Machine Componential Analysis of Kinship Vocabularies: An Example

The paper introduces a computer program to handle the task of componential analysis of kinship terms. Given the kin terms of a language with their attendant kin types, the program discovers all componential models, including the "simplest" ones (using the minimum number of dimensions and components in kin term definitions). As an illustrative example of the application of the program we use the kinship vocabulary of Catalan, a previously unanalyzed language. A completely unconstrained analysis of Catalan leads to an intolerably large number of alternative models but our simplicity restriction pertaining to choosing the minimum number of dimensions leads to a unique model. The generated componential model of Catalan uses four dimensions of contrast, viz. "sex", "generation", "distance" and "affinity", and coincides with that of Spanish. However, it is different from those of other Indo-European languages that also use for demarcation this very set of dimensions

On Redundancy in Describing Linguistic Systems

On Redundancy in Describing Linguistic SystemsThe notion of system of linguistic elements figures prominently in most post-Saussurian linguistics up to the present. A “system” is the network of the contrastive (or, distinctive) features each element in the system bears to the remaining elements. The meaning (valeur) of each element in the system is the set of features that are necessary and jointly sufficient to distinguish this element from all others. The paper addresses the problems of “redundancy”, i.e. the occurrence of features that are not strictly necessary in describing an element in a system. Redundancy is shown to smuggle into the description of linguistic systems, this infelicitous practice illustrated with some examples from the literature (e.g. the classical phonemic analysis of Russian by Cherry, Halle, and Jakobson, 1953). The logic and psychology of the occurrence of redundancy are briefly sketched and it is shown that, in addition to some other problems, redundancy leads to a huge and unresolvable ambiguity of descriptions of linguistic systems (the Buridan’s ass problem)

Kin term patterns and language familie

Kin term patterns and language familieThe anthropologist G. P. Murdock has found a strong correlation between the kin term patterns (or feature-values) for the relative (feature) “sibling” and language families. This important finding for language classification, however, has not been pursued further. In particular, it has not yet been tested whether the kin term patterns domain as a whole, including the patterns for other features (“grandparents”, “uncles”, “aunts”, “nephews and nieces”, etc.), is sufficient to demarcate all language families from one another. This paper presents a large-scale computational profiling of all language families in terms of their kin term patterns. The most significant findings are: (i) that language families can be quite neatly differentiated on the basis of their kin term patterns, and therefore these patterns may be considered as strong indicators of genetic affiliation, and (ii) that the kin term patterns for the features “nephews and nieces (= siblings' children)”, “siblings”, and “siblings-in-law” — i.e. all features including the idea of siblings — are the best predictors of genetic affiliation, as they are significantly more frequently used in the profiles than any other feature.  Modele terminologii powinowactwa i pokrewieństwa a rodzina językowaAntropolog G. P. Murdock odkrył silny związek między modelami powinowactwa i pokrewieństwa dla krewnych (rodzeństwa) a rodzinami językowymi. To ważne odkrycie w klasyfikacji języków nie było odpowiednio dalej wykorzystywane. W szczególności nie sprawdzono jeszcze, czy domena modeli powinowactwa i pokrewieństwa jako całości, w tym modele dla innych cech („dziadkowie”, „wujkowie”, „ciotki”, „siostrzeńcy i siostrzenice” itp.) są wystarczająco ukształtowane we wszystkich rodzinach językowych. W niniejszym artykule przedstawiono profilowanie komputerowe na dużą skalę wszystkich rodzin językowych pod kątem ich modeli powinowactwa i pokrewieństwa. Najważniejsze wnioski są następujące: (i) rodziny językowe mogą być zróżnicowane na podstawie modeli powinowactwa i pokrewieństwa, dlatego też te modele mogą być uważane za silne wskaźniki genetycznej przynależności, oraz (ii) modele dla cechy „siostrzeńcy i siostrzenice (= dzieci rodzeństwa)”, „rodzeństwo” i „rodzeństwo przyrodnie” - czyli wszystkie cechy, w tym rodzeństwa - są najlepszymi przesłankami genetycznej przynależności, ponieważ są znacznie częściej używane w profilach niż jakakolwiek inna funkcja

Universals, Their Violation and the Notion of Phonologically Peculiar Languages

A language can be said to be “peculiar ” if it violates a universal pattern that admits only very few exceptions. In the paper, we propose a typology of phonological peculiarities concerning the content of segment inventories, and deal in detail with one of these types. The type involves the illegitimate absence of a segment that an implicational universal predicts should actually be present in the segment inventory of a language. A computer program retrieved 33 phonological peculiarities of this type in the UCLA Phonological Segment Inventory Database (UPSID), comprising 451 languages. It turned out that 391 of these languages had no peculiarity of the type studied, 43 had one, and 17 more than one peculiarity. Some observations are made regarding the last category of 17 “strongly peculiar ” languages. In particular, it is shown that despite their strong phonological idiosyncrasy, the peculiar languages have only a limited variability in that they cannot violate more than six universals or have more than three distinct segments lacking

Machine componential analysis of Bulgarian kinship terminology and more on the problem of multiple solutions

Machine componential analysis of Bulgarian kinship terminology and more on the problem of multiple solutionsThe Bulgarian kin terms of reference and address are subjected to componential analysis, using the sophisticated computer program KINSHIP. It is shown that an unconstrained and separate analysis of the two sets of terms yields an astronomical number of alternative componential models for each, threatening to compromise the componential method as a whole. However, after combining the set of reference and the set of address terms into a unitary kin term domain and applying the program to this new enlarged data set, further employing appropriate simplicity criteria on overall features (=dimensions) and components of kin term definitions, yields a unique componential model. This result is evaluated in the context of a famous debate on the problems of multiple solutions of kinship systems. It is concluded that componential analysis properly used is an indispensable tool for revealing the structuring of semantic domains