BINARY DECISION IN ABSTRACTION AND THE LOGICAL ALGORITHM

OF GRAMMATICAL CATEGORIZATION

Dagmar Bittner

Centre for General Linguistics, Typology and Universals Research (ZAS), Berlin

Since Trubetzkoy (1939) we know that the phoneme inventory of each language is constructed and functions on the base of a small set of distinctive features. By that, we can consider the phoneme inventories of languages as systems in the very sense of the term system. Later on, in his famous work “Kindersprache, Aphasie und allgemeine Lautgesetze” (1941), Jakobson explicitely stressed that phoneme systems are hierarchically organized. Certain types of distinctive features has to be established before others can become relevant, i.e. there are basic, unavoidable features and more specific ones which introduce additional distinctions. Furthermore, and more crucial with respect to the point that should be made in the present paper, Jakobson strongly emphasized the binary character of distinctive features which is realized in two ways: a) a feature is present or it is not, and b) the presence of a feature does matter or it does not matter (it can equally not be present). In each case, a maximal contrast between the two parts of the opposition is given. In publications discussing the role and nature of meaning in language and grammar, Jakobson showed that the meaning of a linguistic sign is binary and abstract in general. The reason for that lies in the mechanism of abstraction human beings are endowed with.We are only able to classify and categorize our experience of the world by sorting and weighting the properties which are to perceive. Binary decision and differentiation on the base of maximal contrast are the main and unavoidable principles in this process. For an example, compare the linguistic treatment of colour.

Contrary to these findings and considerations, and especially contrary to our knowledge on the architecture of phoneme systems, grammatical categories are typically defined in a descriptive prosaic manner. Although we are used to speak of ‘the grammatical system’ and ‘the system of grammatical categories’ a coherent description in terms of distinctive features is lacking. Moreover, it seems that the existence of a system of distinctive features in grammar commonly is regarded as impossible, not only with respect to the category system as a whole but also with respect to single category domains, e.g. the categories of the noun or the verb or the domain of case or tense.

Nevertheless, the present paper will give some evidence in favour of the hypothesis that the system of grammatical categories is based on a restricted set of distinctive features too. It will be argued, that there is a universal algorithm of grammatical differentiation, i.e. of the development of categories from the base level up to the sub-categorization levels. Although the final detection of the relevant set of distinctive features will remain a task for further research, pieces of evidence for a hierarchical and clearly restricted architecture of grammar can be given.

The general algorithm of the development and differentiation of categories can be deduced from the above mentioned principles of categorization, the principles of binary decision and maximal contrast. Both of these principles involve the division of a certain domain into two parts, cf. (1).

(1) / (relevance of) feature A / + feature A

The twofold character of the negative part of the opposition, allows further differentation, cf. (2)

(2) / relevance of feature A / + feature A
feature A

Finally, the empty cell in (2) can be filled by the relevance of +A and –A at the same time, cf. (3).

(3) / relevance of feature A / + feature A
feature A / + feature A
feature A

The logical possibilities of distinctive characterisation by one feature allow the distinction of two to four sub-domains or categories.

Assuming a hierarchical organization of grammar, a restricted number of basic distinctions is to expect. All of the further differentiations are created by taking the content of one of the cells of a basic differentiation as a new domain for sub-specifications. The mechanism of this sub-specification again follows the described algorithm.

A first example for the algorithm comes from the already quoted work of Jakobson (1941). The first and basic distinction within the phoneme system is that of ‘maximal closed’ vs. ‘minimal closed’ which creates the domain of consonants and the domain of vowels. Non-relevance of the feature ‘closed’ does not exist in the domain of phonemes, but the co-existence of +closed and closed exists. The combination creates the class of nasals which belongs to the minimal consonantal system given in all languages. Only after the differentiation of these three domains within the phoneme system each of them can get further differentiated.

The architecture of grammar contains parallel instances of differentiation. Looking at the starting point of grammatical distinctions, the parts of speech, we find the following: the main opposition is the one between nouns and verbs. This opposition is related to the features +predicate vs. –predicate or +argument vs. –argument which build a maximal contrast. Nouns are –predicates or +arguments and vice versa verbs are +predicates or –arguments. In parallel to the base differentiation of the phoneme system, non-relevance of the feature ‘predicate/argument’ does not exist on the level of lexical concepts, but the co-existence of +predicate and –predicate (or +argument and argument) exists. The feature combination creates the class of adjectives/adverbs. It becomes obvious that adjectives and adverbs are only differentiated at a sub-categorization level of the syntactic use of lexical concepts.

Finally, I will give an example from Jakobsons study of the Russian case system (Jakobson 1958) where all of the four cells created by the categorization algorithm are filled. The nominative is characterized as the case unspecified for any of the features with which the other cases are correlated, i.e. the existence ore non-existence of any of these features is irrelevant. Thus, the nominative occupies the upper left cell in (3). The accusative is characterized to symbolize the feature +direction. It occupies the upper right cell in (3). Whereas the referents of the nominative can bear that feature but it is of no relevance in the actual proposition, the instrumental is clearly connected with direction. Thus, the instrumental occupies the lower left cell. The dative occurs as representation of the combination of the feature values +direction and –direction, and occupies the lower right cell. (The feature +marginal used by Jakobson to characterize the instrumental and the dative, probably, should replaced by +contact. Thus, the maximal contrast to +direction becomes obvious.)

In order to summarize the findings and come closer to the detection of distinctive (core) features in grammatical categorization, some considerations on the perceptual and mereological character of the relevant features will be presented.

References:

Jakobson, Roman. 1941/1971. Kindersprache, Aphasie und allgemeine Lautgesetze. In Roman Jakobson: Selected Writings I, 328-401. The Hague/Paris: Mouton.

Jakobson, Roman. 1958/1984. Morfologiceskije nabljudenija nad slavjanskim skloneniem. In Russian and Slavic Grammar: Studies 1931 - 1981, eds. Linda Waugh and Morris Halle, 105-134. Berlin: Mouton.

Trubetzkoy, Nikolai S. 1939. Grundzüge der Phonologie. Prag: TCLP 7