Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • 10 - Language emergence

  • from Part II - Process and formation
  • Edited by N. J. Enfield, Paul Kockelman, Yale University, Connecticut, Jack Sidnell, University of Toronto
  • Book:
    The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Anthropology
    Published online:
    05 October 2014
    Print publication:
    11 September 2014, pp 250-284

  • Summary

    This chapter illustrates the various ways in which languages differ from each other and then raises the question in what sense one can talk about universals despite this apparent diversity and variation. It reviews the extent of the diversity that we know from today's languages in the world, by highlighting the core domains of language: phonology, morphology, syntax, and semantics. In the chapter, the author uses the term language in the sense of a structure identifier, and applies it to any kind of variant set of structures, including dialects, sociolects, and idiolects. The range and nature of absolute universals depends entirely on the nature of the analysis and the descriptive metalanguage that one uses for a particular phenomenon. The criterion of historical realism is foundational for research on statistical as opposed to absolute universals because statistical universals are fundamentally historical in nature.