The view that language is in some way 'arbitrary', that there is no
formal relationship between a linguistic message and the thought it is
meant to convey, is long established and pervasive. The goal of John
Haiman's study is to challenge the monopoly of arbitrariness, which he
believes has affected in significant ways many models of linguistic
description and analysis, notably those proposed by Saussure and more
recently by Chomsky and his associates. Linguistic structures, Dr
Hainian claims, may be compared to (non-linguistic) diagrams of our
thoughts, and deviate from iconicity in many of the same ways and for
much the same reasons as do diagrams in general. Arbitrariness develops
as a result of the relatively familiar principles of economy,
generalization and association. In relation to this thesis, Dr Haiman
considers a wide variety of constructions, including conditionals and
interrogatives, gapping, causative structures, auxiliaries and
reflexives, and provides a wealth of exemplification from different
languages that also points to typological differences in respect of
iconicity.