Dependencies in language On the causal ontology of linguistic systems Edited by N. J. Enfield language Studies in Diversity Linguistics 14 science press StudiesinDiversityLinguistics ChiefEditor: MartinHaspelmath ConsultingEditors: FernandoZúñiga,PeterArkadiev,RuthSinger,PilarValen zuela Inthisseries: 1. Handschuh,Corinna. Atypologyofmarked-Slanguages. 2. Rießler,Michael. Adjectiveattribution. 3. Klamer,Marian(ed.).TheAlor-Pantarlanguages: Historyandtypology. 4. Berghäll,Liisa. AgrammarofMauwake(PapuaNewGuinea). 5. Wilbur,Joshua. AgrammarofPiteSaami. 6. Dahl,Östen. GrammaticalizationintheNorth: NounphrasemorphosyntaxinScandinavian vernaculars. 7. Schackow,Diana. AgrammarofYakkha. 8. Liljegren,Henrik. AgrammarofPalula. 9. Shimelman,Aviva.AgrammarofYauyosQuechua. 10. Rudin,Catherine&BryanJamesGordon(eds.). AdvancesinthestudyofSiouan languagesandlinguistics. 11. Kluge,Angela. AgrammarofPapuanMalay. 12. Kieviet,Paulus. AgrammarofRapaNui. 13. Michaud,Alexis. ToneinYongningNa:Lexicaltonesandmorphotonology. 14. Enfield,N.J(ed.).Dependenciesinlanguage:Onthecausalontologyoflinguisticsystems. 15. Gutman,Ariel. AttributiveconstructionsinNorth-EasternNeo-Aramaic. 16. Bisang,Walter&AndrejMalchukov(eds.).Unityanddiversityingrammaticalization scenarios. ISSN:2363-5568 Dependencies in language On the causal ontology of linguistic systems Edited by N. J. Enfield language science press N.J.Enfield(ed.).2017.Dependenciesinlanguage:Onthecausalontologyof linguisticsystems(StudiesinDiversityLinguistics14).Berlin:LanguageScience Press. Thistitlecanbedownloadedat: http://langsci-press.org/catalog/book/96 ©2017,theauthors PublishedundertheCreativeCommonsAttribution4.0Licence(CCBY4.0): http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ ISBN:978-3-946234-88-3(Digital) 978-3-946234-74-6(Hardcover) 978-3-946234-66-1(Softcover) ISSN:2363-5568 DOI:10.5281/zenodo.573773 Coverandconceptofdesign:UlrikeHarbort Typesetting:SebastianNordhoff,GusWheeler Illustration:FelixKopecky Proofreading:MartinHaspelmath Fonts:LinuxLibertine,Arimo,DejaVuSansMono Typesettingsoftware:XƎLATEX LanguageSciencePress HabelschwerdterAllee45 14195Berlin,Germany langsci-press.org StorageandcataloguingdonebyFUBerlin LanguageSciencePresshasnoresponsibilityforthepersistenceoraccuracyof URLsforexternalorthird-partyInternetwebsitesreferredtointhispublication, and does not guarantee that any content on such websites is, or will remain, accurateorappropriate. Contents 1 Dependenciesinlanguage N.J.Enfield 1 2 Implicationaluniversalsanddependencies SoniaCristofaro 9 3 NewapproachestoGreenbergianwordorderdependencies JenniferCulbertson 23 4 Frombiologytolanguagechangeanddiversity DanDediu 39 5 Languageintertwinedacrossmultipletimescales:Processing, acquisitionandevolution MortenH.Christiansen 53 6 Whatcomesfirstinlanguageemergence? WendySandler 63 7 Islanguagedevelopmentdependentonearlycommunicative development? ElenaLieven 85 8 Dependencyandrelativedeterminationinlanguageacquisition:The caseofKuWaru AlanRumsey 97 9 Beyondbinarydependenciesinlanguagestructure DamiánE.Blasi&SeánG.Roberts 117 10 Realandspuriouscorrelationsinvolvingtonallanguages JeremyCollins 129 Contents 11 What(else)dependsonphonology? LarryM.Hyman 141 12 Dependenciesinphonology:hierarchiesandvariation KerenRice 159 13 Understandingintra-systemdependencies:ClassifiersinLao SebastianFedden&GrevilleG.Corbett 171 14 Structuralandsemanticdependenciesinwordclass WilliamA.Foley 179 15 Onthemarginsoflanguage:Ideophones,interjectionsand dependenciesinlinguistictheory MarkDingemanse 195 Index 203 iv Chapter 1 Dependencies in language N. J. Enfield UniversityofSydney Considertheif-thenstatementsaboutlanguagelistedinTable1(overleaf). Each of these statements implies a kind of dependency between systems or structuresinlanguage(andsometimeswithsystemsorstructuresoutsideoflan- guage), though the statements invoke different timescales, and imply different types of causal relation. Do these statements – and the many more that exist likethem–belieaunifiednotionofdependencyinlanguage?Ordotheymerely pointtofamilyresemblancesamonglooselyrelatedconcepts?Herearesomeof the(non-exclusive)waysinwhichwemightmeanthatAisdependentonB: • TostatearuleconcerningAonemustrefertoB • WhenaprocessaffectsB,itwillnecessarilyaffectA • TheexistenceofBisaconditionfortheexistenceofA • TheexistenceofBisacauseoftheexistenceofA • AcannotbeexpressedwithoutalsoexpressingB • IfBisthecase,Aisalsolikelytobethecase Itisimportanttodefinedependencyclearly,becausethenotionofdependency in language is central to our understanding of key questions in our discipline. Thesequestionsinclude:Howarelinguisticsub-systemsrelated?Aretherecon- straints on language change? How are languages learned by infants? How is language processed in the brain? What is the relation between language and socialcontext? Thisbookexploresthequestionofdependencyinlanguagewithcasestudies and reviews from across the language sciences. Despite the importance of the conceptofdependencyinourwork,itsnatureisseldomdefinedormadeexplicit. Whatkindsofdependenciesexistamonglanguage-relatedsystems,andhowdo wedefineandexplaintheminnatural,causalterms? N. J. Enfield. 2017. Dependencies in language. In N. J. Enfield (ed.), Dependencies in language, 1–9. Berlin: Language Science Press. DOI:10.5281/zenodo.573780 N.J.Enfield Table1:Someoftheif-thenstatementsfoundinlanguage Iftheverbcomesbeforetheobjectinalanguage,then Greenberg thatlanguageprobablyhasprepositionsandnot (1966) postpositions Ifaspeakerhasjustheardapassiveconstruction,then Pickering& theyaremorelikelytoproduceonenow Ferreira(2008) InEstonian,iftheverb‘tobe’isnegated,thenno Aikhenvald& distinctionsinpersonornumbermaybemarked Dixon(1998:63) Ifaconceptualthemeisexpressedinmultipledifferent semanticsystemsofalanguage,thenthatthemewillbe Hale(1986) ofculturalimportancetospeakersofthelanguage Ifalanguagehasthreeplacesofarticulationin fricatives,thenithasatleastthreeplacesofarticulation Lass(1984:154) instops IfatransitiveclauseinHindiisnotinperfectiveaspect, Kellogg(1893: thennoergativemarkingmayoccur 239) Ifalanguageexpressesmannerandpathofmotion separatelyinitslexicalsemantics,thenspeakersofthe Özyüreketal. languagewillexpressmannerandpathseparatelyin (2007) theirgestures Ifthereisavoicingcontrastinstops,then/t/and/k/ Sherman(1975) arepresent Ifachildhasnotyetlearnedtoproduceand Tomasello comprehendpointinggestures,thenshewillnot (2008) acquirelanguage Ifaspecificstructureishighlyembeddedin Thomason language-specificgrammaticalstructures,thenitisless (2001:69) likelytobeborrowedintoanunrelatedlanguage 2 1Dependenciesinlanguage 1 Condition Oneimportantkindofrelationthatcandefineadependencybetweenco-occur- ring features is the relation of condition. This is where the existence of B is a condition for the existence of A. It is where A would not be observed were B not also observed. Clear examples are when B is a medium for A. For instance, without phonation, there can be no pitch contrast. Pitch contrast depends on phonation,becausetheexistenceofphonationiswhatmakespitchcontrastpos- sible.Similarly,inturn,withoutpitchcontrast,therecanbenosystemsoflexical tone.Notethatconditionaldependencycannotbeparaphrasedintermsofcause. WecansaythatifThaispeakersdidnothavephonationtheywouldnothavelex- icaltone.WecannotsaythatThaispeakershavelexicaltonebecausetheyhave phonation. Dependence in this conditional sense defines the relations between nestedframingsoflanguageasaformofhumanaction,asinAustin’sladderthat links all types of linguistic act from the phonetic to the perlocutionary (Austin 1962;seealsoClark1996:146;Enfield2013:91-92). Conditional dependency introduces collateral effects (Enfield & Sidnell 2012). IfAisconditionallydependentonB,thenAcannotbeexpressedwithoutalsoex- pressing,implying, orrevealingB,regardlessofwhetherthiswaswanted; thus theexpressionofBisacollateraleffectoftheintentiontoexpressA.Anexam- ple comes from the expressive use of the hands in sign language (or co-speech handgesture). Ifa personwants tousetheir handstoshowthespeed atwhich somethingmoved,theyareforcedtoshowmovementinacertaindirection(e.g., North,South,North-Northeast,etc.),regardlessofanyintentiontodepictorre- vealdirectionalinformation.Inthiscase,thedepictionofdirectionofmotionis acollateraleffectofthedepictionofspeedofmotion. 2 Cause A second important kind of relation underlying dependency is that of cause. A problem with positing dependency relations among synchronic structures in language is that often no causal link between the two synchronic structures is posited at all (Clark & Malt 1984: 201). We are familiar with proposals of con- nections between language, culture, and thought, but explicit causal paths are seldom posited. What would it take to establish that there is a causal relation betweenalinguisticfeatureandaculturalvalue(ineitherdirection)?First,con- sider how a grammatical feature comes to exist in a language in the first place. Grammatical properties of languages mostly come about by means of invisible 3 N.J.Enfield handprocesses(Smith1776:Bk4Ch2).Thismeansthatthecausesoftheseeffects aredistributedthroughtinystepsinamassiveprocessofdiffusionofinnovation inpopulations,aprocessthatnopersoncandirectlyguide.Theoutcomesofthe processneednotbearanydirectrelationtothebeliefs,goals,orintentionsthat individualshavehadinproducingtheoriginalbehaviour. But this does not mean those things were not caused by people’s behaviour. Todiscoveranddefinethosecauses, oneneedsthemicrogeneticandenchronic andhistoricalframestogether,andoneneedstoallowthatthoseframesbeinde- pendent.Thisisnottosaythatsucharelationofdirectlinkbetweenindividuals’ internalbehaviorandlinguisticstructuresisimpossible. Itismerelytosaythat ifapatternisobservedinlanguage,itisnotnecessarilythecasethatitisthere or like that because people wanted it to be there or like that. What I have just describedisatypeofcausaldisconnectbetweenindividualintentionsandaggre- gateoutcomesthatisinherenttothecausalityinvolvedindiachronicprocesses. Thesediachronicprocessesare,atbase,actuatedbythecontributionsofindivid- uals. But they cannot be consummated by individuals. Rather they accumulate atthepopulationlevelinwaysthatarebeyondindividuals’reach. There is a further type of causal disconnect that should be pointed out here, whichconcernsthedistinctionbetweendiachronicandontogeneticframingsof causal explanation of a linguistic structure. If I observe that a person has con- ventionalized a certain linguistic structure, and if I ask why this has happened, oneexplanationisontogenetic:shespeakslikethatbecauseherpeersandelders spoke like that when she was learning her language. Her reasons for speaking thatwaymightsimplybe“thisishowwespeak”:whenlearningalanguage,in- fants apply a kind of docility principle (Simon 1990) by which they follow the practices of their community without questioning why things are done in the way that they are done. This strategy is efficient and adaptive. In this way one person’s reasons for speaking in a certain way may have ontogenetic explana- tions (and of course with relation to specific instances of speaking, they may haveenchronicandmicrogeneticexplanations),yettheymaybecompletelydis- connectedfromthediachronicexplanationsforwhythosestructurescametobe usedinthatinfant’scommunityinthefirstplace.Simpson(2002)arguesthatif innovations and extensionsof meaning can be generated out of cultural values, they will not spring directly into grammar. Rather they will spring from pat- terns of inference, and patterns of discourse usage, and it is these patterns, in turn, that may later lead to a grammatical “structuration” of cultural ideas (see alsoEvans2003;Blythe2013).Butimportantly,weseeherehowthereisachain frommicrogeneticandenchronicprocessestodiachronicprocesses,andthento 4