Study of 1,700 languages finds shared grammar rules

Open Forum
1

Study of 1,700 languages finds shared grammar rules

image
image1022×696 202 KB

By analyzing a massive database of over 1,700 distinct languages , researchers have discovered that human speech follows consistent grammatical patterns rather than evolving randomly. Using advanced statistical testing , the study confirmed that approximately one-third of long-debated linguistic universals remain valid across diverse cultures and geographies. These recurring structures, particularly regarding word order and sentence hierarchy , suggest that shared human cognition and the necessity for efficient communication steer language development toward specific solutions. While many previously assumed rules failed to meet these rigorous standards, the findings highlight that evolutionary pressures limit the variety of ways languages organize information. This research provides a more focused path for linguists by identifying which structural commonalities truly transcend historical and ancestral boundaries. Ultimately, the work suggests that despite incredible global diversity, the human mind imposes a fundamental order on how we construct meaning.

4 Likes
2

You are linking what seems to be an ai written article, which itselfs links to magazins citing the work instead of citing the actual work itself or links to pages which content has nothing to do with the content of the ai article.

This is the actual scientific article: Enduring constraints on grammar revealed by Bayesian spatiophylogenetic analyses: Verkerk et. al.

I haven’t been dealing with this matter beforehand, maybe someone else has. But it would probably be a good starting point for any discussion to actually make clear what those language universals are the article is talking about.

A few I have found doing a quick readup on the topic (using my own words):

  1. The high-level word order gets reflected in the low-level word order
  • if a language features SVO word order, subclauses that have object character may come after the verb, if a language features SOV word order, the respective clause comes before the verb that refers to that clause
  • the same applies for whether pre- or postpositions are used

Note that the universal statement made here goes into the direction of: If a language is SOV, then the chances are statistically high, that it uses postpositions.

  1. Languages follow hierachical rules
  • if a language features a dual (a numerus specifically referring to two instances) it also features a plural
  • if a languages features a future tense, it also features a past tense (not the other way round, as can be seen in Japanese, for example)
  • if a language features a conjugation to reflect the 3. person (he, she it does something), it also features the 1. person (I do something) and the 2. person (you do something), if it features a conjugation or specific words for non-living things, it features those for living things, too (you can partly see this with some verbs in Japanese)
  1. More general statements are
  • all language feature words that don’t have a meaning themself (function words, like the articles)
    Note: there is a process called grammaticalization turning words that have a semantical meaning into words that serve a solely grammatical purpose, like the german word man originally meaning human or person
  • all language feature words that have a demonstrative purpose (like demonstrative pronouns)

Note that statements as general as those (all languages feature X) are either relatively trivial or highly discussed if not neglected by the scientific community. In general, statements made go more into the direction of: if a language features X then (there is a statistically high chance) it will feature Y

I have to read the article in detail, but I don’t think that the fact that only one third of those statements have proven to be of statistic significance is so mind-blowing. I mean, this means two third are not. And some matches are not surprising considering all language feature one major common aspect: they are all used by humans.

It is still an interesting research to look for those statements that might be valid, as it may helps us to understand the development of language and the way humans think better. And it might be good for ai research, too.

PS: It is a bit sad that the article doesn’t list the 191 features, but it gives 80+ sources. So there is quiet a bit of reading to be done (besides learning how a Bayesian spatiophylogenetic analysis works), in order to have a chance to really judge on this.

3 Likes