Abstract
This discussion chapter focuses on some basic concepts used in the volume, relating them to ‘the minimum description length approach’. Implications of this approach for the organization of morphology are briefly discussed. Comparisons are made between Rescher's taxonomy of complexity with distinctions made in Nichols’ chapter and also in the work of Ackerman & Malouf. Several contributions build on the latter scholars’ distinction between ‘enumerative’ and ‘integrative’ complexity, motivating special attention to their approach. It is noted that their claim about the prevalence of low integrative complexity may be due to mathematical properties of the notion of ‘average conditional entropy’. Further topics are Nichols’ ‘canonical complexity’ and its relationships to other notions such as transparency and overspecification, and Meakins & Wilmoth's notion of ‘overabundance’. The concluding section notes that morphological complexity is not yet a solidified area of study and that information theory is likely to preserve its relevance.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call