Laurie Bauer - WordPress.com — Get a Free Blog Here

155 LAWS AND PRINCIPLES
Neogrammarian Hypothesis
The neogrammarian hypothesis is usually quoted in English in Lehmann’s
translation: ‘[E]very sound change, inasmuch as it takes place mechanically,
takes place according to laws that admit of no exception’ (Osthoff & Brugman
1967 [1878]: 204). This is not the earliest formulation of the idea, but it is
perhaps the most influential one. This stands in conflict with the idea, summarised
in the slogan associated with the work of the Swiss dialectologist Jules
Gilliéron, ‘chaque mot a son histoire’ (‘every word has its own history’), where
the regularity of sound change is implicitly challenged. It is sometimes also
seen as being in conflict with the notion of lexical diffusion, that is, that
sound change does not affect all words at the same rate.
No-Phrase Constraint
The No-Phrase Constraint is a corollary of the Word-Based Hypothesis. As
stated by Botha (1984: 137) it is ‘Lexical rules do not apply to syntactic phrases
to form morphologically complex words.’ As stated, this constraint is too
strong to account for data from at least some languages.
Obligatory Contour Principle (OCP)
The OCP is formulated by Goldsmith (1979 [1976]: 36), with reference to the
work of Leben, as: ‘at the melodic level of the grammar, any two adjacent
tonemes must be distinct. Thus H[igh] H[igh] L[ow] is not a possible melodic
pattern; it automatically simplifies to H[igh] L[ow].’ This formulation has subsequently
been found to be too general, in that not all languages adhere to the
principle. But the statement has also been generalised so that it can apply to
things other than tonemes.
Ockham’s Razor
Ockham’s razor is named after William (of) Ockham (also spelt ,
and in various other ways) (1285–1347) who came from the village of
Ockham near East Horsley in Surrey. It is usually cited in Latin as entitia non sunt
multiplicanda praeter necessitatem ‘entities should not be multiplied beyond what
is necessary’, even though this form does not arise in Ockham’s own writings, but
was familiar long before Ockham. This is a simplicity metric for theory-building.
One form one meaning
‘One form one meaning’ refers to a supposed typological preference for
languages to avoid homonymy and synonymy. It is thus argued that an ideal