1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Journal of Historical Linguistics
  4. Online First Articles
  5. Online First Article
image of Sound changes are selected by a bias against morphotactic ambiguity
PDF
EPUB

Abstract

Abstract

This paper hypothesises that there is a universal cognitively and semiotically grounded preference for word-form shapes that signal the morphotactic structure of the word forms they represent. By exploring three historical changes in English, we demonstrate how such a bias might plausibly constrain the actuation and implementation of sound changes. The changes we discuss are the emergence of /z/ as the underlying form in English plural, genitive, and 3rd person present suffixes; Middle English Open Syllable Lengthening; and the emergence and stabilization of irregular past tense and participle forms ending on sonorant+/t/ clusters instead of the expected ones resulting from regular /d/-suffixation. The present study shows how a preference for morphotactically indicative (and unambiguous) word-form shapes can be detected and measured and suggests that the existence of such a preference appears to be highly plausible. We conclude by pointing to more ways in which this hypothesis can be tested and potentially corroborated.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/jhl.24034.boh
2026-02-19
2026-03-17

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/jhl.24034.boh
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/10.1075/jhl.24034.boh/jhl.24034.boh.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1075/jhl.24034.boh&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Ambridge, Ben, Evan Kidd, Caroline F. Rowland & Anna L. Theakston
    2015 The Ubiquity of Fre-Quency Effects in First Language Acquisition. Journal of Child Language:.–. 10.1017/S030500091400049X
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S030500091400049X [Google Scholar]
  2. Baumann, Andreas & Kamil Kaźmierski
    2016 A Dynamical-Systems Approach to the Evolution of Morphonotactic and Lexical Consonant Clusters in English and Polish. Yearbook of the Poznan Linguistic Meeting:.–. 10.1515/yplm‑2016‑0006
     https://doi.org/10.1515/yplm-2016-0006 [Google Scholar]
  3. 2018 Assessing the Effect of Ambiguity in Compositionality Signaling on the Processing of Diphones. Language Sciences.–. 10.1016/j.langsci.2018.03.006
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2018.03.006 [Google Scholar]
  4. Baumann, Andreas, Christina Prömer & Nikolaus Ritt
    2019 Wordform Shapes are Selected to be Morphotactically Indicative. Folia Linguistic Historica:.–. 10.1515/flih‑2019‑0007
     https://doi.org/10.1515/flih-2019-0007 [Google Scholar]
  5. 2020 Reconstructing the Diffusion of Middle English Schwa Deletion. Italian Journal of Linguistics:.–. 10.26346/1120‑2726‑154
     https://doi.org/10.26346/1120-2726-154 [Google Scholar]
  6. Bermúdez-Otero, Ricardo
    1998 Prosodic Optimization: The Middle English Length Adjustment. English Language and Linguistics:.–. 10.1017/S1360674300000848
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674300000848 [Google Scholar]
  7. Blevins, Juliette
    2004 Evolutionary Phonology: The Emergence of Sound Patterns. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486357
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486357 [Google Scholar]
  8. 2006 A Theoretical Synopsis of Evolutionary Phonology. Theoretical Linguistics:.–. 10.1515/TL.2006.009
     https://doi.org/10.1515/TL.2006.009 [Google Scholar]
  9. 2009 Structure-Preserving Sound Change: A Look at Unstressed Vowel Syncope in Austronesian. Austronesian Historical Linguistics and Culture History: A Festschrift for Robert Blusted. byK. Alexander Adelaar, Andrew Pawley & Robert A. Blust, –. Canberra: Pacific Linguistics.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Blust, Robert A.
    2007 Disyllabic Attractors and Anti-Antigemination in Austronesian Sound Change. Phonology:.–. 10.1017/S0952675707001108
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675707001108 [Google Scholar]
  11. Böhm, Irene
    2021 Exploring Morphonotactics. An Iterated Learning Experiment of Consonant Clusters. University of Vienna MA Thesis.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Bybee, Joan L.
    1999 Usage-Based Phonology. Functionalism and Formalism in Linguistics (Volume 1: General Papers)ed. byMichael Darnell, Edith A. Moravcsik, Michael Noonan, Frederick J. Newmeyer & Kathleen Wheatley, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/slcs.41.12byb
     https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.41.12byb [Google Scholar]
  13. 2007 Frequency of Use and the Organization of Language. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195301571.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195301571.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  14. Celata, Chiara, Katharina Korecky-Kröll, Irene Ricci & Wolfgang U. Dressler
    2015 Phonotactic Processing and Morpheme Boundaries: Word-Final/Cst/Clusters in German. Italian Journal of Linguistics.–.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Christiansen, Morten H. & Nick Chater
    2008 Language as Shaped by the Brain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences:.–. 10.1017/S0140525X08004998
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X08004998 [Google Scholar]
  16. Croft, William
    2000 Explaining Language Change: An Evolutionary Approach. Harlow & New York: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Dautriche, Isabelle, Kyle Mahowald, Edward Gibson & Steven T. Piantadosi
    2017 Wordform Similarity Increases with Semantic Similarity: An Analysis of 100 Languages. Cognitive Science:.–. 10.1111/cogs.12453
     https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12453 [Google Scholar]
  18. Davies, Mark
    2008– The Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA). Available online athttps://www.english-corpora.org/coca/
     [Google Scholar]
  19. 2017 Early English Books Online Corpus (EEBO). Available online athttps://www.english-corpora.org/eebo/
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Divjak, Dagmar
    2019 Frequency in Language: Memory, Attention and Learning. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781316084410
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316084410 [Google Scholar]
  21. Dressler, Wolfgang U. & Katarzyna Dziubalska-Kołaczyk
    2006 Proposing Morphonotactis. Wiener Linguistische Gazette.–.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Dressler, Wolfgang U., Miroslava Hliničanová, Matej Ďurčo, Karlheinz Mörth & Katharina Korecky-Kröll
    2015 Phonotactic vs. Morphonotactic Obstruent Clusters in Slovak and German. Italian Journal of Linguistics:.–.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Dressler, Wolfgang U., Sabine Sommer-Lolei & Basilio Calderone
    eds. 2018 Experimental and Acquisitional Approaches to Morphonotactics. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Dressler, Wolfgang U.
    2019 Natural Morphology. Oxford Research Encyclopedias: Linguisticsed. byMark Aronoff. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.576
     https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780199384655.013.576 [Google Scholar]
  25. Dziubalska-Kołaczyk, Katarzyna
    2014 Explaining Phonotactics Using NAD. Language Sciences.–. 10.1016/j.langsci.2014.06.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2014.06.003 [Google Scholar]
  26. 2019 On the Structure, Survival and Change of Consonant Clusters. Folia Linguistic Historica:.–. 10.1515/flih‑2019‑0006
     https://doi.org/10.1515/flih-2019-0006 [Google Scholar]
  27. Freiberger, Eva M., Carmen Abbrederis, Franziska Luckabauer & Magdalena Stammler
    2011 Morphonotaktik in der Sprachverarbeitung: Online- und Offline-Tests mit deutschsprachigen Erwach-senen [Morphonotactics in Language Processing: Online and Offline Tests with German Speaking Adults]. Wiener Linguistische Gazette.–.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Gell-Mann, Murray
    1994 Complex Adaptive Systems. Complexity: Metaphors, Models, and Realityed. byGeorge A. Cowan, David Pines, David E. Meltzer, –. Reading: Addison-Wesley.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Gibson, Edward, Richard Futrell, Steven T. Piantadosi, Isabelle Dautriche, Kyle Mahowald, Leon Bergen & Roger Levy
    2019 How Efficiency Shapes Human Language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences:.–. 10.1016/j.tics.2019.02.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2019.02.003 [Google Scholar]
  30. Goldrick, Matthew & Meredith Larson
    2008 Phonotactic Probability Influences Speech Production. Cognition:.–. 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.11.009
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.11.009 [Google Scholar]
  31. Hay, Jennifer
    2004 Causes and Consequences of Word Structure. New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203495131
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203495131 [Google Scholar]
  32. Hay, Jessica F. & Jenny R. Saffran
    2012 Rhythmic Grouping Biases Constrain Infant Statistical Learning. Infancy:.–. 10.1111/j.1532‑7078.2011.00110.x
     https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1532-7078.2011.00110.x [Google Scholar]
  33. Hogg, Richard M. & Christopher B. McCully
    1987 Metrical Phonology: A Course Book. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Honeybone, Patrick
    2008 Lenition, Weaking and Consonantal Strength: Tracing Concepts through the History of Phonology. Lenition and Fortition (Volume 99)ed. byJoaquim Brandão de Carvalho, Tobias Scheer & Philippe Ségéral, –. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110211443.1.9
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110211443.1.9 [Google Scholar]
  35. Hurford, James R.
    2007 The Origins of Meaning: Language in the Light of Evolution. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Jusczyk, Peter W., Paul Smolensky & Theresa Allocco
    2002 How English-Learning Infants Respond to Markedness and Faithfulness Constraints. Language Acquisition:.–. 10.1207/S15327817LA1001_3
     https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327817LA1001_3 [Google Scholar]
  37. Kamandulytė-Merfeldienė, Laura
    2006 The Acquisition of Morphonotactics in Lithuanian. Wiener Linguistische Gazette.–.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. 2015 Morphonotactics in L1 Acquisition of Lithuanian: TD vs. SLI. Eesti Rakenduslingvistika Ühingu Aastaraamat.–. 10.5128/ERYa11.06
     https://doi.org/10.5128/ERYa11.06 [Google Scholar]
  39. Kelić, Maja & Wolfgang U. Dressler
    2019 The Development of Morphonotactic and Phonotactic Word–Initial Consonant Clusters in Croatian First–Language Acquisition. Suvremena Lingvistika:.–.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Kelley, Matthew C. & Benjamin V. Tucker
    2017 The Effects of Phonotactic Probability on Auditory Recognition of Pseudo-Words. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America:.. 10.1121/1.4989319
     https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4989319 [Google Scholar]
  41. Kirby, Simon
    1999 Function, Selection, and Innateness: The Emergence of Language Universals. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198238119.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198238119.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  42. 2012 Language is an Adaptive System: The Role of Cultural Evolution in the Origins of Structure. The Oxford Handbook of Language Evolutioned. byMaggie Tallerman & Kathleen Rita Gibson, –. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Korecky-Kröll, Katharina, Wolfgang U. Dressler, Eva M. Freiberger, Eva Reinisch, Karlheinz Mörth & Gary Libben
    2014 Morphonotactic and Phonotactic Processing in German-Speaking Adults. Language Sciences.–. 10.1016/j.langsci.2014.06.006
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langsci.2014.06.006 [Google Scholar]
  44. Kroch, Anthony, Beatrice Santorini & Lauren Delfs
    2004 Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Early Modern English (PPCEME). Available online atwww.ling.upenn.edu/hist-corpora/
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Kroch, Anthony & Ann Taylor
    2000 Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Middle English (PPCME). Avail-able online atwww.ling.upenn.edu/hist-corpora/
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Labov, William
    1989 The Child as Linguistic Historian. Language Variation & Change:.–. 10.1017/S0954394500000120
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394500000120 [Google Scholar]
  47. Lahiri, Aditi
    2008 The Dental Preterites in the History of English. The Nature of the Word: Studies in Honor of Paul Kiparskyed. byKristin Hanson & Sharon Inkelas, –. Cambridge: MIT Press. 10.7551/mitpress/7894.003.0026
     https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/7894.003.0026 [Google Scholar]
  48. Lahiri, Aditi & Elan B. Dresher
    1999 Open Syllable Lengthening in West Germanic. Language:.–. 10.2307/417730
     https://doi.org/10.2307/417730 [Google Scholar]
  49. Laing, Margaret
    2013 A Linguistic Atlas of Early Middle English, 1150–1325 (LAEME). Edinburgh: The University of Edinburgh. Available online athttps://www.amc.lel.ed.ac.uk/amc-projects-hub/project/laeme/
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Lass, Roger
    1992 Phonology and Morphology. The Cambridge History of the English Language (Volume II: 1066–1476)ed. byNorman Blake, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CHOL9780521264754.003
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CHOL9780521264754.003 [Google Scholar]
  51. Levshina, Natalia
    2022 Frequency, Informativity and Word Length: Insights from Typologically Diverse Corpora. Entropy:.. 10.3390/e24020280
     https://doi.org/10.3390/e24020280 [Google Scholar]
  52. Luick, Karl
    1964 Historische Grammatik der englischen Sprache [Historical Grammer of the English Language]. Leipzig: Tauchnitz.
     [Google Scholar]
  53. Mailhammer, Robert, William W. Kruger & Alexander Makiyama
    2015 Type Frequency Influences Phonological Generalizations: Eliminating Stressed Open Syllables with Short Vowels in West Germanic. Journal of Germanic Linguistics:.–. 10.1017/S1470542715000069
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1470542715000069 [Google Scholar]
  54. Martin, Andrew T.
    2007 The Evolving Lexicon. University of CaliforniaPhD dissertation.
  55. Matzinger, Theresa & Nikolaus Ritt
    2022 Phonotactically Probable Word Shapes Represent Attractors in the Cultural Evolution of Sound Patterns. Cognitive Linguistics:.–. 10.1515/cog‑2021‑0087
     https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2021-0087 [Google Scholar]
  56. Minkova, Donka
    1982 The Environment for Open Syllable Lengthening in Middle English. Folia Linguistica Historica:.–. 10.1515/flih.1982.3.1.29
     https://doi.org/10.1515/flih.1982.3.1.29 [Google Scholar]
  57. 1991 The History of Final Vowels in English: The Sound of Muting. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110889512
     https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110889512 [Google Scholar]
  58. 2009 Phonological Weakness in English: From Old to Present-Day English. Basingstoke & New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978‑0‑230‑29686‑2
     https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-230-29686-2 [Google Scholar]
  59. Minkova, Donka & Michael Lefkowitz
    2021 Middle English Open Syllable Lengthening (MEOSL) or Middle English Compensatory Lengthening (MECL)?English Language and Linguistics:.–. 10.1017/S1360674319000522
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674319000522 [Google Scholar]
  60. Pierrehumbert, Janet B.
    2001 Exemplar Dynamics: Word frequency, Lenition and Contrast. Frequency Effects and the Emergence of Linguistic Structureed. byJoan L. Bybee & Paul Hopper, –. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.45.08pie
     https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.45.08pie [Google Scholar]
  61. 2003 Phonetic Diversity, Statistical Learning, and Acquisition of Phonology. Language and Speech:.–. 10.1177/00238309030460020501
     https://doi.org/10.1177/00238309030460020501 [Google Scholar]
  62. Post, Brechtje, William D. Marslen-Wilson, Billi Randall & Lorraine K. Tyler
    2008 The Processing of English Regular Inflections: Phonological Cues to Morphological Structure. Cognition:.–. 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.06.011
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.06.011 [Google Scholar]
  63. Reali, Florencia & Thomas L. Griffiths
    2009 The Evolution of Frequency Distributions: Relating Regularization to Inductive Biases through Iterated Learning. Cognition:.–. 10.1016/j.cognition.2009.02.012
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2009.02.012 [Google Scholar]
  64. Ringe, Don
    2003 Internal Reconstruction. The Handbook of Historical Linguisticsed. byRichard D. Janda & Brian D. Joseph, –. Malden: Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470756393.ch3
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470756393.ch3 [Google Scholar]
  65. Ritt, Nikolaus
    2004 Selfish Sounds and Linguistic Evolution. A Darwinian Approach to Language Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486449
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486449 [Google Scholar]
  66. 2009 Exploring Middle English (Mor-)Phonotactics: The Case of Word-Final /nd/. Journal of the Spanish Society for Medieval English Language and Literature.–. 10.17811/selim.16.2009.65‑89
     https://doi.org/10.17811/selim.16.2009.65-89 [Google Scholar]
  67. Ritt, Nikolaus & Kamil Kaźmierski
    2016 How Rarities Like Gold Came to Exist: On Co-Evolutionary Interactions between Morphology and Lexical Phonotactics. English Language and Linguistics:. –. 10.1017/S1360674315000040
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674315000040 [Google Scholar]
  68. Ritt, Nikolaus, Christina Prömer & Andreas Baumann
    2017 Evolution of Consonant Clusters in English (ECCE): A Diachronic Phonotactic Database. University of Vienna. Available online athttps://ecce.acdh.oeaw.ac.at/
     [Google Scholar]
  69. Saffran, Jenny R., Richard N. Aslin & Elissa L. Newport
    1996 Statistical Learning by 8-Month-Old Infants. Science:.–. 10.1126/science.274.5294.1926
     https://doi.org/10.1126/science.274.5294.1926 [Google Scholar]
  70. Smith, Kenny
    2006 Cultural Evolution of Language. Encyclopaedia of Language and Linguisticsed. byKeith Brown, –. 2nd ed. Oxford: Elsevier. 10.1016/B0‑08‑044854‑2/04742‑8
     https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/04742-8 [Google Scholar]
  71. Smith, Kenny & Elizabeth Wonnacott
    2010 Eliminating Unpredictable Variation through Iterated Learning. Cognition:.–. 10.1016/j.cognition.2010.06.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2010.06.004 [Google Scholar]
  72. Sommer-Lolei, Sabine, Katharina Korecky-Kröll & Wolfgang U. Dressler
    2018 Acquisition and Processing of (Mor)Phonotactic Patterns of German Consonant Clusters. Experimental and acquisitional approaches to Morphonotacticsed. byWolfgang U. Dressler, Sabine Sommer-Lolei & Basilio Calderone, –. Vienna: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften.
     [Google Scholar]
  73. Storkel, Holly L.
    2001 Learning New Words: Phonotactic Probability in Language Development. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research:.–. 10.1044/1092‑4388(2001/103)
     https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2001/103) [Google Scholar]
  74. Szigetvári, Péter & Geoff Lindsey
    2013 Current British English: searchable transcriptions (CUBE). Available online atwww.cubedictionary.org
     [Google Scholar]
  75. Tamariz, Mónica
    2017 Experimental Studies on the Cultural Evolution of Language. Annual Review of Linguistics:.–. 10.1146/annurev‑linguistics‑011516‑033807
     https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-linguistics-011516-033807 [Google Scholar]
  76. Tamariz, Mónica & Simon Kirby
    2016 The Cultural Evolution of Language. Current Opinion in Psychology:–. 10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.09.003
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.09.003 [Google Scholar]
  77. Vitevitch, Michael S. & Faisal M. Aljasser
    2021 Phonotactics in Spoken-Word Recognition. The Handbook of Speech Perception (2nd ed.)ed. byJennifer S. Pardo, Lynne C. Nygaard, Robert E. Remez & David B. Pisoni, –. Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell. 10.1002/9781119184096.ch11
     https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119184096.ch11 [Google Scholar]
  78. Vitevitch, Michael S. & Paul A. Luce
    1998 When Words Compete: Levels of Processing in Perception of Spoken Words. Psychological Science:.–. 10.1111/1467‑9280.00064
     https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00064 [Google Scholar]
  79. 1999 Probabilistic Phonotactics and Neighborhood Activation in Spoken Word Recognition. Journal of Memory and Language:.–. 10.1006/jmla.1998.2618
     https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1998.2618 [Google Scholar]
  80. Wedel, Andrew B.
    2006 Exemplar models, evolution and language change. The Linguistic Review:. –. 10.1515/TLR.2006.010
     https://doi.org/10.1515/TLR.2006.010 [Google Scholar]
  81. 2007 Feedback and Regularity in the Lexicon. Phonology:.–. 10.1017/S0952675707001145
     https://doi.org/10.1017/S0952675707001145 [Google Scholar]
  82. Wedel, Andrew B. & Ibrahim Fatkullin
    2017 Category Competition as a Driver of Category Contrast. Journal of Language Evolution:.–. 10.1093/jole/lzx009
     https://doi.org/10.1093/jole/lzx009 [Google Scholar]
  83. Wełna, Jerzy
    2009 The Post-Sonorant Devocing of [d] in the Past/Past Participle Forms of Weak Verbs (Sent, Spend, etc.). Þe laurer of oure Englische tongeed. byMarcin Krygier & Liliana Sikorska, –. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
     [Google Scholar]
  84. Wright, Richard
    2004 A Review of Perceptual Cues and Robustness. Phonetically Based Phonologyed. byBruce Hayes, Robert Kirchner & Donca Steriade, –. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486401.002
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486401.002 [Google Scholar]
  85. Zydorowicz, Paulina
    2007 Polish Morphonotactics in First Language Acquisition. Wiener Linguistische Gazette.–.
     [Google Scholar]
  86. 2010 Consonant Clusters Across Morpheme Boundaries: Polish Morphonotactic Inventory and its Acquisition. Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics:.–. 10.2478/v10010‑010‑0028‑0
     https://doi.org/10.2478/v10010-010-0028-0 [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/jhl.24034.boh
Loading
Sound changes are selected by a bias against morphotactic ambiguity
John Benjamins ; https://doi.org/10.1075/jhl.24034.boh
/content/journals/10.1075/jhl.24034.boh
/content/journals/10.1075/jhl.24034.boh
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: evolutionary linguistics ; ambiguity ; morphology ; morphonotactics ; sound change

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error