanities, Seoul National University 2023 KCI Impact Factor : 0.89

How Valid Are the Implicational Relationships between Plosives?

ABSTRACT

KEYWORDS

Statistics

Tools

Issue List

Citation status

KCI Citation Counts (0)

REFERENCES (25) * References for papers published after 2023 are currently being built.

Search PDF

Citation

* References for papers published after 2023 are currently being built.