Newsgroups: sci.lang
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!das-news2.harvard.edu!news2.near.net!news.mathworks.com!newshost.marcam.com!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!Germany.EU.net!EU.net!sun4nl!mcv
From: mcv@inter.NL.net (Miguel Carrasquer)
Subject: Re: Language and genes
Message-ID: <D06KqA.D2J@inter.NL.net>
Organization: NLnet
References: <634@percep.demon.co.uk> <3bihbv$40t@amy13.Stanford.EDU> <D03s7q.Cwv@inter.NL.net> <aldersonD05v91.I90@netcom.com>
Date: Fri, 2 Dec 1994 11:18:09 GMT
Lines: 51

In article <aldersonD05v91.I90@netcom.com>,
Richard M. Alderson III <alderson@netcom.com> wrote:
>In article <D03s7q.Cwv@inter.NL.net> mcv@inter.NL.net (Miguel Carrasquer)
>writes:
>
>>Agreed by whom?  I think that sound change, both synchronically and
>>diachronically, is not gradual at all.  As one goes from one dialect
>>area to another, phonological systems change abruptly (isoglosses).
>
>Ontongeny does not necessarily recapitulate phylogeny here:  The point at 
>which
>most sound changes can be said to be complete is generally more than three
>generations long.

Three generations is well within the sphere of "punctuated equilibrium"
as opposed to gradualism, even allowing for the shift in gear when 
passing from biological evolution to linguistic evolution.

>>The "Great English Vowel Shift" is a diachronical example of abrupt
>>system change...  I think it's futile to look for `causes' of the
>>Vowel Shift: there aren't any. Not in the social sphere, much less in
>>the biological/genetic sphere.
>
>What makes you think it was abrupt?  There is evidence that a long chain of
>rather small changes over the course of about 300 years resulted in the GEVS.
>I believe that Donegan wrote a paper published in the Ohio State Working 
>Papers in Linguistics (probably listed under P. D. Miller) around 1974, as 
>part of her work on processes which affect vowels, on this very question.

What prompted my remark on the GEVS was mainly the fact that it affects
vowels (where it makes sense to even talk about `gradual' changes).
However, vowels are arranged in a phonological system: a "random
mutation" in only one sound, can cause a chain-reaction ("push-chain")
that changes the phonological system abruptly.  This fits in well
with the "punctuated equilibrium" model.  Random variations in the
phonetic realization of (vowel) sounds are always present as "back-
ground noise": allophones, speech-defects, realizations in rapid
speech, etc.   This is the "equilibrium" state.  The equilibrium
can be suddenly disrupted (`punctuated') by a particularly "strong"
mutation.  Social factors can be important here, undoubtedly.  I
don't know much about the details of the GEVS, but I suspect that
it might have been a London phenomenon at first, which spread due
to the social and political influence of the capital.   But the
change itself (why a: => ei, i: => ai, etc.?) cannot be explained
by sociology or much less genetics.  It only makes sense to study 
it within the context of linguistics itself (phonetics and phonology).

-- 
Miguel Carrasquer         ____________________  ~~~
Amsterdam                [                  ||]~  
mcv@inter.NL.net         ce .sig n'est pas une .cig 
