Russianreallyishardforlcarners,andacasualcomparisonmightservetheconclusionthatbig,prestigiouslanguageslikeRussianarecomplex.Justlook,afterall,attheirrich,technicalvocabularies,andthecomplexindustrialsocietiesthattheyserve. Butlinguistswhohavecomparedlanguagessystematicallyarestruckbytheoppositeconclusion. Thisislargelybecauselinguists,unlikelaypeople,focusongrammar,notvocabulary,ConsiderBerik,spokeninafewvillagesineasternPapua.Itmaynothaveawordfor“supernova”,butitdripswithcomplexrules:amandatoryverbendingtellswhattimeofdaytheactionoccurred,andanotherindicatesthesizeofthedireetobject.Of coursethesethingscanbesaidinEnglish,butBerikrequiresthem.Remotesocicticsmaybemateriallysimplc;“primitive”",theirlanguagesarenot. Systematicallyso:astudyin2010ofthousandsoftongucsfoundthatsmallerlanguageshavemoreBerik-stylegrammaticalbitsandpiecesattachedtowords.Bycontrast,biggeronestendtobelikeEnglishorMandarin,inwhichwordschangetheirformlttleifatall.Nooneknowswhy,butalikelyculpritistheveryscaleandubiquityofsuchwidelytravelledlanguages. Asalanguagespreads,moreforeignerscometolearnitasadults(thankstoconquestandtrade,forexample).Sincelanguagesaremorecomplexthantheyneedtobe,manyofthoseadultlearnerswill-Stalin-style-ignoresomeofthenicetieswheretheycan.Ifthosenewcomershavechildren,thechildrenwilloftenlearnaslightlysimplerversionofthelanguagefromtheirparents. Butanewstudy,conductedattheMaxPlanckInstituteforPsycholinguisticsatNijmegenintheNetherlands,hasfoundthatitisnotentirelyforeignersandtheirsloppywaysthataretoblameforlanguagesbecomingsimpler.Merelybeingbiggerwasenough.Theresearchers,LimorRaviv,AntjeMeyerandShiriLev-Ari,asked12groupsoffourstrangersand12groupsofeighttoinventlanguagestodescribeagroupofmovingshapesonthescreen.Theyweretoldthatthegoalwastorackuppointsforcommunicatingsuccessfullyover16rounds.(They“talked"bykeyboardandwereforbiddentousetheirnativelanguage,Dutch.) Overtimebothbigandsmallgroupsgotbetteratmakingthemselvesunderstood,butthebiggeronesdidsobycrcatingmoresystematiclanguagesastheyinteracted,withfeweridiosyncrasies.Therescarcherssupposethatthisisbecausethemembersofthelargergroupshadfewerinteractionswitheachothermember,thisputpressureonthemtocomeupwithclearpatterns.Smallergroupscouldaffordquirkierlanguages,becausetheirmembersgotto“know”cachotherbetter. Ncitherthemoresystematicnorthemoreidiosyncraticlanguageswere“better",givengroupsize:thesmallandlargegroupscommunicatedequallywell.Buttheworkprovidesevidencethatanidiosyncraticlanguageisbestsuitedtoasmallgroupwithrichsharedhistory,Asthelanguagespreads,itncedstobecomemore predictablc. Takenwithpreviousstudies,thenewresearchoffersatwo-partanswertowhygrammarrulesarebuilt-andlost.Asgroupsgrow,theneedforsystematicrulesbecomesgreater,unlearnablein-group-speakwithrandomvariationwon'tdo.Butlanguagesdevelopmorerulesthantheyneed;astheyarelearnedbyforeignspeakersjoiningthegroup.someofthesegetstrippedaway.Thiscanexplainwhypairsofcloselyrelatedlanguages-TajikandPersian,IcelandicandSwedish,FrisianandEnglish-differingrammaticalcomplexity.Ineachcouple,theformerlanguageisbothsmallerandmoreisolated.Systematicityisrequiredforgrowth.Lostcomplexityisthecostofforeignerslearmingyourlanguage.Itisthepriceofsuccess. Whichofthefollowingsentencesbestfitintheblankinthesecondparagraph?
A.They found that Russian does not actually has the most complex grammar rules compared to other languages. B.They tend to find that big languages spoken by large numbers of people are actually simpler than small ones. C.They found that there is not any pattern about the relation between the complexity ofa language and its' popularity. D.They found that laypeople usually pay attention to whether the vocabulary in one language is complex or simple.正确答案B
