Universal #371

Legacy number: 371

 Number  370
 Original  If a language has vowel harmony and perhaps other progressive phonological modifications, then basic word order is OV, but not vice versa; if a language has umlaut and perhaps other regressive/anticipatory phonological modifications, then basic word order is VO, but not vice versa.
 Standardized  IF there is vowel harmony and perhaps other progressive phonological modifications, THEN basic word order is OV, but not vice versa;
IF there is umlaut and perhaps other regressive/anticipatory phonological modifications, THEN basic word order is VO, but not vice versa.
 Formula  vowel harmony ⇒ OV;
umlaut ⇒ VO
 Keywords  vowel harmony, assimilation, order, object, verb, umlaut
 Domain  phonology, syntax
 Type  implication
 Status  achronic
 Quality  statistical
 Basis  ?
 Source  W.P.Lehmann 1978: 113, discussed in Plank 1996, Plank 1998

← Back to Universals Archive

Discussion
Notes
On this reasoning, languages with both progressive and regressive vowel harmony would be expected to have free word order, where neither OV nor VO can be singled out as basic; this in fact is what is found in Australian Warlpiri (Pama-Nyungan) (Evans 1995b: 741). But one hesitates to reason along such lines; too ethereal is the link between phonological and syntactic directions. (Comments from Plank 1998.)
Comment
Frans Plank · 3 Aug 2006
On this reasoning, languages with both progressive and regressive vowel harmony would be expected to have free word order, where neither OV nor VO can be singled out as basic; this in fact is what is found in Australian Warlpiri (Pama-Nyungan) (Evans 1995b: 741). But one hesitates to reason along such lines; too ethereal is the link between phonological and syntactic directions. (Comments from Plank 1998.)