a Department of Psychology , Northeastern University , Boston , MA , USA.
Cogn Neuropsychol. 2017 Oct-Dec;34(7-8):493-499. doi: 10.1080/02643294.2017.1422485.
It is well known that, across languages, certain phonological features are more frequent than others. But whether these facts reflect abstract universal markedness constraints or functional pressures (auditory and articulatory difficulties and lexical frequency) is unknown. Romani, Galuzzi, Guariglia, and Goslin (2017) report that the putative markedness of phonological features captures their order of acquisition and their propensity to elicit errors in patients with an apraxia of speech (but not in phonological aphasia). The authors believe these results challenge the existence of abstract markedness constraints. They also raise some concerns about the explanatory utility of the markedness hypothesis. This commentary demonstrates that markedness is not inherently vague or vacuous nor is it falsified by Romani et al.'s empirical findings. As such, these results leave wide open the possibility that some phonological markedness constraints are abstract.
众所周知，在不同的语言中，某些语音特征比其他特征更为常见。但是，这些事实反映的是抽象的普遍标记限制还是功能压力（听觉和发音困难以及词汇频率）尚不清楚。Romani、Galuzzi、Guariglia 和 Goslin（2017 年）报告说，语音特征的假定标记性可以捕捉它们的习得顺序以及在言语运动障碍患者中引起错误的倾向（但在语音性失语症患者中不会）。作者认为这些结果对抽象标记限制的存在提出了挑战。他们还对标记假说的解释力提出了一些担忧。这篇评论表明，标记性不是内在模糊或空洞的，也不会被 Romani 等人的实证发现所证伪。因此，这些结果为某些语音标记限制可能是抽象的留下了很大的可能性。
