{"history":[],"article":{"id":"0ced07f4-1ac4-4375-a247-960ca43ebdf6","title":"Implicational hierarchy","slug":"implicational-hierarchy","content":":::summary\n:::\n\n# \n**Implicational hierarchy**, in [linguistics](https://bliptext.com/articles/linguistics), is a chain of implicational [universals](https://bliptext.com/articles/linguistic-universal).\nA set of chained universals is schematically shown as in (1):\n(1)\t**A < B < C < D**\nIt can be reformulated in the following way: If a language has property D, then it also has properties A, B, and C; if a language has a property C, then it also has properties A and B, etc. In other words, the implicational hierarchy defines the possible combinations of properties A, B, C, and D as listed in matrix (2):\nImplicational hierarchies are a useful tool in capturing linguistic generalizations\npertaining the different components of the language.\nThey are found in all subfields of grammar.\n\n# Phonology\n(3) is an example of an implicational hierarchy concerning the distribution of nasal phonemes across languages, which concerns dental/alveolar, bilabial, and palatal voiced nasals,\nrespectively:\n(3) ** < < **\nThis hierarchy defines the following possible combinations of dental/alveolar, bilabial, and palatal voiced nasals in the phoneme inventory of a language:\n(4) In other words, the hierarchy implies that there are no languages with but without and, or with and but without.\n\n# Morphology\n[Number](https://bliptext.com/articles/grammatical-number) marking provides an example of implicational hierarchies in morphology.\n(5) **Number: singular < plural < dual < trial / paucal**\nOn the one hand, the hierarchy implies that no language distinguishes a trial unless having a dual, and no language has dual without a plural.\nOn the other hand, the hierarchy provides implications for the morphological marking: if the plural is coded with a certain number of morphemes, then the dual is coded with at least as many morphemes.\n\n# Syntax\nImplicational hierarchies also play a role in syntactic phenomena.\nFor instance, in some languages (e.g. [Tangut](https://bliptext.com/articles/tangut-people)) the transitive verb agrees not with a subject, or the object, but with the syntactic argument which is higher on the person hierarchy.\n(5) **Person: first < second < third**\nSee also: [animacy](https://bliptext.com/articles/animacy).","current_revision":null,"created_by":"kACnuQmH5k9Nr5VNVEpVeg7XpvUmMctD","created_at":"2025-01-26T08:25:39.411Z","updated_at":"2025-01-26T08:25:39.411Z","search_vector":"'hierarchi':2 'implic':1","search_content":" \n \n\n# \n**Implicational hierarchy**, in [linguistics](https://bliptext.com/articles/linguistics), is a chain of implicational [universals](https://bliptext.com/articles/linguistic-universal).\nA set of chained universals is schematically shown as in (1):\n(1)\t**A < B < C < D**\nIt can be reformulated in the following way: If a language has property D, then it also has properties A, B, and C; if a language has a property C, then it also has properties A and B, etc. In other words, the implicational hierarchy defines the possible combinations of properties A, B, C, and D as listed in matrix (2):\nImplicational hierarchies are a useful tool in capturing linguistic generalizations\npertaining the different components of the language.\nThey are found in all subfields of grammar.\n\n# Phonology\n(3) is an example of an implicational hierarchy concerning the distribution of nasal phonemes across languages, which concerns dental/alveolar, bilabial, and palatal voiced nasals,\nrespectively:\n(3) ** < < **\nThis hierarchy defines the following possible combinations of dental/alveolar, bilabial, and palatal voiced nasals in the phoneme inventory of a language:\n(4) In other words, the hierarchy implies that there are no languages with but without and, or with and but without.\n\n# Morphology\n[Number](https://bliptext.com/articles/grammatical-number) marking provides an example of implicational hierarchies in morphology.\n(5) **Number: singular < plural < dual < trial / paucal**\nOn the one hand, the hierarchy implies that no language distinguishes a trial unless having a dual, and no language has dual without a plural.\nOn the other hand, the hierarchy provides implications for the morphological marking: if the plural is coded with a certain number of morphemes, then the dual is coded with at least as many morphemes.\n\n# Syntax\nImplicational hierarchies also play a role in syntactic phenomena.\nFor instance, in some languages (e.g. [Tangut](https://bliptext.com/articles/tangut-people)) the transitive verb agrees not with a subject, or the object, but with the syntactic argument which is higher on the person hierarchy.\n(5) **Person: first < second < third**\nSee also: [animacy](https://bliptext.com/articles/animacy).","revisionCount":0},"hasMore":false,"nextCursor":null}

History