The following comparison of Naturalness theory and Markedness theory contrasts naturalness scales and markedness relations and the distinct notions of value in the two theories in order to focus on recent advances in the identification of rules of naturalness syntax and markedness syntax. It is shown that whereas naturalness theory offers little basis for accounts of variation and change, key notions in markedness theory play a central role both in accounts of synchronic variation and in explanations of the initiation and actualization of change. In a concluding comparison of the two theories it is argued that Markedness theory in essential respects subsumes Naturalness theory. This explains why many linguists find the two theories kindred, and it suggests that the future will see their unification.
2019. Theoretical Approaches to Phonotactic Complexity of Polish. In Complexity in Polish Phonotactics [Prosody, Phonology and Phonetics, ], ► pp. 59 ff.
Motschenbacher, Heiko
2013. Gentlemen before Ladies? A Corpus-Based Study of Conjunct Order in Personal Binomials. Journal of English Linguistics 41:3 ► pp. 212 ff.
Backer, Maarten De & Ludovic De Cuypere
2012. The interpretation of masculine personal nouns in German and Dutch: a comparative experimental study. Language Sciences 34:3 ► pp. 253 ff.
Jensen, Eva Skafte
2012. Markedness, participation and grammatical paradigms: Jakobson and Hjelmslev revisited. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 35:2 ► pp. 145 ff.
Roberge, Paul T.
2012. The Teleology of Change: Functional and Non‐Functional Explanations for Language Variation and Change. In The Handbook of Historical Sociolinguistics, ► pp. 367 ff.
[no author supplied]
2013. References. In A companion to Terence, ► pp. 482 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 12 september 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.