Universal #1184

Legacy number: 1184

 Number  1180
 Original  If in a given language there is a separate term for ‘leg’ (as opposed to ‘foot’), then there is also a term for ‘arm’ (as opposed to ‘hand’).
 Standardized  IF there is a separate term for ‘leg’ (as opposed to ‘foot’), THEN there is a term for ‘arm’ (as opposed to ‘hand’).
 Formula  ‘leg’ ⇒ ‘arm’
 Keywords  body parts
 Domain  lexicon
 Type  implication
 Status  achronic
 Quality  absolute
 Basis  41 languages in Brown 1976 (12 American Indian languages, 10 European, 5 sub-Saharan African, 4 Mideastern and Western Asian, 5 Southeast Asian, 2 Chinese, 2 Micronesian)
 Source  Brown 1976, also mentioned in Andersen 1978: 352

← Back to Universals Archive

Discussion
Notes
A term for ‘leg’ is present in most but not all languages. According to Andersen’s data, at least three languages, Hopi (Uto-Aztecan), Inupik (Eskomo-Aleut), and Tarascan (Chibchan), do not have ‘leg’ (+ ‘foot’) though they do have terms for subparts (e.g. ‘thigh’ => ‘calf’).
Comment
Frans Plank · 3 Aug 2006
A term for 'leg' is present in most but not all languages. According to Andersen's data, at least three languages, Hopi (Uto-Aztecan), Inupik (Eskomo-Aleut), and Tarascan (Chibchan), do not have 'leg' (+ 'foot') though they do have terms for subparts (e.g. 'thigh' ⇒ 'calf').