1887
Volume 16, Issue 1
  • ISSN 1387-6732
  • E-ISSN: 1570-6001
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Unger (2011) observes that Chinese characters do not observe a Zipfian distribution, and he uses this fact as evidence that Chinese characters do not represent words. He then goes on to suggest that they do not represent morphemes either. In this note I argue that Unger’s observation is neither new, nor is it necessary; and that, at least with respect to his claim about morphemes, it does not support the conclusion he wishes to make.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/wll.16.1.05spr
2013-01-01
2019-12-08
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/wll.16.1.05spr
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): character , Chinese , corpus , logogram , morpheme , phonogram , syllable , word and Zipf ’s Law

Most Cited This Month

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