Universal #365
Legacy number: 365
| Number | 364 |
| Original | Inflectional affixes tend to be longer in agglutinative languages than in flective languages. |
| Standardized | IF morphology is agglutinative, THEN inflectional affixes tend to be longer. IF morphology is flexive, THEN inflectional affixes tend to be shorter. |
| Formula | agglutinative ⇒ long inflectional affixes; flexive ⇒ short inflectional affixes |
| Keywords | affix, complexity, agglutination, flexion |
| Domain | inflection |
| Type | mutual implication |
| Status | achronic |
| Quality | statistical |
| Basis | unspecified |
| Source | Dressler 1985, adapted from Skalicka: Plank 1996, Plank 1998, Moravcsik 1994a: 41 |
Discussion
Notes
Implications presumably intended as mutual: "mutually conducive traits".For a tabular summary of Skalicka's typological "constructs" see Plank 1998: 204-205.Presumably the claim is about average length of inflectional affixes. Alternatively, it could be read as being about affixes of corresponding categories: e.g., dative plural, if cumulated, is shorter than dative plus plural, if not cumulated. Or even, ... than dative on its own and plural on its own, if not cumulated.
Comment
Implications presumably intended as mutual: "mutually conducive traits". For a tabular summary of Skalicka's typological "constructs" see Plank 1998: 204-205. Presumably the claim is about average length of inflectional affixes. Alternatively, it could be read as being about affixes of corresponding categories: e.g., dative plural, if cumulated, is shorter than dative plus plural, if not cumulated. Or even, ... than dative on its own and plural on its own, if not cumulated.
Log in to join the discussion.