linguistic analysis - Professor Binkert's Webpage - Oakland University

14
(18) a. [t] occurs in verbs ending in the sounds [p] (hyped), [k] (cracked), [f] (cuffed), [s]
(kissed), etc.
b. [d] occurs in verbs ending in the sounds [b] (robbed), [g] (shrugged), [v] (moved),
[z] (cruised), etc.
c. [d] occurs in verbs ending in the sounds [t] (granted) and [d] (guarded)
Testing and verifying the data in (18) is the next step. One looks at as many different regular verbs
as possible to see if the statements are correct. Such investigation reveals that the statements, in fact,
are correct; however, the statements are no more than a list, and a list does not explain why the
sounds are distributed as they are. In other words, why is [p] in (18a) and not (18b) or (18c)? These
are very important steps in proposing solutions to any problem: one must not only gather, organize,
and verify the data; one must explain why the data fall out the way they do if one is going to put forth
the most robust proposal about the data. Although this is a theoretical example about English
phonology, one can still discuss its effectiveness as a matter of cost. The analysis in (18) is not very
cost-effective theoretically because it reveals no generalizations. It is not a very good way to account
for the data because it is merely a list. We need to look for common features among the items in the
list to see why they are in one list and not the other. We need to look for generalizations. To see
what this means in a situation one is more likely to encounter in business, consider the following
example.
In the business world, cost is often a primary consideration. The choice of one car design over
another will often depend on its cost-effectiveness. It is most cost-effective for a manufacturer to
vary only the exterior of various models and to use the same underlying mechanical and electrical
systems, the same chassis, the same engines, etc. If every vehicle in a manufacturer’s fleet is built
in a completely different way from every other vehicle and there are no common features, costs will
increase. Thus, manufacturers look for designs that can be generalized over many different specific
vehicles. It is not an accident that many vehicles look alike.
Similarly, in designing homes in a subdivision, builders will use the same underlying floor plan and
only vary the exterior elevations because that cuts down on costs. Architects will put bathrooms on
the second floor above bathrooms on the first floor rather than on opposite sides of the house because
that design is more cost effective. If you ask the architect why the upstairs bathroom is where it is
and not somewhere else, the architect can give you the reason and that reason probably has to do
with cost.
In designing vehicles and buildings, engineers and architects will look for ways in which they can
utilize as many of the same features as they can in all their products as a cost-saving measure. They
will try to generalize. Of course, the same is true not only in the automobile and construction
industries, but other businesses as well. At an abstract level, that is exactly what we need to do with
the data in (18). We need to look for generalizations. Specifically, we need to determine why the
data in (18) fall out the way they do. What do the members of each group have in common?