Deflexion (linguistics)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Deflexion is a linguistic process related to inflectional languages (like all members of the Indo-European language family) reflecting a gradual decline of the inflectional morphemes (atomic semantic units) bound to lexemes (abstract word units). Typically, word endings to indicate noun cases and verbal tenses are affected, leading to the loss of some inflectional affixes. Complete loss of the original subset of affixes combined with a development towards allomorphy and new morphology is associated with pidgin and creolization[1][2].

Directly related to deflexion is the fact that the languages become less synthetic and more analytic in nature.

Deflexion is a common feature of the history of many Indo-european languages. According to the Language Contact Hypothesis for Deflexion[3], supported by the comparison between Germanic languages[4], for instance, Icelandic and Afrikaans, this process is attributed to language contact. Specifically, the phenomenon occurs at the presence of large, influential groups of speakers that acquired the leading idiom as a second language[5] (L2 acquisition), thus by nature is limited to economical trade-offs widely considered as acceptable. Though gradual, English experienced a dramatic change from Old English being a moderately inflected language using a complex case system, to Modern English, considered a weakly inflected language or even analytic. Important deflexion changes first arrived into the English language with the North Sea Germanic (Ingvaeonic) shifts, shared by Frisian and Low German dialects, like merging accusative and dative cases into an objective case. Viking invasions and the subsequent Norman conquest accelerated the process. The importance of deflexion in the formative stage of a language can be illustrated by modern Dutch, where deflexion accounts for the overwhelming majority of linguistic changes in the last thousand years or more. Afrikaans virtually originated from Dutch by deflexion. French is another example of a language where deflexion has been exceptionally strong.

According to the unidirectionality hypothesis[6], deflexion should be subject to a semantically driven one-way cline of grammaticality. However, exceptions to the gradual diachronic process have been observed where the deflexion process diminished or came to a hold, or where inflexional case marking was occasionally reinforced.

[edit] Notes and references

  1. ^ Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, Elsevier, 2004, Pidgins affix dropping (6:3187)
  2. ^ Morphology in pidgins and Creoles, Ingo Plag, University of Siegen, Version of June 28, 2004, [1]
  3. ^ What are the factors that cause deflection? In order to answer this question, the Meertens Institute (KNAW) and the Amsterdam Center for Language and Communication (UvA) have started a research-program called Variation in Inflection, or simply Variflex [2]. “The loss of inflectional distinctions and the language contact hypothesis have often been discussed in the literature, but have never been the subject of extensive and integrated research. This is probably due to the need for a complex, multidisciplinary approach. Such a research programme would have to combine theoretical linguistics, diachronic linguistics, dialectology, first language acquisition and second language acquisition.”(The original Variflex proposal)
  4. ^ The Development of Case in Germanic - Jóhanna Barðdal, University of Bergen[3]
  5. ^ Weerman, F. (1993), The diachronic consequences of first and second language acquisition
  6. ^ Hopper, Paul J. and Elizabeth Closs Traugott: Grammaticalization, 1993, Cambridge University Press.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../d/e/f/Deflexion_%28linguistics%29.html"
In other languages