Abstract
In this article, two recent word order studies, i.e. Tomlin [ Basic Word Order: Functional Principles, London: Croom Helm (1986)], and Manning and Parker [ Language Sciences 11, 43–65 (1989)], will be examined. Some specific and general problems with these studies will be identified. Firstly, in Tomlin's study, the observed predominance of S initial languages is unaccounted for; to remedy this flaw, an alternative differential weighting system is proposed. Secondly, it is argued that Manning and Parker's (1989) figure/ground interpretation of basic word order is seriously problematic in that the support that they provide for the interpretation is both irrelevant and circular. In conclusion, non-linguistic evidence in the word order study is called for.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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 callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
