28.4755, Review: Morphology; Phonology; Semantics; Syntax: Coloma (2016)

[The LINGUIST List]

LINGUIST List: Vol-28-4755. Thu Nov 09 2017. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.

Subject: 28.4755, Review: Morphology; Phonology; Semantics; Syntax: Coloma (2016)

Moderators: linguist at linguistlist.org (Damir Cavar, Malgorzata E. Cavar)
Reviews: reviews at linguistlist.org (Helen Aristar-Dry, Robert Coté,
                                   Michael Czerniakowski)
Homepage: http://linguistlist.org

Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
           http://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/

Editor for this issue: Clare Harshey <clare at linguistlist.org>
================================================================


Date: Thu, 09 Nov 2017 16:22:26
From: Laura Dubcovsky [lauradubcovsky at gmail.com]
Subject: La complejidad de los idiomas

 
Discuss this message:
http://linguistlist.org/pubs/reviews/get-review.cfm?subid=36307597


Book announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/28/28-562.html

AUTHOR: Germán  Coloma
TITLE: La complejidad de los idiomas
PUBLISHER: Peter Lang AG
YEAR: 2016

REVIEWER: Laura Dubcovsky, University of California, Davis

REVIEWS EDITOR: Helen Aristar-Dry

SUMMARY

The book “La Complejidad de los Idiomas” (“Languages’ Complexity”) by Germán
Coloma, intends to operationalize the construct of language complexity by
using computational measures and quantifiable variables. The author shows
mathematical models, hypotheses, and formulas that may pave the path to a more
informed and accurate notion of complexity in the different linguistic
categories.  He describes languages as well-organized and regulated systems,
driven by forces of efficiency and stability. Above all the author emphasizes
the book’s synergetic focus, which integrates linguistic and extralinguistic
variables. Therefore notions of linguistic families, linguistic areas, diverse
speaking populations and number of speakers will be integral to the
quantitative analysis, adding more layers to the conceptualization of language
complexity.

In Chapter One, “Conceptos de Complejidad” (“Complexity Concepts”), Coloma
focuses on definitions of complexity. He explains how the meaning of
simple/complex languages varies, according to the use of relative or absolute
terms, and of local or general assumptions. For example, when described in
relative terms, the Portuguese language sounds easier to Spanish speakers,
because of the proximity to their native language, but difficult to speakers
of Chinese. To avoid fluctuations and discrepancies, most studies adopt
absolute terms, and use languages’ number of components, grammatical rules,
and other stable criteria to define their complexities.  Additionally, taking
up a local perspective may bring detailed and more precise information, while
following a global perspective may gain breadth and scope of the definition. 
Coloma also describes briefly main language categories, which are fully
developed in consecutive chapters, and characterizes the opposing theoretical
approaches of formalists (Chomsky, 1965) and functionalists (Greenberg, 1966).
Finally he introduces the two sources that provide the data of his study: the
World Atlas of Language Structures--hereafter WALS- (Dryer and Haspelmath,
2013), and the short fable “El Viento Norte y el Sol” (“The Northern Wind and
the Sun”) mentioned in Martínez et al. (2003). 

The second chapter, “Medición de la Complejidad” (“Complexity Measurement”)
describes the nature and limitations of two types of measures, and explains
relevant formulas and mathematical procedures that are used throughout the
book.  On the one hand theoretical measures are supported by general
grammatical rules and typologies. They compare universal paradigms to
particular language systems, either across categories or within specific
components, by means of deductive methods. For example, scholars can estimate
theoretically the phonological complexity of particular vowels by contrasting
them to the paradigmatic sound system.  On the other hand, empirical measures
focus on particular texts and their socio-cultural contexts, and use inductive
methods for the analyses. For example, scholars can measure empirically the
lexical complexity by estimating the ratio between lexical and grammatical
words and their occurrences in the specific text.  Both types of measures have
limitations and face their own challenges. While general typologies cannot
account for the number of components or categorical classifications used in
particular languages, empirical measures struggle to compare different text
types, as they vary dramatically in length, genres and vocabulary. In the
second part of the chapter Coloma explains two useful tools of analysis. The
“Kolmogorov complexity” (1963) metric measures the ratio between the size of a
compacted text and the corresponding size of the original text.  The
“Menzerath Law” (1959) predicts that the measure of one linguistic element is
negatively correlated with the measure of the components of that element.  

The following four chapters focus on one particular language category
separately. Chapter 3 describes “Complejidad fonológica” (“Phonological
Complexity”). Coloma starts by characterizing vowels and consonants and the
general sound system. Then he highlights the distinctive traits of accent and
tones, with influence at the sound level. Spanish has an accentual system that
brings about changes in meanings and functions. For example, the different
stress’ positions in “médico” (“doctor”), “medico” (“I medicate”), and
“medicó”  (“s/he medicated”), indicate the profession (as a noun), the verb in
present tense and first person, and in preterit and third person,
respectively.  Likewise tonal languages use distinctive tones to differentiate
meanings of the same word, such as in Mandarin “ma,” means “mother,” when it
is expressed in a high tone; “horse,” in a low tone; “hemp plant,” in an
ascendant move from low to high tones; and “to nag,” in a descendant move from
high to low tones.  It seems that there is a negative correlation between
accents and tones (“Menzerath Law”), by which the more complex accentual
systems have simpler tones; and vice versa, languages with rich tonal systems
do not differentiate meanings by accents. The author completes the
phonological repertoire with the syllabic structure. He shows a broad range of
combinations between vowels (V) and consonants (C) among languages. For
example Spanish offers multiple possibilities of forming syllables, such as V,
CV, VC, CCV, VCC, CCVC, CCVCC.  

Chapter 4 examines “Complejidad Morfológica” (“Morphological Complexity”) at
the word level. First Coloma describes synthetic words that include several
components (morphemes) that mark specific functions. For example the Spanish
word “gat-it-a-s” (“she- kittens”) involves four morphemes with distinctive
functions:  “gat-” (for the meaning of feline), “-a” (feminine gender), “–s”
(plural number), and “-it-” (diminutive). Synthetic words contrast with
analytic, formed by just one morpheme that cannot be decomposed, such as the
Spanish word “sol” (“sun”).  The author also depicts words that can carry
various functions in only one morpheme, as it is typical in Spanish
conjugations. For example, the final vowel of “corr-o” (“I run”) shows a
fusion that condenses the mark for the verb tense (present), the person
(first), and the number (singular).  Among other morphological mechanisms are
composition, derivation and flexion.  The former takes place when independent
lexical morphemes form a new word, such as “sordo-mudo” (“deaf-mute”) in
Spanish.  In other cases, grammatical morphemes bring a distinctive function
to the original word. For example, the Spanish suffix “–mente,” and the
English suffix “-ly,” added at the end of an adjective, transform it into an
adverb, as in “rápida-mente” (“quick- ly”).  Finally, nominal and verbal
structures are highlighted because they contain a large number of markers,
such as gender, number and case; and verb tense, aspect, mode, person, number
and voice, respectively, which would bring higher levels of morphological
complexity. 

Chapter 5, “Complejidad Sintáctica” (“Syntax Complexity”), moves to the
sentence level, focusing on four main syntactic criteria. First, word order in
a sentence may be flexible or fixed, according to the degree of freedom of its
components. Coloma compares the word order of basic syntagms (subject- verb-
object) within and between languages, observing a freer and more variable word
order in Spanish than in English.  The second syntactic criterion is the
distance between the nucleus and the modifiers of a given structure.  The
author explains that the farther the modifying components are from the core,
the more syntactically complex the language is.  Another syntactic criterion
is the morphosyntactic alignment between the syntagms and their possible
functions. For example, in the sentence, “Mi mamá habla” (“My mom speaks”),
the nominal phrase represents an intransitive subject and does not carry any
additional marker. However, in the sentence, “Hablo a mi mamá” (“I speak to my
mom”) the same nominal phrase represents the direct object of an accusative
verb, and is preceded by a preposition -“a” (“to”)- that marks the transitive
relationship. The last criterion includes simple and complex structures, which
establish equal relations between coordinate clauses, or unequal relationships
between principal and subordinated clauses, adding a hierarchical and more
complex level of syntactic accessibility.

Chapter 6, “Complejidad Verbal y Léxica” (“Verbal and Lexical Complexity”)
includes the two systems announced in the title.  Within the verbal
complexity, Coloma elaborates on tense and aspect, although he also refers to
mode (indicative, subjunctive, imperative) and voice (active/passive). Among
different tense markers, the author describes the final vowel used in Spanish,
which indicates a fusion between verb tense, person, and number, as mentioned
in Chapter 4. For example the “–o” in “cant-o” (“I sing”) signals the present
tense in first person, and the “-é” in “cant-é” (“I sang”) the first person
preterit. English includes auxiliaries as tense markers, interjecting them
between the personal pronoun and the main verb. For example, “I will sing,”
indicates the future tense, and “I did not sing,” the negative form of the
preterit.  Some languages also incorporate more complicated tense systems,
like the Spanish pluscuamperfect, which is used to indicate a past event that
takes place before another event also in the past.  Moreover verbal complexity
may be expressed by aspects, which are ways of performing the action.
Languages may combine tenses and aspects, such as the Spanish distinction
between perfect/imperfect in the preterit, while others--like Mandarin--only
include aspects, and others only differentiate verb tenses, like English.

For the lexical complexity Coloma differentiates between lexical and
grammatical words. The former are independent and carry distinctive and stable
meanings, such as nouns, adjectives, and adverbs. The latter are functional
and have occasional meanings, such as pronouns, conjunctions and prepositions.
 The author emphasizes vocabulary as a clear artifact to measure lexical
complexity.  Typically, words are computed by the amount of entries in the
dictionary, and sometimes by ratios between number of words and text lengths.
However, the author claims that numbers alone are not sufficient to measure
lexical complexities.  He draws examples from the WALS data source and shows
an extended range of linguistic possibilities, which reflects the numerical
differences found among languages’ repertoires. Systems may repeat the same
word, pointing out many different meanings, or include null to a broad system
of articles (definite/indefinite). They may offer large inventories for
familiar categories, such as colors and family members, or refine the list of
personal pronouns according to more familiar/approachable or
respectful/distant types of treatments, etc.  Coloma then concludes that, as
necessary as computational measures are, other variables also account for
lexical complexities, such as phylogenetic, sociocognitive and cultural
factors. 

Chapter 7, “Relación entre Medidas de Complejidad” (“Relationship Between
Measures of Complexity”), revises statistical measures previously presented in
isolation or in binary opposition, and presents them in dynamic interactions.
Coloma shows through step-by-step procedures how to transform categorical
variables in numerical values, calculate correlations, and understand multiple
regressions. He explains the statistical notions, drawing from linguistic
scenarios.  Among other cases, the author describes a positive correlation
between analytic words and the neutral alignment (morphosyntactic category).
He also shows that the simple correlation between the tonal system and number
of phonemes (phonological category) can be better explained when a partial
correlation (e.g. syllabic structure) is incorporated. He clearly demonstrates
how languages with few tones and low number of phonemes have a negative
correlation with a complex syllabic variable, and conversely, languages with
many tones and phonemes are negatively correlated with simple syllabic
structure. Finally the author highlights the fact that the simultaneous
combination of measures would facilitate the findings of language tendencies
that would better explain the complexity construct. 

In the last chapter, “Conclusiones y Comentarios” (“Conclusions and
Comments”), Coloma summarizes theoretical notions, such as similarities and
differences among languages and within categories, and main principles that
guide the integration of linguistic and extralinguistic factors.  The author
also revises relevant tools, formulas and procedures used in the analysis. He
emphasizes the trade-off effect, which helps interpret negative correlations
correctly, and the equal complexity hypothesis, which brings into
consideration socio-cultural variables, such as the number of speakers, the
age of a language, and the phenomenon of languages in contact.  Coloma also
refer to the origin of language complexities and its development throughout
the years, and comments on the persistent dichotomy between innate and
acquired nature of language. Finally he underlines that the dynamic synergy
between statistical analyses and extralinguistic interactions would contribute
to a more sophisticated understanding of language complexities.  

EVALUATION

“La Complejidad de los Idiomas” (“The Complexity of Languages”) addresses
complex linguistic and statistical notions in clear and simple style. As
stated in the prologue, Coloma attempts to reach novice and experienced
readers interested in examining linguistic aspects quantitatively.  The author
gives straightforward explanations of mathematical concepts and procedures
along the chapters, and includes examples that link the statistical analysis
to language categories, in order to facilitate readers’ comprehension.  Being
an economist, Coloma situates his book in an interdisciplinary space, offering
a reading that intersects the fields of linguistics and mathematics.  The book
can also be incorporated as a reference text, especially in courses of applied
linguistics, second language acquisition and reading. Moreover and since the
book is written in Spanish, it can be extremely helpful in bilingual teaching
preparation programs, where there is a big need for academic materials written
in Spanish.  Faculty, students and researchers will benefit from Coloma’s
complete summaries and well organized ideas. 

In spite of the valuable strengths, the book also has some limitations. First
the author presents tables and figures throughout the chapters that are
neither titled nor numbered, and  they  do not even appear in the index of
contents. This absence represents a big challenge for readers interested in
following the unlabeled tables and figures along the book. Among the visual
representations, it is worth mentioning tables of contingencies, such as the
negative correlation between tone and accent (p. 78) and between verb tenses
and aspects (p. 153). Likewise Coloma inserts various figures, for example to
illustrate linguistic families (p.43) and compare vowel systems between
Spanish and English (p. 59).  Another limitation is given by the presentation
of quite advanced computational concepts and statistical procedures, unless
for an audience more  exposed to mathematical analyses.  The average reader
would need more guidance, not only to refresh mathematical notions and
practical mechanisms, but also to gain a deeper understanding of the reasoning
behind the concepts and be able to apply them in the linguistic field.

REFERENCES

Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Dryer, M. and M. Haspelmath (2013) The World Atlas of Language Structures
Online.  

Greenberg, J. (1966). Language universals. La Haya: Mouton.

Kolmogorov, A. (1963). On Tables of Random Numbers. Sankhya 25: 369-376.

Martínez Celdrán, E., et al. (2003). Illustrations of the IPA: Castilian
Spanish. Journal of the International Phonetic Association 33: 255-260.

Menzerath, P. (1954). Die Architektonik des deutschen Wortschatzes. Bonn:
Dümmler.


ABOUT THE REVIEWER

Laura Dubcovsky is a retired lecturer and supervisor from the Teacher
Education Program in the School of Education at the University of California,
Davis. With a Master’s in Education and a PhD in Spanish linguistics /with
special emphasis on second language acquisition, her interests tap topics of
language and bilingual education. She is currently dedicated to the
preparation of in service bilingual Spanish/English teachers, especially on
the use of Spanish for educational purposes. She also volunteers as
interpreter in parent/teachers conferences at schools and translates programs
and flyers for the Crocker Art Museum, bilingual school programs and STEAC.
She also collaborates as a reviewer with the Linguistic list serve and
bilingual associations. For more than ten years she has taught a pre-service
bilingual teachers’ course that addresses communicative and academic traits of
Spanish, needed in a bilingual classroom She published “Functions of the verb
decir (‘to say’) in the incipient academic Spanish writing of bilingual
children in Functions of Language, 15(2), 257-280 (2008) and the chapter,
“Desde California. Acerca de la narración en ámbitos bilingües” in ¿Cómo
aprendemos y cómo enseñamos la narración oral? (2015). Rosario, Homo
Sapiens:127- 133.





------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*****************    LINGUIST List Support    *****************
Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
            http://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/
 


----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-28-4755	
----------------------------------------------------------