A lexico- and phonostatistic analysis of over 1200 coordinate and non-coordinate English freezes (sooner or later, dribs and drabs, razzle-dazzle) has shown that UNMARKED-BEFORE-MARKED is a very potent principle determining the order of compounded elements. One objectively measurable correlate of markedness – lexical and phonemic frequency – was analyzed. In coordinate freezes, first conjuncts (1) were significantly more frequent, (2) were segmentally and syllabically shorter, and (3) contained more voiceless obstruents than second conjuncts. In rhyme freezes, in addition to (2), as above, first conjuncts contained fewer sonorants, voiced obstruents, and labials than second conjuncts. In ablaut freezes, first conjuncts contained fewer diphthongs but more fronted vowels (higher F2), compared to second conjuncts. All these findings support the hypothesis that relative markedness probabilistically regulates the ordering of conjuncts in freezes.
Abraham, R.M. (1950). Fixed order in coordinates. Modern Language Journal, 34, 276–287.
2.
Allan, K. (1987). Hierarchies and the choice of left conjuncts (with particular attention to English). Journal of Linguistics, 23, 51–77.
3.
Battistella, E.L. (1990). Markedness. The Evaluative Superstructure of Language.New York: SUNY Press.
4.
Brown, A.F. (1963). Normal and Reverse English Word List.Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
5.
Carroll, J.B., Davies, P., and Richman, B. (1971). The American Heritage Word Frequency Book.Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
6.
Cedergren, H.J., and Sankoff, D. (1974). Variable rules: Performance as statistical reflection of competence. Language, 50, 333–355.
7.
Cooper, W.E., and Ross, J.R. (1975). World order. In R.E. Grossman, L.J. San, and T.J. Vance (eds.), Papers from the Parasession on Functionalistm (pp. 63–111). Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society.
8.
Danes, F. (ed.) (1974). Papers on Functional Sentence Perspective.Prague: Academia.
9.
Dogil, G., and Luschützky, H.C. (1990). Notes on sonority and segmental strength. Rivista di Linguistics, 2, 3–54.
10.
Dressler, W.U. (1990a). The cognitive perspective of ‘naturalist’ linguistic models. Cognitive Linguistics, 1, 75–98.
11.
Dressler, W.U. (1990b). Principles of naturalness in phonology and across components. Paper read at the annual meeting of SLE, Berne, September 18–21.
12.
Fenk-Oczlon, G. (1989). Word frequency and word order in freezes. Linguistics, 27, 517–556.
13.
Firbas, J. (1964). On defining the theme in functional sentence analysis. Travaux Linguistiques de Prague, 1, 267–279.
14.
Gamkrelidze, T.V. (1978). On the correlation of stops and fricatives in a phonological system. In J.H. Greenberg, (ed.), Universals of Human Language. Vol. 2: Phonology (pp. 9–46). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
15.
Greenberg, J.H. (1966a). Language Universals.The Hague: Mouton.
16.
Greenberg, J.H. (ed.) (1966b). Universals of Language.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press [2nd edition].
17.
Greenberg, J.H. (ed.) (1978). Universals of Human Language, Vol. 2: Phonology.Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
18.
Guiraud, P. (1966). Zagadnienia i Metody Statystyki Jêzykoznawczej.Warszawa: PWN.
19.
Hawkins, P. (1984). Introducing Phonology.London: Hutchinson.
20.
Herdan, G. (1964). Quantitative Linguistics.London: Butterworths.
21.
Jakobson, R., and Waugh, L. (1979). The Sound Shape of Language.Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
22.
Kuno, S. (1976). Subject, theme and the speaker's empathy -- A reexamination of relativization phenomena. In C. Li (ed.), Subject and Topic (pp. 417–444). New York: Academic Press.
23.
Ladefoged, P. (1975). A Course in Phonetics.New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Inc.
24.
Lakoff, G. (1987). Women, Fire and Dangerous Things.Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
25.
Malkiel, Y. (1959). Studies in irreversible binomials. Lingua, 8, 113–160.
26.
Mathesius, V. (1939). O tak zvanem aktuàlnim cleni vety. Slovo a slovenost, 5, 171–174.
27.
Mines, M.A., Hanson, B.F., and Shoup, J.E. (1978). Frequency of occurrence of phonemes in conversational English. Language and Speech, 21, 221–241.
28.
Pinker, S., and Birdsong, D. (1979). Speakers' sensitivity to rules of frozen word order. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 497–508.
29.
Ross, J.R. (1975). Parallels in phonological and semantactic organization. In J.F. Kavanagh and J.E. Cutting (eds.), The Role of Speech in Language (pp. 283–304). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
30.
Ross, J.R. (1980). Ikonismus in der Phraseologie. Zeitschrift für Semiotik, 2, 39–56.
31.
Sgall, P. (1972). Topic, focus and ordering of elements of semantic representations. Philologica Pragensia, 15, 1–14.
32.
Sobkowiak, W. (1990). On the phonostatistics of English onomatopoeia. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia, 23, 15–30.
33.
Sobkowiak, W. (1991). Metaphonology of English Paronomasic Puns.Frankfurt: Peter Lang.
34.
Sobkowiak, W. (forthcoming). The logic of markedness arguments.
35.
Szpyra, J. (1983). Semantic and phonological constraints on conjunct ordering in English and Polish. Kwartalnik Neofilologiczny, 30, 33–53.
36.
Thorndike, E.L., and Lorge, I. (1944). The Teacher's Word Book of 30,000 Words.New York: Columbia University.
37.
Thun, N. (1963). Reduplicative Words in English.Uppsala: Carl Blooms Boktryckeri.
38.
Trnka, B. (1968). A Phonological Analysis of Present-day Standard English.Alabama: University Press.
39.
Wells, J.C. (1962). A study of the formants of the pure vowels of British English. Unpublished MA thesis, University of London.
40.
Zwicky, A.M. (1978). On markedness in morphology. Die Sprache, 24, 129–143.
