Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-fvjsw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-12T08:01:50.030Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phonological effects on word order: AB constructions in Hebrew

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2026

Noa Handelsman and
Outi Bat-El
Noa Handelsman*
Affiliation:
School of Education, Tel Aviv University
Outi Bat-El*
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics, Tel Aviv University
*
handelsman@mail.tau.ac.il
obatel@tauex.tau.ac.il
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

The literature on what we call AB constructions (freezes, irreversible binomials), such as odds and ends and copy paste, attributes the fixed word order to both phonological and nonphonological, mostly semantic constraints. However, some researchers attribute a prominent role to phonology, while others view semantics as the major contributor to word order of AB constructions. In this paper we evaluate the role of phonology in Hebrew AB constructions with reference to a harmonic grammar with weighted constraints, where constraint weight is calculated on the basis of its effect in our corpus. The grammar reveals that semantic constraints weigh more than phonological constraints in both the cumulative weight and the average weight. Nevertheless, phonology affects a great number of data items, in particular those where semantic constraints are mute. We thus conclude that although syntax and semantics are responsible for word order, phonology determines word order when the other modules do not have a say.

Keywords

binomialsfixed word orderphonology-semantics interactionweighted constraintsHebrew

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Phonological Data and Analysis , Volume 4 , Issue 2 , 2022, pp. 1 - 21
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
Published by the Linguistic Society of America with permission of the authors under a CC BY 3.0 license.
Copyright
Copyright © 2022 Noa Handelsman & Outi Bat-El.

Footnotes

*

We thank Evan Cohen and the participants of TAU Phonology Circle for helpful comments and suggestions. All disclaimers apply.

References

Abraham, Richard D. 1950. Fixed order of coordinates: A study of comparative lexicography. The Modern Language Journal 34 (4). 276–287. https://doi.org/10.2307/318913.Google Scholar
Amir Coffin, Edna & Bolozky, Shmuel. 2005. A reference grammar of Modern Hebrew. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511811081.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Asherov, Daniel & Bat-El, Outi. 2019. Syllable structure and complex onsets in Modern Hebrew. Brill's Journal of Afroasiatic Languages and Linguistics 11 (1). 69–95. https://doi.org/10.1163/18776930-01101007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Avishur, Yitzhak. 1976. Pairs of parallel words coupled in close proximity in Jewish Aramaic - in Biblical Aramaic and in the Aramaic translations. Beit Mikra 21. 247–262. [in Hebrew].Google Scholar
Bhandare, V. V. 1995. Structural and semantic aspects of the dvandva compound. Annals of the Bhandarkar Oriental Research Institute 76. 89–96.Google Scholar
Becker, Michael. 2002. Hebrew stress: Can you hear those trochees? Tel-Aviv: Tel-Aviv University MA thesis.Google Scholar
Benor, Sarah Bunin & Levy, Roger. 2006. The chicken or the egg? A probabilistic analysis of English binomials. Language 82. 233–278. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2006.0077.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bat-El, Outi. 1995. On the apparent ambiguity of the schwa symbol in Tiberian Hebrew. Langues Orientales Anciennes Philologie et Linguistique 5–6. 79-96.Google Scholar
Bat-El, Outi. 2005. The emergence of the trochaic foot in Hebrew hypocoristics. Phonology 22. 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0952675705000515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bat-El, Outi. 2011. Semitic templates. In van Oostendrop, Marc, Ewen, Colin J., Hume, Elizabeth & Rice, Keren (eds.), Blackwell companion to phonology, 2586–2608. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781444335262.wbctp0108.Google Scholar
Bat-El, Outi. 2014. Staying away from the weak left edge: A strengthening strategy. In Bendjaballah, Sabrina, Faust, Noam, Lahrouchi, Mohamed & Lampitelli, Nicola (eds.), The form of structure, the structure of form: Essays in honor of Jean Lowenstamm, 193–207. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lfab.12.15bat.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beckman, Jill N. 1998. Positional faithfulness. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts dissertation.Google Scholar
Bresnan, Joan, Cueni, Anna, Nikitina, Tatiana & Baayen, R. Harald. 2007. Predicting the dative alternation. In Bouma, Gerlof, Krämer, Irene & Zwarts, Joost (eds.), Cognitive foundations of interpretation, 69–94. Amsterdam: The Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences.Google Scholar
Casali, Roderic F. 1997. Vowel elision in hiatus contexts: Which vowel goes? Language 73. 493–533. https://doi.org/10.2307/415882.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, Evan G., Silber-Varod, Vered & Amir, Noam. 2018. The acoustics of primary and secondary stress in Modern Hebrew. Brill's Annual of Afroasiatic Languages and Linguistics 10. 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1163/18776930-01001001.Google Scholar
Cooper, William E. & Ross, John R.. 1975. World order. Chicago Linguistic Society (CLS) 11(2). 63111.Google Scholar
Copestake, Ann & Herbelot, Aurélie. 2011. Exciting and interesting: Issues in the generation of binomials. In Belz, Anja, Evans, Roger, Gatt, Albert & Striegnitz, Kristina (eds.), Proceedings of the UCNLG+Eval: Language Generation and Evaluation Workshop, 45–53. Edinburgh: Association for Computational Linguistics. https://aclanthology.org/W11-2707.Google Scholar
Faust, Noam. 2005. The fate of gutturals in Modern Hebrew. Tel-Aviv: Tel-Aviv University MA thesis.Google Scholar
Fenk-Oczlon, Gertraud. 1989. Word frequency and word order in freezes. Linguistics 27. 517–556. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.1989.27.3.517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gil, David. 1989. Freezes, prosodic theory, and the modularity of grammar. Folia Linguistica 23. 375–386.Google Scholar
Goldsmith, John. 1976. Autosegmentalphonology. Cambridge, MA: MIT dissertation.Google Scholar
Golston, Chris. 1995. Syntax outranks phonology. Phonology 12 (3). 343–368. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0952675700002554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gorgis, Dinha T. & Tamimi, Yasser Al. 2005. Binomials in Iraqi and Jordanian Arabic. Journal of Language and Linguistics 4(2). 135–151.Google Scholar
Gülzow, Insa & Gagarina, Natalia (eds.). 2007. Frequency effects in language acquisition defining the limits of frequency as an explanatory concept. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110977905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gustafsson, Marita. 1976. The frequency and “frozenness” of some English binomials. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 77(4). 623–637.Google Scholar
Hawkins, John A. 1983. Word order universals. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hawkins, John A. 1990. A parsing theory of word order universals. Linguistic Inquiry 21(2). 223–261. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4178670.Google Scholar
Hawkins, John A. 1994. A performance theory of order and constituency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hayes, Bruce. 1995. Metrical structure theory: Principles and case studies. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Inklas, Sharon & Zec, Draga (eds). 1990. The phonology-syntax connection. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v8i0.2025.Google Scholar
Jacobsen, William H. Jr 1982. Basque copulative compounds: A problem in irreversible binomials. Berkeley Linguistics Society (BLS) 8. 384–397. https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v8i0.2025.Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1912. Growth and structure of the English language. Leipzig: B.G. Teubner.Google Scholar
Kaddari, Tzvi. 1966. Noun composites (“dvandva” type compounds) in Biblical Hebrew. Lě onénu 30. 113–135. [in Hebrew].Google Scholar
Kager, René. 1993. Alternatives to the iambic-trochaic law. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 11. 381–432. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00993165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kager, René. 1999. Optimality theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaye, Alan S. 2009. Cultural ingredients in Arabic lexical pairs (binomials). Word 60. 65–78. https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.2009.11432593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly, Michael H., Bock, Kathryn J. & Keil, Frank C.. 1986. Prototypicality in a linguistic context: Effects on sentence structure. Journal of Memory and Language 25. 59–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596x(86)90021-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kopaczyk, Joanna & Sauer, Hans. 2017. Defining and exploring binomials. In Kopaczyk, Joanna & Sauer, Hans (eds.), Binomials in the history of English, 1–23. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316339770.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kwon, Nahyun & Masuda, Keiko. 2019. On the ordering of elements in ideophonic echo-words versus prosaic dvandva compounds, with special reference to Korean and Japanese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 28. 29–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10831-019-09189-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lambrecht, Knud. 1984. Formulaicity, frame semantics, and pragmatics in German binomial expressions. Language 60 (4). 753–796. https://doi.org/10.2307/413798.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Legendre, Géraldine, Miyata, Yoshiro & Smolensky, Paul. 1990. Harmonic grammar - A formal multilevel connectionist theory of linguistic well-formedness: Theoretical foundations (CU-CS-465-90). Computer Science Technical Reports 447. http://scholar.colorado.edu/csci_techreports/447.Google Scholar
Liberman, Mark & Prince, Alan. 1977. On stress and linguistic rhythm. Linguistic Inquiry 8. 249–336.Google Scholar
Lohmann, Arne. 2014. English co-ordinate constructions: A processing perspective on constituent order. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139644273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malikel, Yakov. 1959. Studies in irreversible binomials. Lingua 8. 113–160. https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-3841(59)90018-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Masini, Francesca. 2006. Binomial constructions: Inheritance, specification and subregularities. Lingue e Linguaggio 2. 207–232.Google Scholar
McCarthy, John J. & Prince, Alan. 1993. Generalized alignment. In Booij, Gert & van Marle, Jaap (eds.), Yearbook of morphology, 79–153. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
McDonald Janet, L., Bock, Kathryn & Kelly, Michael H.. 1993. Word and world order: Semantic, phonological, and metrical determinants of serial position. Cognitive Psychology 25. 188–230. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1993.1005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mollin, Sandra. 2012. Revisiting binomial order in English: Ordering constraints and reversibility. English Language and Linguistics 16 (1). 81–103. https://doi.org/10.1017/s1360674311000293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mollin, Sandra. 2014. The (ir)reversibility of English binomials. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, Nicole A. 2003. Asymmetric anchoring. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers dissertation.Google Scholar
Pater, Joe. 2009. Weighted constraints in generative linguistics. Cognitive Science 33 (6). 999–1035. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01047.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pater, Joe. 2016. Universal grammar with weighted constraints. In McCarthy, John J. & Pater, Joe (eds.), Harmonic grammar and harmonic serialism, 1–46. London: Equinox Press.Google Scholar
Pinker, Steven & Birdsong, David. 1979. Speakers’ sensitivity to rules of frozen word order. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 18. 497–508. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0022-5371(79)90273-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pordány, Laszlo. 1986. A comparison of some English and Hungarian freezes. In Fisiak, Jacek (ed.), Papers and studies in contrastive linguistics, 119–127. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
Prince, Alan & Smolensky, Paul. 1993/2004. Optimality theory: Constraint interaction in generative grammar. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. [1993, TR 2, Rutgers University Cognitive Science Center].10.1002/9780470759400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Renner, Vincent. 2014. A study of element ordering in English coordinate lexical items. English Studies 95 (4). 441–458. https://doi.org/10.1080/0013838x.2014.908039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwarzwald, Ora. 1998. Word foreignness in modern Hebrew. Hebrew Studies 39. 115–142. https://doi.org/10.1353/hbr.1998.0000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Selkirk, Elisabeth. 1984. Phonology and syntax: The relation between sound and structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Shih, Stephanie S., Grafmiller, Jason, Futrell, Richard & Bresnan, Joan. 2015. Rhythm's role in genitive construction choice in spoken English. In Vogel, Ralf & van, Ruben Vijver, de (eds.), Rhythm in cognition and grammar, 207–234. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110378092.207CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shih, Stephanie S. & Zuraw, Kie. 2017. Phonological conditions on variable adjective and noun word order in Taglog. Language 93 (4). 317–352. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2017.0075.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Siewierska, Anna. 1988. Word order rules. London: Croom Helm. https://doi.org/10.2307/415269.Google Scholar
Smolensky, Paul & Legendre, Géraldine. 2006. The harmonic mind: From neural computation to optimality-theoretic grammar (Cognitive Architecture, Vol. 1). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Sobkowiak, Włodzimierz. 1993. Unmarked before marked as a freezing principle. Language and Speech 40 (3). 177–187. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-010-9163-x.Google Scholar
Stallings, Lynne M. & MacDonald, Maryellen C.. 2011. It's not just the “heavy NP”: Relative phrase length modulates the production of heavy-NP shift. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 36. 393414. https://doi.org/10.1177/002383099303600403.Google Scholar
Tachihara, Karina & Goldberg, Adele E.. 2020. Cognitive accessibility predicts word order of couples’ names in English and Japanese. Cognitive Linguistics 31 (2). 231–249. https://doi.org/10.1515/cog-2019-0031.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tai, James H-Y. 1985. Temporal sequence and Chinese word order. In Haiman, John (ed.), Iconicity in syntax, 24–26. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/ts1.6.04tai.Google Scholar
Wasow, Thomas. 1997. Remarks on grammatical weight. Language Variation and Change 9 (1). 81–105. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0954394500001800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wright, Saundra K., Hay, Jennifer & Bent, Tessa. 2005. Ladies first? Phonology, frequency, and the naming conspiracy. Linguistics 43 (3). 531–361. https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2005.43.3.531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zipf, George K. 1935/1965. The psycho-biology of language: an introduction to dynamic philology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press (1935 First edition. Houghton: Mifflin).Google Scholar