Some Topics in the Development of OIA MIA NIA

Author(s): H C Bhayani
Publisher: L D Indology Ahmedabad

Page 74

65
limits are apprehended, therapy is performed by some kind of reanalysis, which eliminates the offending opacity. This position has been adopted by some earlierwriters. Samuels observes that it is a conmonplace that grammatical ambiguities arising from sound change may be remedied by selection of new analogical forms and he cites Sapir, Saussure, Hermann, Jespersen, Bally. Paul also denies prophyaxis. Longacker (1977) says, 'a re-analysis occurs in response to a particular set of factors present in a particular class of expressions, it resolves certain structural pressures or exploits the structural potential of those expressions. Speakers do not however redesign their entire language or check the implications of a modification for all other aspects of the linguistic system before adopting the modification. A change which resolves certain structural pressures may, therefore create new ones and lead to further changes' (p. 123-124)
Givon (1976) claims that ‘main clauses (and in particular declarative-affirmative ones) are the most progressive, innovative environment in language, where innovations are first introduced and from where they spread later on into other emvironments (p. 126)
Typically, changes in various places in the grammar may occur and happen to have the effect of making existing initial structure analyses more opaque to the language learner. There seems to be a tolcrance level for such exceptional behaviour or opacity, and when this is reached a radical re-structuring, more transparent, casier to figure out and closer to the respective surface structures results. The structuring is entailed by Transparency Principle and is manifested by a set of simultaneous changes in possible surface structures i.e. only the latter changes result from the Transparency Principle (p. 129).