Routledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics.pdf

A-Z 55analogue communicationTerm coined by Watzlawick et al. (1967) on the model of analogue calculators (which,like slide rules in contrast to digital calculators, operate with actual quantities) for nonverbalcommunication that operates mainly with body language and sign language andis based on a relationshi p of similarity between the signal and the referent. Analoguecommunication is used primarily for the representation of human relations; its semanticsis complex, but situation-specific, and is often ambiguous (e.g. laughing, crying). Asanalogue communication possesses no morphological elements for marking syntacticrelations (negation, conjunction), and no temporal differentiation, its translatability intodigital communication is problematic.ReferenceWatzlawick, P., J.H.Beavin, and D.D.Jackson. 1967. Pragmatics of human communication: a studyof interactional patterns, pathologies and paradoxes. New York.analogySynchronic or diachronic ( synchrony vs diachrony) process by which conceptuallyrelated linguistic units are made similar (or identical) in form, especially where previousphonetic change had created a variety of forms. Analogy is often regarded as the result ofthe move towards economy of form or as a way to facilitate the acquisition of themorphological forms of a language.The main types of analogy are as follows (see Hock 1986:167–237). (a) Analogicalleveling (also ‘paradigmatic leveling’), or the reduction or elimination ofmorphophonemic alternation within a morphological paradigm ( morphology,morphophoneme, paradigmatic vs syntagmatic relationship), especially if there is nosemantic differentiation involved (e.g. OE cēo—san—cēas—curon—(ge) coren vs Mod.Eng. choose—chose—chose—chosen, where both the vowel and the consonant alternateshave been leveled). (b) Proportional analogy, in which a regularity is carried over toirregular forms according to the formula A:A′=B:X (e.g. the replacement of the originalplural form kine by the analogized form cows according to the pattern stone: stones=cow:X (=cow-s)). Proportional analogy can affect (i) morphology, as in the aboveexample; (ii) orthography (e.g. ME ‹wolde›, ‹coude›, becoming Mod. Eng. ‹would›,‹could›, respectively); (iii) word formation (in the creation of neologisms), e.g.xeroxing. Proportional analogy can work in combination with morphological reanalysisin word formation as well (e.g. Hamburger with the original meaning ‘from Hamburg,’reanalyzed as ham+burger and yielding analogized forms such as cheeseburger,turkeyburger).