Balthasar Bickel

Typology in the 21st century: Major current developments

Abstract 1. Typology as a discipline In the past century, typology was mostly used as an alternative method of pursuing one of the same goals as generative grammar: to determine the limits of possible human languages and, thereby, to contribute to a universal theory of grammar. The paradigm result was the absolute universal law that would rule out as linguistically impossible what would seem logically imaginable, e.g., a language with a gender distinction exclusively in the 1st person singular.

Language evolution: syntax before phonology?

Phonology and syntax represent two layers of sound combination central to languages expressive power. Comparative animal studies represent one approach to understand the origins of these combinatorial layers. Traditionally, phonology, where meaningless sounds form words, has been considered a simpler combination than syntax, and thus should be more common in animals. A linguistically informed review of animal call sequences demonstrates that phonology in animal vocal systems is rare, whereas syntax is more widespread. In the light of this and the absence of phonology in some languages, we hypothesize that syntax, present in all languages, evolved before phonology.

Exploring the nature of the ‘subject’-preference: Evidence from the online comprehension of simple sentences in Mandarin Chinese

In two visual ERP studies, we investigated whether Mandarin Chinese shows a subject-preference in spite of the controversial status of grammatical relations in this language. We compared ERP responses at the position of the verb and the second NP in object-verb-subject (OVS) and subject-verb-object (SVO) structures. While SVO is the basic word order in Chinese and OV with subject-drop is possible, OVS is strongly dispreferred. At the position of the verb, which disambiguated towards an object or a subject reading of NP1, Experiment 1 revealed an N400 for both subject-initial control conditions in comparison with the critical object-initial condition. Experiment 2 showed that this result was due to differences in lexical-semantic relatedness between NP1 and the verb. When these were controlled for, we observed an N400 for the disambiguation towards an object-initial order, i.e., evidence for a subject-preference. At the postverbal NP, the object-initial condition showed a biphasic N400-late positivity pattern in both experiments. We interpret the N400 as reflecting the processing of an unexpected argument and the late positivity as a correlate of a well-formedness mismatch. Overall, our results suggest that Mandarin Chinese shows a subject-preference for an initial argument, thus providing further converging support for the notion that the subject-preference might constitute a universal processing strategy. We argue that the functional basis for this strategy lies in cross-linguistically applicable economy principles that serve to constrain incremental interpretation.

Randomization tests in language typology

Abstract Two of the major assumptions that common statistical tests make about random sampling and distribution of the data are not tenable for most typological data. We suggest to use randomization tests, which avoid these assumptions. Randomization is applicable to frequency data, rank data, scalar measurements, and ratings, so most typological data can be analyzed with the same tools. We provided a free computer program, which also includes routines that help determine the degree to which a statistical conclusion is reliable or dependent on a few languages in the sample.

The prosodic word is not universal, but emergent

In Prosodic Phonology, domains for the application of phonological patterns are commonly modeled as a Prosodic Hierarchy. The theory predicts, among other things, that (i) prosodic domains cluster on a single universal set of domains (‘Clustering’), and (ii) no level of prosodic structure is skipped in the building of prosodic structure unless this is required by independently motivated higher ranking principles or constraints (‘Strict Succession’). In this paper, we demonstrate that if, as is standardly done, evidence is limited to lexically general phonological processes, some languages systematically violate the Strict Succession Prediction, evidencing no prosodic word domain, and some languages systematically violate the Clustering Prediction, evidencing more than one domain between the phonological phrase and the foot. We substantiate these claims by in-depth studies of phonological rule domains in Vietnamese (Austroasiatic) and Limbu (Sino-Tibetan). As an alternative to the Prosodic Hierarchy framework, we advocate a heuristic for cross-linguistic comparison in which prosodic domains are conceived of as language-particular, intrinsic and highly specific properties of individual phonological rules or constraints. This allows us to explore empirically the actual degree of variation to be encountered across prosodic systems. It turns out that the ‘word’ has no privileged or universal status in phonology, but only emerges through frequent reference of sound patterns to a given construction type in a given language.

Spatial operations in deixis, cognition, and culture: where to orient oneself in Belhare

Introduction The question I want to raise, ‘Where to orient oneself’, addresses two issues. First, it asks for the type of deictic field within which spatial information is transmitted. This issue is motivated by my attempts to understand what Belhare people mean when they tell you, for instance, to move something toba ‘up’; for it is by no means obvious where toba is. Secondly, the question looks for the domain in which spatial information is encoded and for the relation of this domain to grammar, semantics, and cognition. More specifically, I inquire into the effects that spatial deixis has on the grammar of Belhare, on the quality of different ‘senses’ in deixis (is there linguistically resolvable polysemy? or mere contextual vagueness?), and on the relation of linguistic deixis to other cognitive modalities that are basic to spatial orientation and manifest in cultural patterns and social behaviour. I address the cross-modal questions from a linguistic point of view, seeking for structural parallels in non-linguistic cognition. The language and people I am concerned with are called Belhare (Nep. Belhālre or Belhārīya ) or Belhare Rai, the term Rai (Nep. Rāī ) being the collective ethnonym for a subgroup of the Kiranti (Nep. Kiratī ) people in Eastern Nepal (cf. Vikal & Rāī 2051, Bickel 1996). The language is spoken by some two thousand people. Virtually all speakers are bilingual, also speaking Nepali, the national Indo-Aryan lingua franca, but Belhare is still the preferred means of communication.

Exorcising Grice's ghost: an empirical approach to studying intentional communication in animals

Languages intentional nature has been highlighted as a crucial feature distinguishing it from other communication systems. Specifically, language is often thought to depend on highly structured intentional action and mutual mindreading by a communicator and recipient. Whilst similar abilities in animals can shed light on the evolution of intentionality, they remain challenging to detect unambiguously. We revisit animal intentional communication and suggest that progress in identifying analogous capacities has been complicated by (i) the assumption that intentional (that is, voluntary) production of communicative acts requires mental‐state attribution, and (ii) variation in approaches investigating communication across sensory modalities. To move forward, we argue that a framework fusing research across modalities and species is required. We structure intentional communication into a series of requirements, each of which can be operationalised, investigated empirically, and must be met for purposive, intentionally communicative acts to be demonstrated. Our unified approach helps elucidate the distribution of animal intentional communication and subsequently serves to clarify what is meant by attributions of intentional communication in animals and humans.

Aspectual scope and the difference between logical and semantic representation

Abstract A common theory of aspect marking, which we might label ‘selection theory’, assumes that (viewpoint) aspect and Aktionsart (temporal schemes expressed by predicates or, compositionally, by propositions) stand in an operator-operandum relationship, where aspect operators select matching elements in an Aktionsart, thereby highlighting specific boundaries or phases. In this paper, I show that under the premise of a selection theory, we need to distinguish between two types of nondefeasible (non-pragmatic) meaning representations: Whereas semantic representations are aspectologically relevant and inside the scope of aspect operators, logical representations, i.e., representations including all truth conditions contributed by an expression, are outside the scope of aspect operators. This distinction allows a more principled notion of ‘aspectual pair’ in Slavic languages and has also important consequences for cognitive architecture in the domain of meaning representations.

A fresh look at grammatical relations in Indo-Aryan

Abstract Verb agreement in Hindi has recently been shown to be sensitive to both argument structure and morphological case features (Mohanan, 1994): the verb agrees with the ‘highest nominative’ argument, i.e., with a nominative S- or A-argument, or if there is no nominative A, with a nominative O-argument (where S = ‘single argument of intransitives’, A = ‘transitive actor’, O = ‘transitive object’). In this article we propose that such a combination of morphological and syntactico-semantic notions is a general characteristic of the over-all syntax of many if not all Indo-Aryan languages. On the basis of constructions which are demonstrably sensitive to grammatical relations, viz. verb agreement, gapping in nonfinite clauses, control constructions and matrix-coding (‘raising’), we argue that these relations are defined as ‘nominative or ergative S/A’ in Maithili and Nepali. Hindi shows a split between some constructions being sensitive to the same grammatical relation and others to a notion of ‘non-genitive S/A’ (gapping in converb clauses) and to ‘highest nominative’ (agreement). Other constructions, viz. conjunction reduction, converbial reference control, and reflexivization, prove not to be sensitive to grammatical relations, in contradiction to frequent assumptions made in the literature on Indo-Aryan syntax.

Face vs. empathy: the social foundation of Maithili verb agreement

Abstract Maithili features one of the most complex agreement systems of any Indo-Aryan language. Not only nominative and non-nominative subjects, but also objects, other core arguments, and even nonarguments are cross-referenced, allowing for a maximum of three participants encoded by the verb desinences. The categories reflected in the morphology are person, honorific degree, and, in the case of third persons, gender, spatial distance, and focus. However, not all combinations of category choices are equally represented, and there are many cases of neutralization. We demonstrate that the paradigm structure of Maithili verb agreement is not arbitrary but can be predicted by two general principles of interaction in Maithil society: a principle of social hierarchy underlying the evaluation of peoples “face” (Brown and Levinson 1987[1978]), and a principle of social solidarity defining degrees of “empathy” (Kuno 1987) to which people identify with others. Maithili verb agreement not only reflects a specific style of social cognition but also constitutes a prime means of maintaining this style by requiring constant attention to its defining parameters. In line with this, we find that the system is partly reduced by uneducated, so-called lower-caste speakers, who are least interested in maintaining this style, especially its emphasis on hierarchy.