Routledge Dictionary of Language and Linguistics.pdf

Dictionary of language and linguistics 56Analogy is also an important factor in sound change. When a sound A becomes A' inword X, then it will usually undergo the same change in other words, given the samephonological conditioning ( phonologically conditioned). Such inductive rules canbecome too ‘potent,’ especially under extralinguistic motivation, creating incorrect formsthrough overgeneralization ( hypercorrection), for example forms found in children’sspeech, such as *foots for feet or *goed for went.The concept of analogy goes back to classical times, but was then understooddifferently from today ( Analogists vs Anomalists). Central to the modern notion isthe Neogrammarian view of sound laws, where analogy was set forth as the‘psychological counterpart of physiologically motivated sound laws’ (see Boretzky1977:131) in order to ‘explain away exceptions to supposedly exceptionless sound lawsas form associations and thereby justify the autonomy of the sound level’ (cf. Sturtevant1961). The transformational grammarians (transformational grammar) interpretanalogy as an instance of the universal process of simplification. In the case of analogy, acomplex group of rules is simplified by a single rule that takes on the function of severalothers, which are then eliminated.ReferencesAndersen, H. 1973. Abductive and deductive change. Lg 49. 765–93.Anttila, R. 1977. Analogy. The Hague.Becker, T. 1990. Analogie und morphologische Theorie. Munich.Best, K.H. 1973. Probleme der Analogieforschung. Munich.Boretzky, N. 1977. Einführung in die historische Linguistik. Reinbek.Chene, B.de 1975. The treatment of analogy in a formal grammar. PCLS 11. 152–64.Hermann, E. 1931. Lautgesetze und Analogie. Berlin.Hock, H.H. 1986. Principles of historical linguistics. Berlin. (2nd edn 1991).Kuryłowicz, J. 1949. La nature des procès dits ‘analogiques.’ ALH 5. 15–37.Lehmann, W.P. 1962. Historical linguistics: an introduction. New York. (3rd edn London, 1994.)Mańczak, W. 1958. Tendences générales des changements analogiques. Lingua 7. 298–325 and387–420.——1980. Laws of analogy. In J.Fisiak (ed.), Historical morphology. The Hague. 283–8.Meyerthaler, W. 1979. Aspekte der Analogietheorie. In H.Lüdtke (ed.), Grundlagen desSprachwandels. Berlin. 80–130.Paul, H. 1880. Prinzipien der Sprachgeschichte. Halle. (9th edn. Tübingen, 1975.). Ch. 5.Rogge, C. 1925. Die Analogie im Sprachleben. Archiv für die ges. Psychologie 52. 441–68.Ross, J.F. 1982. Portraying analogy. Cambridge.Sapir, E. 1921. Language. New York.Saussure, F.de. 1916. Cours de linguistique générale, ed. C.Bally and A.Sechehaye. Paris. (Coursein general linguistics, trans. R.Harris. London, 1983.)Skousen, R. 1989. Analogical modeling of language. Dordrecht.Sturtevant, E.H. 1961. Linguistic change. Chicago, IL. (Orig. 1907.)Vennemann, T. 1972. Phonetic analogy and conceptual analogy. In T.Vennemann and T.Wilbur(eds), Schuchardt, the Neogrammarians, and the transformational theory of phonologicalchange. Frankfurt. 181–204.