CAH and MDH
Tuesday, August 30th, 2005We discussed the Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis followed by the Marked Differentiatial Hypothesis. I gave a short presentation on Lado’s article on the complexities of vocabulary learning and teaching. Seemed to go well.
Remember that the MDH only applies to things that relate to implicational universals. Implicational universals are so intriguing! They really blow your mind at times. Further, they make me believe that there is something innately capable of “getting” language.
Let me give an example of one of these implicational universals.
Words for colors appear in the following order:
(purple, pink, orange, grey) -> brown -> blue -> (green, yellow) -> red -> (white, black)
This means that if a language has a word for blue, then it also has words for green, yellow, red, white, and black. This also says that a language that does not have a word for blue will not have a word for brown. Isn’t that crazy?! So, a language, if it has a word for color, will start with white or black. It will then add red, then…
See this for examples:
http://www.putlearningfirst.com/language/research/colour_words.html
http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a2_168b.html
This “implicational universal” comes from Berlin and Kay, 1969, which I just searched on the Internet to see if there was any newer information that might challenge it. I found some stuff:
http://www.icsi.berkeley.edu/wcs/study.html
This site uses the word “universal tendency” rather than implicational universal, denoting that it is a tendency rather than hard and fast rule. However, still the tendency is amazing, no?

Here’s the REAL BatCat
