Practice question · Multiple choice
The Neogrammarians claimed sound change is strictly exceptionless, yet Grimm's Law showed apparent irregularities. How does Verner's resolution change our understanding of scientific progress in linguistics?
Hints
- What did the discovery of additional phonetic conditions do to the supposed exceptions?
- Does finding a finer sub-rule invalidate the principle of exceptionless change or reinforce it?
Show the answer
A. It shows anomalies reflect missing conditions rather than broken rules
Why
Apparent exceptions do not falsify regularity or make laws obsolete; rather, they reveal conditioning factors that strengthen regular models. Sound change cannot be dismissed as random or confined to core vocabulary.
Practise A History of Linguistics
The app has 3 more questions on this lesson, and keeps your place in the course. Languages I is free to start.
More questions on A History of Linguistics
- Why is a systematic sound correspondence better evidence of relatedness than a set of similar-looking words?
- Arrange these milestones in the history of linguistics in chronological order.
- Pāṇini's grammar of Sanskrit uses a formal metalanguage with ordered rules and abbreviation conventions.
- Match each figure or school to the position they are known for.
- Approximately how many rules does Pāṇini's grammar contain, to the nearest thousand?
- Sort each statement by whether it belongs to the COMPARATIVE method or to GENERATIVE grammar.
- Which are true of Grimm's Law?
- Complete the account of the comparative method.
- The behaviourist framework Chomsky attacked in 1959 held that language is acquired through association and…