To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
In spite of the influential Saussurean dichotomy of synchronic and dia-chronic studies, it has in fact not been possible to keep these two main aspects of linguistics in hermetically sealed compartments. The aim of this paper is to explore the theoretical relations between phenomena in the two fields in the context of the current interest in universals. The examples cited are not intended to be conclusive and are meant only as illustrations.
[Samples of printed English sentences of three lengths were drawn randomly from a representative selection of popular magazines. The words of each sentence were classified according to Fries's system and a count was made of the various word classes at each sentence position. The tabulations were plotted as frequency distributions and treated statistically. Principally, the data obtained from all three sentence lengths indicate (1) that the greatest variations in word-class frequency tend to occur in sentence extremes and the immediately adjoining positions, and (2) that different word classes have characteristic patterns of variation.]
The Ordering Hypothesis of Bresnan 1971a projects the stress contours of simple S's onto complex syntactic structures by permitting stress rules to apply systematically within the transformational derivation. This hypothesis, a principle governing the application of stress rules, is distinct from the stress rules themselves. Berman and Szamosi 1972 fail to observe this distinction in their attempt to demonstrate the futility of any principle like the Ordering Hypothesis. As a result, their ‘counter-examples’, together with facts they do not consider, actually support the Ordering Hypothesis, which is necessary to project onto complex cases any valid generalizations about stress and surface structure or meaning. Lakoff 1972 also makes mistakes of interpretation and argument; his global alternative compares unfavorably with the Ordering Hypothesis in describing and explaining the apparent ‘optionality’ of stress contours.