Knowledge (XXG)

Language complexity

Source đź“ť

117: 197:, a creole language, as "the world's least complex language". According to linguists, this claim was "not founded on any serious evidence", and it was removed from later editions. Apparent complexity differences in certain areas were explained with a balancing force by which the simplicity in one area would be compensated with the complexity of another; e.g. 242:, and other secondary features which are most typically absent in creoles. McWhorter's notion that "unnatural" language contact in pidgins, creoles and other contact varieties inevitably destroys "natural" accretions in complexity perhaps represents a recapitulation of 19th-century ideas about the relationship between language contact and complexity. 217:
mechanism. Revisiting the idea of differential complexity, McWhorter argued that it is indeed creole languages, such as Saramaccan, that are structurally "much simpler than all but very few older languages". In McWhorter's notion this is not problematic in terms of the equality of creole languages because simpler structures convey
86:
only through an elaboration that would give them the necessary structural and lexical complexity that would meet the requirements of an advanced civilization. At the same time, languages described as 'primitive' were naturally considered to reflect the simplicity of their speakers. On the other hand,
292:
Many researchers suggest that several different concepts may be needed when approaching complexity: entropy, size, description length, effective complexity, information, connectivity, irreducibility, low probability, syntactic depth etc. Research suggests that while methodological choices affect the
284:
Measuring complexity is considered difficult, and the comparison of whole natural languages as a daunting task. On a more detailed level, it is possible to demonstrate that some structures are more complex than others. Phonology and morphology are areas where such comparisons have traditionally been
245:
During the years following McWhorter's article, several books and dozens of articles were published on the topic. As to date, there have been research projects on language complexity, and several workshops for researchers have been organised by various universities. Among linguists who study this,
216:
argued against the compensation hypothesis. McWhorter contended that it would be absurd if, as languages change, each had a mechanism that calibrated it according to the complexity of all the other 6,000 or so languages around the world. He underscored that linguistics has no knowledge of any such
285:
made. For instance, linguistics has tools for the assessment of the phonological system of any given language. As for the study of syntactic complexity, grammatical rules have been proposed as a basis, but generative frameworks, such as the
254:
At a general level, language complexity can be characterized as the number and variety of elements, and the elaborateness of their interrelational structure. This general characterisation can be broken down into sub-areas:
221:
in the most straightforward manner, while increased language complexity is largely a question of features which may not add much to the functionality, or improve usefulness, of the language. Examples of such features are
62:, are considered simpler than most other languages, but there is no direct ranking, and no universal method of measurement although several possibilities are now proposed within different schools of analysis. 184:
ideas about superiority of the languages of establishment. The first known quote that puts forward the idea that all languages are equally complex comes from Rulon S. Wells III, 1954, who attributes it to
205:
All languages have a complex grammar: there may be relative simplicity in one respect (e.g., no word-endings), but there seems always to be relative complexity in another (e.g., word-position).
189:. While laymen never ceased to consider certain languages as simple and others as complex, such a view was erased from official contexts. For instance, the 1971 edition of 533: 967: 944: 917: 878: 509: 351: 289:
and the Simpler Syntax framework, have been less successful in defining complexity and its predictions than non-formal ways of description.
770: 126: 1019: 836: 730: 438: 159: 307: 88: 190: 896:
Di Garbo, Francesca; Olsson, Bruno; Wälchli, Bernhard (2019). Di Garbo, Francesca; Olsson, Bruno; Wälchli, Bernhard (eds.).
857:
Di Garbo, Francesca; Olsson, Bruno; Wälchli, Bernhard (2019). Di Garbo, Francesca; Olsson, Bruno; Wälchli, Bernhard (eds.).
293:
results, even rather crude analytic tools may provide a feasible starting point for measuring grammatical complexity.
235: 268:: variety of parts, such as phoneme inventory size, number of distinctions in a grammatical category, e.g. aspect 100: 47: 130: 28: 1011: 714: 430: 667:"Language Complexity in Historical Perspective: The Enduring Tropes of Natural Growth and Abnormal Contact" 762: 223: 51: 549: 387:
Wurzel, Wolfgang Ullrich (2001). "Creoles, complexity, and linguistic change (Source does not exist )".
50:
is turning towards recognizing that complexity is a suitable research area, a central focus has been on
91:
noted that some nations "which appear to be at the very lowest grade of intellectual culture", such as
46:
Language complexity has been studied less than many other traditional fields of linguistics. While the
999: 418: 815:
Hawkins, John A. (2014). "Major contributions from formal linguistics to the complexity debate". In
70:
Throughout the 19th century, differential complexity was taken for granted. The classical languages
194: 828: 722: 1052: 816: 706: 647: 527: 468: 361: 286: 239: 186: 40: 1057: 1025: 1015: 963: 940: 923: 913: 884: 874: 832: 766: 736: 726: 688: 639: 597: 570: 515: 505: 444: 434: 396: 347: 177: 96: 83: 1047: 995: 903: 864: 824: 754: 718: 678: 631: 562: 480: 414: 339: 227: 860:
Grammatical Gender and Linguistic Complexity, Volume 1: General Issues and Specific Studies
794:
Language universals and linguistic complexity: Three case studies in core argument marking
373: 92: 59: 1003: 422: 335: 213: 75: 899:
Grammatical Gender and Linguistic Complexity, Volume 2: World-Wide Comparative Studies
274:: e.g. ways of arranging components, phonotactic restrictions, variety of word orders. 82:, were considered to possess qualities which could be achieved by the rising European 1041: 978: 956: 231: 198: 651: 173: 141: 902:. Studies in Diversity Linguistics. Vol. 27. Berlin: Language Science Press. 863:. Studies in Diversity Linguistics. Vol. 26. Berlin: Language Science Press. 471:(2012). "'All Languages Are Equally Complex': The rise and fall of a consensus". 622:
McWhorter, John H. (2001). "The world's simplest grammars are creole grammars".
210: 181: 137: 20: 927: 888: 683: 666: 519: 302: 1029: 897: 858: 740: 692: 643: 601: 574: 448: 400: 566: 484: 36: 24: 908: 869: 792: 499: 262:: number of parts, such as word length in terms of phonemes, syllables etc. 635: 79: 1010:. Studies in the Evolution of Language. Vol. 13. Oxford; New York: 429:. Studies in the Evolution of Language. Vol. 13. Oxford; New York: 550:"'All Languages Are Equally Complex': The rise and fall of a consensus" 55: 32: 343: 980:
The Practical Study of Languages; A Guide for Teachers and Learners
218: 71: 334:. Studies in Language Companion Series. Vol. 94. Amsterdam: 330:
Miestamo, Matti; Sinnemäki, Kaius; Karlsson (eds.), Fred (2008).
246:
there is still no universally accepted consensus on this issue.
588:
Arends, Jacques (2001). "Simple grammars, complex languages".
110: 547:
Joseph, John E.; Newmeyer, Frederick J. (2012-01-01).
23:
which can be divided into several sub-topics such as
39:
complexity. The subject also carries importance for
823:. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 14–36. 955: 548: 939:. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 786: 784: 782: 617: 615: 613: 611: 280:: e.g. recursion, lexical–semantic hierarchies. 203: 937:Language Complexity: Typology, Contact, Change 332:Language Complexity: Typology, Contact, Change 325: 323: 103:, possess a striking degree of elaborateness. 8: 498:Arkadiev, Peter; Gardani, Francesco (2020). 462: 460: 458: 1008:Language Complexity as an Evolving Variable 427:Language Complexity as an Evolving Variable 532:: CS1 maint: location missing publisher ( 140:. Please do not remove this message until 907: 868: 829:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199685301.003.0002 723:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199685301.001.0001 682: 160:Learn how and when to remove this message 713:. Oxford Linguistics. Oxford; New York: 136:Relevant discussion may be found on the 319: 230:marking, syntactic asymmetries between 172:During the 20th century, linguists and 525: 369: 359: 54:choices. Some languages, particularly 7: 759:Complexity: A Philosophical Overview 709:; Preston, Laurel B., eds. (2014). 14: 821:Measuring Grammatical Complexity 797:(Thesis). University of Helsinki 711:Measuring Grammatical Complexity 308:L2 Syntactic Complexity Analyzer 115: 501:The complexities of morphology 191:Guinness Book of World Records 1: 983:. London: J. M. Dent & Co 819:; Preston, Laurel B. (eds.). 958:The Language Complexity Game 555:Historiographia Linguistica 473:Historiographia Linguistica 142:conditions to do so are met 107:Equal complexity hypothesis 1074: 671:Frontiers in Communication 791:Sinnemäki, Kaius (2011). 684:10.3389/fcomm.2021.621712 665:McElvenny, James (2021). 272:Organizational complexity 101:native American languages 962:. Cambridge: MIT Press. 935:Miestamo, Matti (2008). 504:. Oxford. pp. 1–2. 1012:Oxford University Press 715:Oxford University Press 567:10.1075/hl.39.2-3.08jos 485:10.1075/hl.39.2-3.08jos 431:Oxford University Press 266:Paradigmatic complexity 909:10.5281/zenodo.3446230 870:10.5281/zenodo.3446224 817:Newmeyer, Frederick J. 763:Transaction Publishers 707:Newmeyer, Frederick J. 469:Newmeyer, Frederick J. 260:Syntagmatic complexity 224:inalienable possessive 207: 180:that would reject any 977:Sweet, Henry (1899). 954:Ristad, Eric (1993). 636:10.1515/lity.2001.001 278:Hierarchic complexity 624:Linguistic Typology 590:Linguistic Typology 389:Linguistic Typology 297:Computational tools 236:subordinate clauses 129:of this section is 17:Language complexity 372:has generic name ( 287:minimalist program 250:Complexity metrics 240:grammatical gender 187:Charles F. Hockett 89:Friedrich Schlegel 84:national languages 41:language evolution 996:Sampson, Geoffrey 969:978-0-262-18147-1 946:978-90-272-3104-8 919:978-3-96110-181-8 880:978-3-96110-179-5 761:. New Brunswick: 755:Rescher, Nicholas 511:978-0-19-260551-1 467:Joseph, John E.; 415:Sampson, Geoffrey 353:978-90-272-3104-8 170: 169: 162: 1065: 1033: 991: 989: 988: 973: 961: 950: 931: 911: 892: 872: 843: 842: 812: 806: 805: 803: 802: 788: 777: 776: 751: 745: 744: 703: 697: 696: 686: 662: 656: 655: 630:(2/3): 125–166. 619: 606: 605: 596:(2/3): 180–182. 585: 579: 578: 561:(2–3): 341–368. 552: 544: 538: 537: 531: 523: 495: 489: 488: 464: 453: 452: 411: 405: 404: 395:(2/3): 377–387. 384: 378: 377: 371: 367: 365: 357: 327: 228:switch-reference 219:logical meanings 165: 158: 154: 151: 145: 119: 118: 111: 1073: 1072: 1068: 1067: 1066: 1064: 1063: 1062: 1038: 1037: 1036: 1022: 1006:, eds. (2009). 1004:Trudgill, Peter 994: 986: 984: 976: 970: 953: 947: 934: 920: 895: 881: 856: 852: 847: 846: 839: 814: 813: 809: 800: 798: 790: 789: 780: 773: 753: 752: 748: 733: 705: 704: 700: 664: 663: 659: 621: 620: 609: 587: 586: 582: 546: 545: 541: 524: 512: 497: 496: 492: 466: 465: 456: 441: 425:, eds. (2009). 423:Trudgill, Peter 413: 412: 408: 386: 385: 381: 368: 358: 354: 344:10.1075/slcs.94 338:. p. 356. 329: 328: 321: 316: 299: 252: 174:anthropologists 166: 155: 149: 146: 135: 120: 116: 109: 68: 12: 11: 5: 1071: 1069: 1061: 1060: 1055: 1050: 1040: 1039: 1035: 1034: 1020: 992: 974: 968: 951: 945: 932: 918: 893: 879: 853: 851: 848: 845: 844: 837: 807: 778: 772:978-1560003779 771: 746: 731: 698: 657: 607: 580: 539: 510: 490: 479:(3): 341–368. 454: 439: 406: 379: 352: 336:John Benjamins 318: 317: 315: 312: 311: 310: 305: 298: 295: 282: 281: 275: 269: 263: 251: 248: 214:John McWhorter 168: 167: 123: 121: 114: 108: 105: 67: 64: 52:methodological 19:is a topic in 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 1070: 1059: 1056: 1054: 1051: 1049: 1046: 1045: 1043: 1031: 1027: 1023: 1021:9780199545216 1017: 1013: 1009: 1005: 1001: 997: 993: 982: 981: 975: 971: 965: 960: 959: 952: 948: 942: 938: 933: 929: 925: 921: 915: 910: 905: 901: 900: 894: 890: 886: 882: 876: 871: 866: 862: 861: 855: 854: 849: 840: 838:9780199685301 834: 830: 826: 822: 818: 811: 808: 796: 795: 787: 785: 783: 779: 774: 768: 764: 760: 756: 750: 747: 742: 738: 734: 732:9780199685301 728: 724: 720: 716: 712: 708: 702: 699: 694: 690: 685: 680: 676: 672: 668: 661: 658: 653: 649: 645: 641: 637: 633: 629: 625: 618: 616: 614: 612: 608: 603: 599: 595: 591: 584: 581: 576: 572: 568: 564: 560: 556: 551: 543: 540: 535: 529: 521: 517: 513: 507: 503: 502: 494: 491: 486: 482: 478: 474: 470: 463: 461: 459: 455: 450: 446: 442: 440:9780199545216 436: 432: 428: 424: 420: 416: 410: 407: 402: 398: 394: 390: 383: 380: 375: 363: 355: 349: 345: 341: 337: 333: 326: 324: 320: 313: 309: 306: 304: 301: 300: 296: 294: 290: 288: 279: 276: 273: 270: 267: 264: 261: 258: 257: 256: 249: 247: 243: 241: 237: 233: 229: 225: 220: 215: 212: 206: 202: 200: 199:David Crystal 196: 192: 188: 183: 179: 175: 164: 161: 153: 143: 139: 133: 132: 128: 122: 113: 112: 106: 104: 102: 98: 94: 90: 85: 81: 78:, as well as 77: 73: 65: 63: 61: 57: 53: 49: 44: 42: 38: 34: 30: 29:morphological 26: 22: 18: 1007: 985:. Retrieved 979: 957: 936: 898: 859: 850:Bibliography 820: 810: 799:. Retrieved 793: 758: 749: 710: 701: 674: 670: 660: 627: 623: 593: 589: 583: 558: 554: 542: 500: 493: 476: 472: 426: 409: 392: 388: 382: 370:|last3= 331: 291: 283: 277: 271: 265: 259: 253: 244: 208: 204: 171: 156: 147: 125: 69: 45: 25:phonological 16: 15: 182:nationalist 21:linguistics 1042:Categories 1000:Gil, David 987:2011-03-15 928:1150195371 889:1150166021 801:2016-04-28 520:1197563838 419:Gil, David 314:References 303:Coh-Metrix 195:Saramaccan 178:standpoint 176:adopted a 127:neutrality 1053:Phonology 1030:227962299 741:869852316 693:2297-900X 644:1430-0532 602:1430-0532 575:0302-5160 528:cite book 449:227962299 401:1430-0532 362:cite book 226:marking, 193:featured 150:July 2021 138:talk page 99:and some 48:consensus 33:syntactic 1058:Language 757:(1998). 652:16297093 211:creolist 209:In 2001 201:, 1987: 131:disputed 80:Sanskrit 37:semantic 1048:Grammar 66:History 60:creoles 56:pidgins 1028:  1018:  966:  943:  926:  916:  887:  877:  835:  769:  739:  729:  691:  650:  642:  600:  573:  518:  508:  447:  437:  399:  350:  232:matrix 93:Basque 35:, and 648:S2CID 76:Greek 72:Latin 1026:OCLC 1016:ISBN 964:ISBN 941:ISBN 924:OCLC 914:ISBN 885:OCLC 875:ISBN 833:ISBN 767:ISBN 737:OCLC 727:ISBN 689:ISSN 640:ISSN 598:ISSN 571:ISSN 534:link 516:OCLC 506:ISBN 445:OCLC 435:ISBN 397:ISSN 374:help 348:ISBN 234:and 124:The 97:Sámi 74:and 58:and 904:doi 865:doi 825:doi 719:doi 679:doi 632:doi 563:doi 481:doi 340:doi 1044:: 1024:. 1014:. 1002:; 998:; 922:. 912:. 883:. 873:. 831:. 781:^ 765:. 735:. 725:. 717:. 687:. 677:. 673:. 669:. 646:. 638:. 626:. 610:^ 592:. 569:. 559:39 557:. 553:. 530:}} 526:{{ 514:. 477:39 475:. 457:^ 443:. 433:. 421:; 417:; 391:. 366:: 364:}} 360:{{ 346:. 322:^ 238:, 95:, 43:. 31:, 27:, 1032:. 990:. 972:. 949:. 930:. 906:: 891:. 867:: 841:. 827:: 804:. 775:. 743:. 721:: 695:. 681:: 675:6 654:. 634:: 628:5 604:. 594:5 577:. 565:: 536:) 522:. 487:. 483:: 451:. 403:. 393:5 376:) 356:. 342:: 163:) 157:( 152:) 148:( 144:. 134:.

Index

linguistics
phonological
morphological
syntactic
semantic
language evolution
consensus
methodological
pidgins
creoles
Latin
Greek
Sanskrit
national languages
Friedrich Schlegel
Basque
Sámi
native American languages
neutrality
disputed
talk page
conditions to do so are met
Learn how and when to remove this message
anthropologists
standpoint
nationalist
Charles F. Hockett
Guinness Book of World Records
Saramaccan
David Crystal

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

↑