Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-sd5qd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-08T00:17:21.804Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Functional Load and Sound Change

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 April 2026

Robert D. King
Robert D. King*
Affiliation:
University of Texas
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The idea that functional load offers a tool of potentially great explanatory power in diachronic linguistics is shared by a number of contemporary linguists, particularly those influenced at first or second hand by Prague. It is the purpose of the present paper to investigate the hypothesis that functional load plays a significant role in sound change. I will attempt to demonstrate that functional load, if it is a factor in sound change at all, is one of the least important of those we know anything about, and that it is best disregarded in discussions centering on the cause and direction of phonological change.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 43 , Issue 4 , December 1967 , pp. 831 - 852
Copyright
Copyright © 1967 Linguistic Society of America

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Abernathy, Robert. 1963. Some theories of Slavic linguistic evolution. American contributions to the Fifth International Congress of Slavists, 1. 7–26. The Hague, Mouton.Google Scholar
Austin, William. 1957. Criteria for phonetic similarity. Lg. 33. 538–43.Google Scholar
Benediktsson, Hreinn. 1959. The vowel system of Icelandic: a survey of its history. Word 15. 282–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Linguistique, Cercle Prague, de. 1931. Réunion phonologique internationale … (Travaux, 4.).Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam, and Halle, Morris. 1965. Some controversial questions in phonological theory. Journal of Linguistics 1. 97–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diver, William. 1955. The problem of Old Bulgarian št. Word 11. 228–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gilliéron, Jules. 1918. Genéalogie des mots qui designent l'abeille. Paris, Champion.Google Scholar
Herzog, Marvin I. 1965. The Yiddish language in Northern Poland. (Indiana University Research Center in Anthropology, Folklore, and Linguistics, Publ. 37.) Bloomington.Google Scholar
Hill, Archibald A. 1936. Phonetic and phonemic change. Lg. 12. 15–22.Google Scholar
Hockett, Charles, 1955. A manual of phonology. (Indiana University Publications in Anthropology and Linguistics, Memoir 11.) Baltimore.Google Scholar
Hockett, Charles, 1966. The quantification of functional load: a linguistic problem. (Rand Corporation memorandum RM-5168-PR.) Santa Monica, Calif.Google Scholar
Hoenigswald, Henry. 1960. Language change and linguistic reconstruction. Chicago, University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Jakobson, Roman. 1931. Prinzipien der historischen Phonologie. Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague 4. 247–67.Google Scholar
Joos, Martin. 1952. The medieval sibilants. Lg. 27. 222–31.Google Scholar
King, Robert D. 1965. Functional load: its measure and its role in sound change. Madison, University of Wisconsin dissertation.Google Scholar
Martinet, André. 1933. Remarques sur le système phonologique du français. Bulletin de la Société de Linguistique de Paris 34. 191–202.Google Scholar
Martinet, André. 1938. La phonologie. Le Français Moderne 6. 131–46.Google Scholar
Martinet, André. 1952. Function, structure, and sound change. Word 8. 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martinet, André. 1955. Économie des changements phonétiques. Bern, Francke.Google Scholar
Mathesius, Vilém. 1929. La structure phonologique du lexique du tchèque moderne. Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague 1. 67–84.Google Scholar
Mathesius, Vilém. 1931. Zum Problem der Belastungs- und Kombinationsfähigkeit der Phoneme. Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague 4. 148–52.Google Scholar
Moulton, William G. 1960. The short vowel systems of Northern Switzerland. Word 16. 155–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moulton, William G. 1961. Zur Geschichte des deutschen Vokalsystems. Beiträge zur Geschichte der Deutschen Sprache und Literatur 83. 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paul, Hermann, and Mitzka, Walther. 1960. Mittelhochdeutsche Grammatik. 18th ed. Tübingen, Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Postal, Paul M. 1966. Review of Elements of general linguistics, by Martinet, André. Foundations of Language 2. 151–86.Google Scholar
Sapir, Edward. 1921. Language. New York, Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar
Spence, N. C. W. 1965. Quantity and quality in the vowel system of Vulgar Latin. Word 21. 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Steblin-Kamenskij, M. I. 1958. A contribution to the history of the Old Icelandic vowel system. Časopis pro Moderní Filologu 40. 79–82.Google Scholar
Trnka, Bohumil. 1931. Bemerkungen zur Homonymie. Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague 4. 152–6.Google Scholar
Trubetzkoy, N. 1935. Anleitung zu phonologischen Beschreibungen. Brno, Cercle Linguistique de Prague.Google Scholar
Trubetzkoy, N. 1939. Grundzüge der Phonologie. (Travaux du Cercle Linguistique de Prague, 7.).Google Scholar
Vachek, Josef. 1964. On peripheral phonemes of modern English. Brno Studies in English 4. 7–109.Google Scholar
Vachek, Josef. 1966. The linguistic school of Prague. Bloomington, Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Wang, William S.-Y., and Thatcher, James W. 1962. The measurement of functional load. (Communication Sciences Laboratory, Report No. 8.) Ann Arbor, University of Michigan.Google Scholar
Weinreich, Max. 1960. The system of Yiddish proto-vowels. Yidishe Sprakh 20. 65–71.Google Scholar