Editor for this issue: Ljuba Veselinova <lveselin
emunix.emich.edu>
In LINGUIST 7-739 I asked whether anyone had tested the often heard claim that large phoneme inventory sizes correlate with short words, and vice versa. Thanks to those who responded! I was pointed to the following recent article, where the claim is tested and confirmed for a sample of ten languages: NETTLE, David (1995), "Segmental inventory size, word length, and communicative efficiency", Linguistics 33.2: 359-367. Nettle explains the correlation in terms of competing motivations: Different languages optimize either speed of performance or simplicity of structure. These functional constraints are inevitably in conflict with each other, and different languages resolve the conflict differently by assigning different weights to the constraints. Nettle cites recent work in European "quantitative linguistics" for related approaches. True, such claims can only be tested by using quantitative methods, but are they irrelevant to phonological theory, and linguistic theory more generally? Chilin Shih objects that Mandarin Chinese has a small phoneme inventory and short words. In Nettle's study, Chinese is not exceptional because he counts compounds as single words and includes the distinctive force of tone in calculating the size of the phonemic inventory. Markus Hiller points out that it is not quite clear what should be counted in each case -- do we include all Japanese words of Chinese origin that are hardly used in the spoken language because of homonymy? How do we exclude them? He suggests that only the core vocaabulary should be taken into account. In addition, he proposes that not segments, but gestures (in the sense of Browman & Goldstein 1986) should be counted, because they are more easily classified as redundant vs. distinctive, and they are less abstract than features. Nettle did not use such sophisticated methods in his study, and the fact that he got statistically significant results shows that the effect is so strong that it is not obscured by all the "noise". Paul de Lacy notes that we need to distinguish between roots and words (although the prediction of the functional theory probably applies to both equally) and notes that Polynesian languages do not have particularly long words. Maori, for instance, has only 14 segmental phonemes, 80% of its roots are bimoraic, and it hasn't resorted to increasing word length yet. In Nettle's study, though, Hawaiian does have a fairly high average word length (7.08 segments, the thgird highest in his sample). I am grateful to And Rosta (ucleaarMail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issueucl.ac.uk) Wolfgang Behr (w.behr
em.uni-frankfurt.d400.de) Markus Hiller (markus.hiller
zdv.uni-tuebingen.de) Chilin Shih (cayenne!cls
research.att.com) Paul de Lacy (delacy
voyager.co.nz) Martin Haspelmath Department of English Free University of Berlin