<div dir="ltr">Of course it's not necessarily the case that morphologically complex words are usually parsed morpheme-by-morpheme online, especially with high frequency, frequency which might be enhanced in small societies.<div><br></div><div>Marianne</div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 11:03 AM Heath Jeffrey <<a href="mailto:schweinehaxen@hotmail.com">schweinehaxen@hotmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0)">
An object lesson about correlations between societal complexity and linguistic complexity is the trajectory of Trudgill's work. His original basic idea was that small, tightly-knit societies allow (and perhaps favor) complex phonemic inventories and opaque
morphology to develop. If you read "Sociolinguistic Typology" from cover to cover, you get the sense that halfway through writing it he realized that small, tightly-knit societies can also allow highly simple systems (like those David has brought to our attention).
So large-population national languages are stuck in a narrow range in the middle, while those of small tightly-knit ones can range widely in both directions. Not fully elucidated by Trudgill but implied by his results: the common denominator between very high
complexity and very low complexity is that both types of language put a high cognitive burden on the listener, who must either quickly parse words that contain many tiny morphemes in complex networks on the one hand, or must infer the speaker's meaning from
limited lexical input on the other hand. It's cognitive complexity in this shifty sense, not mechanically computed complexity (number of phonemes, morphemes-per-word counts, etc.), that we should be looking at. But this doesn't make research methodology any
easier. </div>
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%">
<div id="m_7184812083100803328divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font face="Calibri, sans-serif" style="font-size:11pt" color="#000000"><b>From:</b> Lingtyp <<a href="mailto:lingtyp-bounces@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">lingtyp-bounces@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>> on behalf of David Gil <<a href="mailto:gil@shh.mpg.de" target="_blank">gil@shh.mpg.de</a>><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, October 1, 2018 12:18 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Martin Kohlberger<br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a href="mailto:lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>; <a href="mailto:josephdbrooks@ucsb.edu" target="_blank">josephdbrooks@ucsb.edu</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Lingtyp] Temporal features?</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div class="m_7184812083100803328BodyFragment"><font size="2"><span style="font-size:11pt">
<div class="m_7184812083100803328PlainText">Martin,<br>
<br>
On 01/10/2018 22:45, Martin Kohlberger wrote:<br>
> Dear David,<br>
><br>
> Following Joseph's comment, I really don't follow your point. How <br>
> does your "national language" value necessarily correlate with greater <br>
> socio-political complexity compared to a "local language only recently <br>
> part of larger polity"? Are you implying that communities which speak <br>
> a local language that is not part of a larger polity are necessarily <br>
> socio-politically less complex than communities which speak a national <br>
> language?<br>
More or less, yes, that's what I'm implying. Nation states have <br>
multiple levels of jurisdictional hieraerchy; they have newspapers, <br>
public transport, bureaucracies, football leagues, universities, you <br>
name it. Hunter-gatherer societies have essentially none of the above.<br>
<br>
(I'm not quite sure what the source of the misunderstanding is. If it <br>
has anything to do with apparent value judgements, I should emphasize <br>
that there is nothing inherently better or worse in being more complex, <br>
be it grammatically or socio-politically.)<br>
<br>
David<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
David Gil<br>
<br>
Department of Linguistic and Cultural Evolution<br>
Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History<br>
Kahlaische Strasse 10, 07745 Jena, Germany<br>
<br>
Email: <a href="mailto:gil@shh.mpg.de" target="_blank">gil@shh.mpg.de</a><br>
Office Phone (Germany): +49-3641686834<br>
Mobile Phone (Indonesia): +62-81281162816<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Lingtyp mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
<a href="https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flistserv.linguistlist.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flingtyp&data=02%7C01%7C%7C76205e5dc78d4c69d8b508d627b98c2a%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636740075199345121&sdata=WctENG%2BNjJyDPELtreASiiUqiQaQLVwrIcT5LCzA3IQ%3D&reserved=0" target="_blank">https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Flistserv.linguistlist.org%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Flingtyp&data=02%7C01%7C%7C76205e5dc78d4c69d8b508d627b98c2a%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C636740075199345121&sdata=WctENG%2BNjJyDPELtreASiiUqiQaQLVwrIcT5LCzA3IQ%3D&reserved=0</a><br>
</div>
</span></font></div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Lingtyp mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
</blockquote></div>