To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
The term non-canonical syntax generally refers to deviations from 'typical' word order. These represent a fascinating phenomenon in natural language use. With contributions from a team of renowned scholars, this book presents a range of case-studies on non-canonical syntax across historical, register-based, and non-native varieties of English. Each chapter investigates a different non-canonical construction and assesses to what extent it can be called 'non-canonical' in a theory-based and frequency-based understanding of non-canonical syntax. A range of state-of-the-art methodologies are used, highlighting that an empirical approach to non-canonical syntactic constructions is particularly fruitful. An introduction, a synopsis, a terminological chapter, and three section introductions frame the case studies and present overviews of the theory behind non-canonical syntax and previous work, while also illustrating open questions and opportunities for future research. The volume is essential reading for advanced students of English grammar and researchers working on non-canonical syntax and syntactic variation. This title is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.
Historical Sociolinguistics is the study of the relationship between language and society in its historical dimension. This is the first textbook to introduce this vibrant field, based on examples and case studies taken from a variety of languages. Chapters begin with clear explanations of core concepts, which are then applied to historical contexts from different languages, such as English, French, Hindi and Mandarin. The volume uses several pedagogical methods, allowing readers to gain a deeper understanding of the theory and of examples. A list of key terms is provided, covering the main theoretical and methodological issues discussed. The book also includes a range of exercises and short further reading sections for students. It is ideal for students of sociolinguistics and historical linguistics, as well as providing a basic introduction to historical sociolinguistics for anyone with an interest in linguistics or social history.
In grammaticalization studies, reanalysis is understood as the assignment of new meaning to formally unchanged elements, supported by bridging contexts compatible with the old and the reanalyzed meaning. The source determination hypothesis (SDH) predicts that parallel grammaticalization trajectories occur crosslinguistically, as similar source meanings give rise to similar inferences. One such pattern is the development of recent past markers from FINISH constructions. While grammaticalization pathways are well-documented crosslinguistically, the SDH has never been tested experimentally. In this study, we examine whether modern English speakers are sensitive to inferences arising from a bridging context identified as relevant to the grammaticalization of Old Spanish FINISH into a recent past marker. In a temporal distance judgment task, we examined whether the bridging context identified for Old Spanish facilitates an inference of temporal immediacy in contemporary English, where the construction has not been grammaticalized. In line with the SDH, the bridging context enhanced an inference of immediacy in contemporary English (Exp. 1), with specific grammatical features of the source determining its strength (Exp. 2). These results not only demonstrate the viability of testing hypotheses about language change using experimental pragmatics but also call for empirically refining the concept of source determination.
This is an extended review of Jonathan Owens, Arabic and the Case against Linearity in Historical Linguistics (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2023) that addresses several important issues in the methodology of historical Arabic linguistics.
This article provides a detailed description of an undocumented use of zaìshì 在勢 as a deontic adverb in Late Qing and Early Republican Chinese literature. This word commonly functions as a verb (“to hold power”) or a nominalized verb (“one who holds power”), but its use as a preposed deontic adverb, meaning “under these circumstances”, is not attested in earlier Chinese texts and has no cognates in other Sinitic languages. The author analyses the syntax and semantics of zaìshì in a large corpus of medieval Chinese texts and early Chinese translations of foreign literature. The article then suggests that the preposed deontic adverb zaìshì emerged as the result of the appropriation of linguistic elements present in classical literature but whose use had been restricted to classical forms of literary composition.
The study of the history of English has its roots in the work of English scholars who first concerned themselves with the nature of their language about four hundred years ago. Prior to the eighteenth century this work was pre-linguistic, positing a divine origin for language and comparing English (unfavourably) to Classical Greek and Latin. With the advent of modern linguistics in Indo-European research, the history of English became an object of academic interest and the first university positions for its study were established, mainly in Germany and Scandinavia. Simultaneously there arose a tradition of studying English dialects, first as an antiquarian occupation in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, then later as an attempt to capture local history in the vocabulary of specific regions in the twentieth. This then led to the production of dialect dictionaries and surveys.
This article, the third in a series, focuses on the “living” preverbs used in the verbal system of contemporary Pashto. The verbs treated here belong to the “compound verbs with preverb” class or to the “mixed verbs with preverb” class: verbs that replace the wə́- of the simple verbs with another preverb. This class of verbs represents a closed set, and a complete list of these verbs can be investigated systematically and exhaustively. This subject is as yet unexamined and its implications for the interpretation of contemporary Pashto verbal morphology are particularly stimulating.
This paper proposes new origins for tense vowels in Tangut by integrating textual analysis of Tangut texts with comparative data from both Gyalrongic and other Sino-Tibetan languages. It uncovers two previously unreported sources of vowel tensing in compounding: the collective prefix (*S-) and the compound linker (*-S-). Both morphemes left only a few traces, indicating their antiquity and productivity in earlier stages. The collective *S- could be an inherited morpheme which finds parallels in Tibetan, whereas the compound linker *-S- emerged as a stage of morphological merging in West Gyalrongic with (an) obscure origin(s). These findings not only advance our understanding of the origins of Tangut tense vowels but also offer insights into Sino-Tibetan nominal morphology.
Linguistic contact is a reality of everyday life, as speakers of different languages come into contact with one another, often causing language change. This undergraduate textbook provides a means by which these processes, both modern and historical, can be analysed, based on cutting-edge theoretical and methodological practices. Chapters cover language death, the development of pidgins and creoles, linguistic convergence and language contact, and new variety formation. Each chapter is subdivided into key themes, which are supported by diverse and real-world case studies. Student learning is bolstered by illustrative maps, exercises, research tasks, further reading suggestions, and a glossary. Ancillary resources are available including extra content not covered in the book, links to recordings of some of the language varieties covered, and additional discussion, presentation and essay topics. Primarily for undergraduate students of linguistics, it provides a balanced, historically grounded, and up-to-date introduction to linguistic contact and language change.
This article addresses derivational issues related to palatalization in Khotanese, focusing on action nouns of the kīra- type (< *-i̯a-). It is argued that diachronic palatalization conforms to the rules of synchronic palatalization and that the origin of the hapax legomenon jsīna- “killing” (Z 13.124), which apparently violates these rules, needs to be interpreted differently. It is traced back to a reduplicated Indo-Iranian verbal stem *ǰa-ghn- (cf. Young Avestan jaɣn-) < Proto-Indo-European *gwhé-gwhn- “to strike repeatedly” → “to kill”. This stem is also reflected in the Khotanese gerundive jsīñaa- “to be killed” < *dzai̯n-i̯a- ← *dzaɣn- < Iranian *ǰa-gn-. The article contributes additional evidence supporting the development of the preconsonantal voiced velar fricative *ɣ into *i̯ in pre-Khotanese.
Recent research shows that, even under direct insertion, loan verbs are subject to constraints: for instance, they enter non-finite categories more readily than finite categories. To deepen our understanding of such loan word accommodation biases we investigate two contact situations to test whether biases hold in contact between closely related languages. A corpus study on Norse and French loan verbs entering Middle English compares the proportions of their finite and non-finite usage to gauge the impact of etymology and temporal distance to direct contact on loan integration. We identify significant bias towards non-finite use for both etymologies, but it is stronger for French than for Norse loan verbs. This suggests that biases are stronger in some contexts than in others: they are more prominent at a smaller temporal distance to direct contact and in contact between languages that are less closely related.
Several scholars noted that the pronunciations of 天 “sky” tiān and 風 “wind” fēng in Bai appear to be akin to the western variants of the words attested in the paronomastic gloss dictionary Shìmíng 釋名. I will demonstrate in the current study that there are additional commonalities shared by both Bai and the ancient western dialect, termed Old Western Chinese (OWC) in this study. In both languages, one can identify words with zy- in Middle Chinese (MC) that are pronounced j-. Bai and Old Western Chinese use the same word (椹 shèn) for “fungus”. Furthermore, Old Chinese (OC) cluster *-p/t-s yields -t in both languages in lieu of yielding -j as observed in Middle Chinese. Last but not least, it appears that in both languages, words with *lˤ- (whence MC d-) and -ʔ (whence MC rising tone) are distinct from other words with d- in Middle Chinese. Hence, this paper puts the claim that Bai is akin to Old Western Chinese on a stronger footing. As a side note, judging from the fact that 四 “four” sì contains -t in Old Western Chinese and early Bai, its Old Chinese form most likely ends in *-[t]-s.
This article examines the word histories of 12 nouns (eight zoonyms, two other lifeform names, and two toponyms) in Mixtec, a shallow or emergent language family of Mesoamerica. It argues that these nouns—now morphologically opaque—are fused compounds that arose from the Mixtec vocabulary of the mantic count of 260 days, a temporal organization that was part of the common cultural heritage of pre-Hispanic Mesoamerican peoples. With the European colonization and persecution of Mesoamerican religious practices, the use of the mantic count was abandoned. It was at this time that the compounds would have been demotivated; that is, the internal morphological structure would have become inaccessible to speakers who could no longer relate it to the mantic cycle. This then enriched the lexicon, creating etymological pairs for the same, or similar, referents. It is suggested that the survival of the eight zoonyms may have to do with their use in the context of omens.
While engaged in helping rebuild a post-Napoleonic Prussia and Europe after his Roman years, Humboldt pursued several linguistic projects: a linguistic cartography of Europe applicable to other continents; initial analyses of Nahuatl; grammatical sketches of seven other Mexican languages; a programmatic comparative-contrastive statement of linguistics in “Essai sur les langues du nouveau Continent;” an in-depth analysis of Quechua of the Andes plus grammatical sketches for Araucano (Mapuche), Guaraní, and Muisca of South America; comparative studies of Aztecan, Mayan, or Tupian language families and linguistic areas; introduction to Massachusett, Mahican, and Onondaga grammars of eastern North America; noun incorporation versus polysynthesis; growing understanding of verbal morphology, including the zero morpheme; “inner forms” of American languages; attention to language contact and also to extralinguistic, sociocultural scenes and wider contexts as part of comprehensive descriptions and explanations of differences and changes in languages without literary traditions in substitution of historical records.
It has long been recognized that the Semitic suffix conjugation and the Berber adjectival perfective suffix conjugation have striking similarities in their morphology, which has been correctly attributed to be the result of a shared inheritance from Proto-Afro-Asiatic. Nevertheless, the function of these conjugations in the respective language families is quite distinct. This article argues that ultimately this suffix conjugation is a predicative suffix in the common ancestor of Berber and Semitic, and moreover shows that Semitic and Berber have significant overlap in the stem formations of adjectives. It is argued that these formations must likewise be reconstructed for their common ancestor.
This paper discusses a secondary addition of syllable-final glottal stops in Ganan (Sino-Tibetan > Sal > Jingpho-Luish). In particular, it deals with the phenomenon where words ending with i or u in Luish languages Cak and Kadu have an additional glottal stop in Ganan. This study found that words ending with i or u can be reconstructed as either *i or *iy or *u or *uw respectively, and the secondary glottal stop is added in Ganan when the reconstructed form is *iy or *uw and does not have a high tone.
A comprehensive description of the combination of the finite auxiliary verbs wērden ‘become’/wēsen ‘be’ and a present participle in Middle Low German is still a strong desideratum. This study presents a corpus-based analysis of the aforementioned phenomenon with a special focus on its grammatical structure and its different meanings. In particular, it focuses on a wide range of temporal and aspectual meanings, depending on the auxiliary verb, its tense and mood. Moreover, the relationship between the semantics of the main verb and the meaning of the whole construction is investigated. Finally, the competition with alternative verbal complex constructions expressing the same meaning is also explored. The analysis is carried out on the basis of Middle Low German texts from different times, language areas, and genres.
The apostrophe was introduced into the English orthographic system by the mid sixteenth century as a printer's mark especially designed ‘for the eye rather than for the ear’ (Sklar 1976: 175; Little 1986: 15). Whereas the uses of the apostrophe today are limited to the Saxon genitive construction (the woman's book), to verbal contractions (you'll ‘you will’ or you're ‘you are’) and to other formulaic expressions (o'clock), its early uses also included other cases of elision and some abbreviated words (Parkes 1992: 55‒6; Beal 2010a: 58). Among this plethora of uses, perhaps one of the most distinctive functions of this symbol is the indication of the genitive construction, which has no full form in Present-day English after the progressive extinction of the genitive case affix. Such a development could have also happened in the regular past morpheme, but its outcome differed, as it continues to be spelled out today.
The present article is then concerned with the standardisation of the apostrophe in the English orthographic system in the period 1600–1900 and pursues the following objectives: (a) to study the use and omission of the apostrophe in the expression of the past tense, the genitive case and the nominative plural in the period; (b) to assess the relationship between the three uses and their likely connections; and (c) to evaluate the likely participation of grammarians in the adoption and the rejection of each of these phenomena in English. The source of evidence for this corpus-based study comes from A Representative Corpus of Historical English Registers (ARCHER 3.2, Denison & Yáñez-Bouza 2013), sampling language use in different genres and text types in the historical period 1700–1900. Additionally, the Early English Books Online corpus (EEBO, Davies 2017) has also been used as material to investigate the early uses of the possessive apostrophe in the late sixteenth century. A preliminary data analysis confirms the second half of the seventeenth century as the period that saw the definite rise of the genitive apostrophe in English, refuting the early assumptions which considered it to be an eighteenth-century development (Crystal 1995: 68; Lukač 2014: 3). The results also suggest that this phenomenon was to some extent associated with the decline of the apostrophe in other environments, more particularly in the expression of the regular past tense forms. Moreover, there seems to be no indication that standardisation emerged from linguistic prescription; instead, grammars seem to have been shaped after use.
Chapter 1 introduces the field of historical pragmatics. The rise of historical pragmatics in the mid-1990s was the result of changes in both linguistics and pragmatics. In linguistics, a reawakened interest in historical linguistics, combined with an emphasis on language as performance, on the ephemeral aspects of language, on meanings as negotiated in use, with the importance of social and cultural factors in shaping language use, with the increased importance of the analysis of empirical data, made easier by the development of computer corpora, all set the groundwork for the rise of historical pragmatics. In pragmatics, it was the recognition that written discourse, and not just oral discourse, constituted communicative acts produced in a social and cultural context, and was thus a valid subject of pragmatic study. The scope of historical pragmatics spans the two branches of pragmatics, the Anglo-American and the European Continental branch, with two aligned fields – historical sociolinguistics and historical sociopragmatics – having affinity with the latter. The chapter includes an introductory case study of pragmatic markers exemplifying the approach of historical pragmatics.
Middle Low German is generally considered to be a direct successor to Old Saxon. However, later dialects, including Middle Low German, differ from Old Saxon with respect to a number of features, which is unexpected under a direct succession relationship. To account for the presence of such features, some scholars attribute them to High German influence on Middle Low German (Wolff 1934, Stiles 1995, Stiles 2013). Others, however, hypothesize that written Old Saxon (which provides the basis for the comparison) was an artificial grapholect that reflected Old English and Franconian conventions rather than a genuine spoken language (Collitz 1901, Rooth 1973, Doane 1991:45–46). This paper further contributes to this discussion by examining the systems of degree adverbs in Old Saxon and Middle Low German. Based on data from different corpora, it is shown that the system in Old Saxon resembles the one in Old English, while the Middle Low German system is comparable to the systems in Middle High German and Early Middle Dutch. It is concluded that an explanation based solely on language contact is problematic, and that the grapholect hypothesis has more explanatory power.*