Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: THEORY: Verbs go irregular before our very eyes!

From:And Rosta <a.rosta@...>
Date:Friday, August 30, 2002, 12:07
John Cowan:
> And Rosta wrote: > > From the learner's point > > of view, none of this makes any difference; my point is just that from the > > analyst's point of view, varying degrees of ingenuity will find varying > > degrees of regularity. > > Granted. But the distinction between regularity and irregularity > is not purely an analytical convenience: there are testable differences > between what is processed by the syntax-rule-machine and what is > processed by the pattern-associator-machine. (We need to talk to > some Maori speakers with genetic defects!)
But systemic regularity and psycholinguistic regularity are not necessarily the same thing, given that the psycho evidence is that the more frequent a systemic regular is, the more likely it is to be stored preinflected & hence processed like an irregular.
> > More generally, though, I believe that unless (as in English) regular > > and irregular inflection have phonologically different repercussions, > > inflectional (ir)regularity is largely an irrelevance to the existing > > lexicon. > > Can you expand on this? What different repercussions, and what > existing lexicon?
The existing lexicon = words already existing in the language. Apart from that, I have no idea what I was trying to say. --And.