Menu
Home
People
Places
Arts
History
Plants & Animals
Science
Life & Culture
Technology
Reference.org
Accidental gap
open-in-new
<h2 id="phonological-gaps">Phonological gaps</h2> <p>Often words that are allowed in the phonological system of a language are absent. For example, in English the <a href="/facts/Consonant_cluster/CxFhVk8X">consonant cluster</a> /spr/ is allowed at the beginning of words such as <i>spread</i> or <i>spring</i> and the <a href="/facts/Syllable_rime/Ylt7pyJe">syllable rime</a> /ɪk/ occurs in words such as <i>sick</i> or <i>flicker</i>. Even so, there is no English word pronounced */sprɪk/. Although this potential word is phonologically <a href="/facts/Well-formedness/Hb54VaNt">well-formed</a> according to English <a href="/facts/Phonotactics/SqxGkJ67">phonotactics</a>, it happens to not exist.<a class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:2" href="#fn:2"><sup>2</sup></a> </p><p>The term "phonological gap" is also used to refer to the absence of a <a href="/facts/Phonemic_contrast/p1vGJloj">phonemic contrast</a> in part of the phonological system.<a class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:3" href="#fn:3"><sup>3</sup></a> For example, <a href="/facts/Thai_language/PnaLdG77">Thai</a> has several sets of <a href="/facts/Stop_consonant/okC9pztc">stop consonants</a> that differ in terms of <a href="/facts/Voice_(phonetics)/VdqrEGQ3">voicing</a> (whether or not the <a href="/facts/Vocal_cords/H1K7NPo2">vocal cords</a> vibrate) and <a href="/facts/Aspiration_(phonetics)/Kat42tA6">aspiration</a> (whether a puff of air is released). Yet the language has no voiced <a href="/facts/Velar_stop/YLmfGoqx">velar stop</a> (/ɡ/).<a class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:4" href="#fn:4"><sup>4</sup></a> This lack of an expected distinction is commonly called a "hole in the pattern".<a class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:5" href="#fn:5"><sup>5</sup></a> </p> Thai stop consonants<table><tbody><tr><th>plain voiceless</th><th>aspirated voiceless</th><th>voiced consonant</th></tr><tr><td>p</td><td>pʰ</td><td>b</td></tr><tr><td>t</td><td>tʰ</td><td>d</td></tr><tr><td>k</td><td>kʰ</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table> <h2 id="morphological-gaps">Morphological gaps</h2> <p>A morphological gap is the absence of a word that could exist given the morphological rules of a language, including its <a href="/facts/Affix/MKeAIE7e">affixes</a>.<a class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:6" href="#fn:6"><sup>6</sup></a> For example, in English a <a href="/facts/Deverbal_noun/lv7Te1pj">deverbal noun</a> can be formed by adding either the suffix <i>-al</i> or <i>-(t)ion</i> to certain verbs (typically words from <a href="/facts/Latin_language/pM3Kge85">Latin</a> through <a href="/facts/Anglo-Norman_French/GmwkRAzQ">Anglo-Norman French</a> or <a href="/facts/Old_French/QcRpPdAc">Old French</a>). Some verbs, such as <i>recite</i> have two related nouns, <i>recital</i> and <i>recitation</i>. However, in many cases there is only one such noun, as illustrated in the chart below. Although in principle the morphological rules of English allow for other nouns, those words do not exist.<a class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:7" href="#fn:7"><sup>7</sup></a> </p> <table><tbody><tr><th>verb</th><th>noun (<i>-al</i>)</th><th>noun (<i>-ion</i>)</th></tr><tr><td>recite</td><td>recital</td><td>recitation</td></tr><tr><td>propose</td><td>proposal</td><td>proposition</td></tr><tr><td>arrive</td><td>arrival</td><td><i>"arrivation"</i></td></tr><tr><td>refuse</td><td>refusal</td><td><i>"refusation"</i></td></tr><tr><td>describe</td><td><i>"describal"</i></td><td>description</td></tr></tbody></table> <p>Many potential words that could be made following morphological rules of a language do not enter the <a href="/facts/Lexicon/MxfVm3gl">lexicon</a>.<a class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:8" href="#fn:8"><sup>8</sup></a> <a href="/facts/Blocking_(linguistics)/rIGVemJQ">Blocking</a>, including <i>homonymy blocking</i> and <i>synonymy blocking</i>, stops some potential words.[6] A <a href="/facts/Homonym/2GFCuaCa">homonym</a> of an existing word may be blocked. For example, the word <i>liver</i> meaning "someone who lives" is only rarely used because the word <i><a href="/facts/Liver/Rtp4Fk2b">liver</a></i> (an internal organ) already exists.<a class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:9" href="#fn:9"><sup>9</sup></a> Likewise, a potential word can be blocked if it is a <a href="/facts/Synonym/a3BgMcdu">synonym</a> of an existing word. An older, more common word blocks a potential synonym, known as <i>token-blocking</i>. For example, the word <i>stealer</i> ("someone who steals") is also rarely used, because the word <i><a href="/facts/Thief/B2zvPLGA">thief</a></i> already exists. Not only individual words, but entire <a href="/facts/Word_formation/dcqY8cYp">word formation</a> processes may be blocked. For example, the <a href="/facts/Suffix/Nlnft3NK">suffix</a> <i>-ness</i> is used to form nouns from adjectives. This <a href="/facts/Productivity_(linguistics)/px1fUjDw">productive</a> word-formation pattern blocks many potential nouns that could be formed with <i>-ity</i>. Nouns such as *<i>calmity</i> (a potential synonym of <i>calmness</i>) and *<i>darkity</i> (cf. <i>darkness</i>) are unused potential words. This is known as <i>type-blocking</i>.[6] </p><p>A <a href="/facts/Defective_verb/LGwAbk5H">defective verb</a> is a verb that lacks some <a href="/facts/Grammatical_conjugation/z1j65HK8">grammatical conjugation</a>. For example, several verbs in <a href="/facts/Russian_language/ETXrTgHV">Russian</a> do not have a <a href="/facts/Grammatical_person/PfUA43oU">first-person</a> <a href="/facts/Grammatical_number/zzs5AV6v">singular</a> form in <a href="/facts/Present_tense/Dlum8nSr">non-past tense</a>. Although most verbs have such a form (e.g. <i>vožu</i> "I lead"), about 100 verbs in the <a href="/facts/Russian_grammar/wGXNJksH">second conjugation</a> pattern (e.g. *<i>derz'u</i> "I talk rudely"; the asterisk indicates <a href="/facts/Grammaticality/MJ1to9uY">ungrammaticality</a>) do not appear as first-person singular in the present-future tense.<a class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:10" href="#fn:10"><sup>10</sup></a> Morris Halle called this defective verb paradigm an example of an accidental gap. </p><p>The similar case of <a href="/facts/Unpaired_word/GqSlJhRk">unpaired words</a> occurs where one word is obsolete or rare while another word <a href="/facts/Derivation_(linguistics)/1ED86Ao8">derived</a> from it is more common. Examples include <i>effable</i> (whence <i>ineffable</i>), <i>kempt</i> (whence <i>unkempt</i>), or <i>whelm</i> (root of <i>overwhelmed</i>).<a class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:11" href="#fn:11"><sup>11</sup></a> </p> <h2 id="semantic-gaps">Semantic gaps</h2> <p>A gap in <a href="/facts/Semantics/1L4WwLAP">semantics</a> occurs when a particular meaning distinction visible elsewhere in the lexicon is absent. For example, English words describing family members generally show <a href="/facts/Gender/LfjRHcJy">gender</a> distinction. Yet the English word <i>cousin</i> can refer to either a male or female cousin.<a class="footnote-ref" id="fnref:12" href="#fn:12"><sup>12</sup></a> Similarly, while there are general terms for siblings and parents, there is no comparable common gender-neutral term for a parent's sibling, and traditionally none for a sibling's child. The separate words predicted on the basis of this semantic contrast are absent from the language, or at least from many speakers' dialects. It is possible to coin new ones (as happened with the word <i><a href="/facts/Nibling/X7hvogyh">nibling</a></i>), but whether those words gain widespread acceptance in general use, or remain <a href="/facts/Neologism/vlq6w82X">neologistic</a> and resisted outside particular <a href="/facts/Register_(sociolinguistics)/q1eujwX8">registers</a>, is a matter of prevailing <a href="/facts/Usage_(language)/arBgNK1u">usage</a> in each era. </p> <table><tbody><tr><th>male</th><th>female</th><th>neutral</th></tr><tr><td>grandfather</td><td>grandmother</td><td>grandparent</td></tr><tr><td>father</td><td>mother</td><td>parent</td></tr><tr><td>son</td><td>daughter</td><td>child</td></tr><tr><td>brother</td><td>sister</td><td>sibling</td></tr><tr><td>uncle</td><td>aunt</td><td>pibling (but this coinage remains in limited use to date)</td></tr><tr><td>nephew</td><td>niece</td><td><a href="/facts/Nibling/X7hvogyh">nibling</a> (but this coinage remains in limited use to date)</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td>cousin</td></tr></tbody></table> <h2 id="see-also">See also</h2> <ul><li><a href="/facts/Idiom_(language_structure)/1kqDMAbI">Idiom (language structure)</a></li> <li><a href="/facts/Lacuna_model/ym4LxMxq">Lacuna model</a></li> <li><a href="/facts/Pseudoword/jyqqtlrC">Pseudoword</a>, a unit that appears to be a word in a language but has no meaning in its lexicon</li> <li><a href="/facts/Semantic_gap/EVM27Ke2">Semantic gap</a> in computer programming languages and natural language processing</li> <li><a href="/facts/Sniglet/o22vzrok">Sniglet</a>, described as "any word that doesn't appear in the dictionary, but should"</li></ul> <h2 id="notes">Notes</h2> <h2 id="references">References</h2> <ol> <li id="fn:1"><p>Crystal, David (2003). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN 0-6312-2664-8. <a href="0-6312-2664-8" target="_blank">0-6312-2664-8</a> <a href="#fnref:1" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></p></li> <li id="fn:2"><p>Trask, Robert Lawrence (1996). A Dictionary of Phonetics and Phonology. London: Routledge. <a href="#fnref:2" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></p></li> <li id="fn:3"><p>Crystal, David (2003). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN 0-6312-2664-8. <a href="0-6312-2664-8" target="_blank">0-6312-2664-8</a> <a href="#fnref:3" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></p></li> <li id="fn:4"><p>Abramson, Arthur S. (1962). The Vowels and Tones of Standard Thai: Acoustical Measurements and Experiments. Bloomington: Indiana University Research Center in Anthropology, Folklore, and Linguistics. <a href="#fnref:4" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></p></li> <li id="fn:5"><p>Trask, Robert Lawrence (1996). A Dictionary of Phonetics and Phonology. London: Routledge. <a href="#fnref:5" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></p></li> <li id="fn:6"><p>Crystal, David (2003). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN 0-6312-2664-8. <a href="0-6312-2664-8" target="_blank">0-6312-2664-8</a> <a href="#fnref:6" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></p></li> <li id="fn:7"><p>Kerstens, Johan; Eddy Ruys; Joost Zwarts, eds. (2001). "Accidental gap". Lexicon of Linguistics. Utrecht institute of Linguistics OTS. Retrieved 2011-02-12. <a href="http://www2.let.uu.nl/UiL-OTS/Lexicon/zoek.pl?lemma=Accidental+gap&lemmacode=975" target="_blank">http://www2.let.uu.nl/UiL-OTS/Lexicon/zoek.pl?lemma=Accidental+gap&lemmacode=975</a> <a href="#fnref:7" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></p></li> <li id="fn:8"><p>Aronoff, Mark (1983). "Potential words, actual words, productivity and frequency". Proceedings of the 13th International Congress of Linguists: 163–171. <a href="#fnref:8" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></p></li> <li id="fn:9"><p>Naghzguy-Kohan, Mehrdad; Kuteva, Tania (1 January 2016). "On competition and blocking in inflectional morphology: Evidence from the domainof number in New Persian". Folia Linguistica. 50 (1). doi:10.1515/flin-2016-0003. <a href="/wiki/Doi_(identifier)" target="_blank">/wiki/Doi_(identifier)</a> <a href="#fnref:9" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></p></li> <li id="fn:10"><p>Halle, Morris (1973). "Prolegomena to a theory of word-formation". Linguistic Inquiry. 4: 451–464. <a href="#fnref:10" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></p></li> <li id="fn:11"><p>Quinion, Michael (23 November 1996). "Unpaired words". World Wide Words. Retrieved 2012-07-31. <a href="http://www.worldwidewords.org/articles/unpaired.htm" target="_blank">http://www.worldwidewords.org/articles/unpaired.htm</a> <a href="#fnref:11" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></p></li> <li id="fn:12"><p>Crystal, David (2003). A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell. ISBN 0-6312-2664-8. <a href="0-6312-2664-8" target="_blank">0-6312-2664-8</a> <a href="#fnref:12" class="footnote-back-ref">↩</a></p></li> </ol>