Paradigm economy: a reply to Nyman
The paradigm economy principle (PEP) is a constraint on the way in which the inflectional resources of a lang can be organized into paradigms. The strict version of this constraint bans all paradigm mixture. It is argued that some types of mixture are compatible with the PEP. However, some seemingly...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of linguistics 1988-09, Vol.24 (2), p.489-499 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
Zusammenfassung: | The paradigm economy principle (PEP) is a constraint on the way in which the inflectional resources of a lang can be organized into paradigms. The strict version of this constraint bans all paradigm mixture. It is argued that some types of mixture are compatible with the PEP. However, some seemingly unacceptable mixtures may occur on a diachronic basis. Martti Nyman has argued (see LLBA 22 /2, 8803370) that the PEP is not a factor in accounting for morphological change. Relevant developments in Latin are viewed by Nyman as illustrations of the "one form-one meaning" (OFOM) principle. It is argued that expectations regarding diachronic change in Latin based on the PEP are more precise & more accurate than those based on the OFOM. In Paradigm Economy: A Rejoinder to Carstairs, Nyman (U of Helsinki) suggests that Carstairs's defense of the PEP is not methodologically explicit. It is argued that the semiological underpinnings of OFOM are clearer than those of PEP. 1 Table, 71 References. B. Annesser Murray |
---|---|
ISSN: | 0022-2267 1469-7742 |
DOI: | 10.1017/S0022226700011889 |