Universal #416
Legacy number: 416
| Number | 415 |
| Original | Affixes are ordered so that their increasing distance from the stem reflects decreasing semantic relevance to it. |
| Standardized | Affixes are ordered so that their increasing distance from the stem reflects decreasing semantic relevance to it. |
| Keywords | affix-order, stem, relevance |
| Domain | inflection, semantics |
| Type | mutual implication |
| Status | achronic |
| Quality | statistical |
| Basis | sample of 50 languages in Bybee 1985a |
| Source | Bybee 1985a, cited in Moravcsik 1994: 50 |
Discussion
Notes
The more relevant, the closer; the less relevant, the more marginal.Others use "semantic scope" rather than "relevance" to predict relative affix ordering (e.g., Keren Rice).The relative chronology of univerbation is another predictor that has been suggested:The older the affix, the closer to the stem; the more recently univerbated, the more marginal.The interesting question is how well the relevance/scope predictions agree with the diachronic prediction.
Log in to join the discussion.
Others use "semantic scope" rather than "relevance" to predict relative affix ordering (e.g., Keren Rice).
The relative chronology of univerbation is another predictor that has been suggested:
The older the affix, the closer to the stem; the more recently univerbated, the more marginal.
The interesting question is how well the relevance/scope predictions agree with the diachronic prediction.