Historical linguistics

Language Change over Time
Change in Time
• The rate of change varies, but they build up until the "mother
  tongue" becomes arbitrarily distant and different (cf. difficulty
  in understanding some Brits or even Appalachians)
• After a thousand years, the original and new languages will
  not be mutually intelligible (cf. English and German and
  Dutch, and even more distantly English and Pashto (language
  of Afghanistan))
• After ten thousand years, the relationship will be essentially
  indistinguishable from chance relationships between
  historically unrelated languages.
• Some changes take place in one generation (the cot-caught
  merger), some take over hundreds of years (word order change
  in Classic Chinese)
Historical Reconstruction
• When considering whether languages are
  related, we look for systematic
  correspondences between vocabulary items in
  different languages
• Since the relationship between sound and
  meaning is arbitrary (dog-chein-gou), these
  differences aren’t expected accidentally
A Note of Caution
• Chance resemblance is possible, just not
  common
• English bad, Persian bad “bad”
• Dutch elkaar “each other”, Basque elkar “each
  other”
• Examination of the rest of the vocabulary of
  these languages reveal that these are accidental
Another Note of Caution
• Borrowing
• We need to consider if the word is a new addition to
  the language or if it is vocabulary that is native to the
  language
• e.g. we don’t want to conclude that English and
  Mandarin are related based on:
   – English: /kɑfi/ “coffee, Mandarin: /kɑfe/ “coffee”
   – Btw, the English term came from Arabic, by way of
     Turkish and then Dutch
Classifying Languages

• These systematic correspondences (we’ll look at
  them more in a moment) are used to classify
  languages according to their origins.
• Languages are put into families (and sub-
  families)
• the relationships between languages are described
  using female terms: most often daughter (and
  mother)
Indo-European (IE)
• An early sketch from the late 1800s, more or
  less accurate even today
Italic
• The Romance languages descended from Latin
  are the only Italic languages spoken today
•   Ibero-Romance: Portuguese, Spanish
•   Gallo-Romance: French, Catalan, Romansch
•   Italo-Romance: Italian, Sardinian
•   Balkano-Romance: Romanian
Germanic

• English is part of the Germanic family.
Clear Cognates
English   Dutch   Danish
one       een     en
two       twee    to
three     drie    tre
four      vier    fire
five      vijf    fem
six       zes     seks
seven     zeven   syv
eight     acht    otte
nine      negen   ni
ten       tien         ti
Classifying Languages: Indo-European

• We also notice that there are similarities
  between Latin (Romance), English /
  German (Germanic) and yet other
  languages: Greek and Sanskrit, for
  example.
• Sir William Jones, in the 1780s, was the
  first to notice them.
More Distant Relatives
English    Lithuanian       Greek
one        vienas       heis
two        du           duo
three      trys         treis
four       keturi       tettares
five       penki        pente
six        sheshi       heks
seven      septyni      hepta
eight      ashtuoni     oktô
nine       devyni       ennea
ten        deshimt      deka
Classifying Languages: Indo-European
Language Classification: How?

We rely on two things:

• the Uniformitarian Principle

• The regularity of sound-change
The Uniformitarian Principle
‘knowledge of processes that operated in the past
      can be inferred by observing ongoing
            processes in the present’

                or, for language:

‘Language must work now in the same way as it
                  ever did’
Regularity of Sound-Change
• Most of historical linguistics relies on the
  assumption that

• sound-change is regular and exceptionless

• That is, any sound-change will affect all the
  words that contain that (combination of)
  sound(s).
“regular and exceptionless’
• Consider:
• OE cnafa /knava/ > ModE knave /nejv/
• OE cniht /knixt/ > ModE knight /najt/

• So what’s the rule?
• And what’s the ModE reflex of OE cyning
  /kyniŋ/?
“regular and exceptionless’

• OE /kyniŋ/ > ModE /kɪŋ/
• Why not /nɪŋ/?
• Because the rule that deletes initial /k/ only
  applies before /n/.
• So, the rule getting rid of initial /k/ is
  exceptionless, but it has a specific
  environment when it applies, just like
  phonological rules
The Comparative Method

• If we assume that sound-change is regular
and exceptionless in this way, we can use
systematic comparison of languages to see the
relationships between them.

This is known as the Comparative Method.
Grimm’s Law
• Important result of the comparative method
• Grimm’s Law: consonant changes between
  Proto-Indo-European and Proto-Germanic
Grimm’s Law
• ptk>fθx
• became fricatives in Germanic, but stayed same in
  Latin & Greek
• bdg>ptk
• devoiced in Germanic, but stayed same in Latin &
  Greek
• bh dh gh > b d g
• deaspirated in Germanic, but fricatives in Latin (f,
  f, h), devoiced in Greek (ph, th, kh), retained in
  Sanskrit, Hindi
p>f

Sanskrit   pita      padam
Greek      pate:r    poda
Latin      pate:r    pedem
Gothic     fadar     fotu
English    father    foot
PIE        *pǝter-   *ped-

(majority rule here in the inference about PIE)
Completed Chain Shift
• e.g. The Great Vowel Shift
Chain Shift in Progress
• e.g. The Northern City Shift (around the Great Lakes,
  esp Syracuse, Rochester, Detroit, Chicago)
• ӕ > ej (ɪj), ɑ > a (ӕ), ᴐ > ɑ, ɛ > ʌ, backing of ʌ


                 ɪ
                     ↘
                         ɛ →



                               a
Northern Cities Shift
•   ӕ > ej:   laughs at it
•   ɑ > a:    on
•   ᴐ > ɑ:    all
•   ɛ > ʌ:        seventeen
•   ʌ > ᴐ:    fund
Phonological and Morphological
             Change
• Old English had rich case inflection
• Modern English has almost none
• Phonological change led to morphological
  change
Case
•   Nominative = subject marker
•   Accusative = object marker
•   Dative = indirect object marker
•   Genitive = possessive marker

Se cniht      geaf gief-e þӕs hierd-es        sun-e
the youth.NOM gave gift-ACC the shepherd-GEN son-DAT
“The youth gave the shepherd’s son a gift.”
Old English Case
Sound Changes
• Dative: consonant deletion results in loss of
  plural –m
• All cases: unstressed vowels reduced to schwa
• All cases: schwa deleted
• So, what’s left?
Modern English
        SG        PL
NOM   hound     hounds
ACC   hound     hounds
GEN   hound’s   hounds’
DAT   hound     hounds
Morphological Change
• Reanalysis (folk etymology) – speakers
  provide a morphological analysis that doesn’t
  correspond (historically) to the derivation of
  the word
• e.g. hamburger
Morphological Change
• Reanalysis
• e.g. earwig
• Old English: ēarwicga ear+insect
  – would have been earwidge in Modern English
• “widge” is lost as an independent word
• Middle English: arwygyll ear+wiggle
• Modern English: earwig
Morpho-Syntactic Change
• e.g. Latin had no pronounced determiners
• the distinction between a and the (new vs old
  information) was marked through word order
  – latrâvit canis “a dog barked”
  – canis latrâvit “the dog barked”
Morphological Change
• Over-regularization – irregular morphology becomes
  regular
• e.g. Old English Comparatives
   – Adjective + ra, with stem change (similar to certain
     irregular past tense, e.g., say-said)
       • long ~ lengra
   – Adjectives + ra, no stem change
       • wearm ~ wearmra
• Expected in Modern English:
      • warm ~ warmer, long ~ lenger!
• Instead, overregularization yielded longer
Semantic Change
• Other examples of semantic change
  – Broadening: dogge used to be a specific breed
  – Narrowing:
     • meat used to be “food” (flesh was “meat”)
     • deer originally meant “animal” (cf the related
       German word Tier “animal”), but became
       restricted
  – Shifting: nice used to mean “ignorant”
Syntactic Change
• Modern English:
  – auxiliary verb raises to Tense
  – main verb stays in VP
  – result: main verb follows adverbs: John often went
    skiing.
• French:
  – auxiliary verb raises to Tense
  – main verb raises to Tense
  – result: verb (aux or main) precedes adverbs: John went
    often skiing
Syntactic Change
• Old and Middle English:
Here men vndurstonden ofte by this nyght the night of synne
here men understood often by this night the night of sin
Syntactic Change
• Modern English
  – I to C in questions
  – result: aux verb to C in questions
• French
  – I to C in questions
  – result: verb (aux or main) to C in questions
Rise of ModE Patterns
Why do Languages Change?
• Natural processes in language use
  – rapid or casual speech produces assimilation,
    vowel reduction, deletion
  – this pronunciation can become conventionalized,
    and so end up being produced even in slower,
    more careful speech
Child Language
• What’s natural for kids was natural for our
  ancestors as well.
• “scant” was “skamt”: m became n in the
  neighborhood of t (assimilation: K.I.S.S.)




          history                   bug-gug: child
Why do Languages Change?
• Language Learning
• The child must construct their language based
  on the input received
• This process is imperfect
• Bias towards regularization – learning an
  irregular form requires more input
• Also random differences may spread,
  especially through a small population
Why do Languages Change?
• Language Contact
• Through migration, conquest, trade
• Adults may learn the new language as a
  second language
• Children may be fully bilingual
• Results in borrowing of words, sounds, even
  syntactic constructions
Borrowing
• Borrowed words with sounds not in the
  borrowing language may be “nativized”
  – e.g. Russian does not have [h]
  – German words with [h] borrowed into Russian
    change to [g]
  – German Hospital -> Russian gospital
Borrowing
• Or, the borrowed sounds may be incorporated
  into the new language (Bach [x])
• If the borrowing is extensive enough, a new
  phoneme may be added to the borrowing
  language
Language change: good or bad?
• Not an aesthetic question!
• All stages of language are valid expressions of
  our language instinct (Universal Grammar)
• Just as all languages and dialects are valid
  expressions of our language instinct

Historical linguistics

  • 1.
  • 2.
    Change in Time •The rate of change varies, but they build up until the "mother tongue" becomes arbitrarily distant and different (cf. difficulty in understanding some Brits or even Appalachians) • After a thousand years, the original and new languages will not be mutually intelligible (cf. English and German and Dutch, and even more distantly English and Pashto (language of Afghanistan)) • After ten thousand years, the relationship will be essentially indistinguishable from chance relationships between historically unrelated languages. • Some changes take place in one generation (the cot-caught merger), some take over hundreds of years (word order change in Classic Chinese)
  • 3.
    Historical Reconstruction • Whenconsidering whether languages are related, we look for systematic correspondences between vocabulary items in different languages • Since the relationship between sound and meaning is arbitrary (dog-chein-gou), these differences aren’t expected accidentally
  • 4.
    A Note ofCaution • Chance resemblance is possible, just not common • English bad, Persian bad “bad” • Dutch elkaar “each other”, Basque elkar “each other” • Examination of the rest of the vocabulary of these languages reveal that these are accidental
  • 5.
    Another Note ofCaution • Borrowing • We need to consider if the word is a new addition to the language or if it is vocabulary that is native to the language • e.g. we don’t want to conclude that English and Mandarin are related based on: – English: /kɑfi/ “coffee, Mandarin: /kɑfe/ “coffee” – Btw, the English term came from Arabic, by way of Turkish and then Dutch
  • 6.
    Classifying Languages • Thesesystematic correspondences (we’ll look at them more in a moment) are used to classify languages according to their origins. • Languages are put into families (and sub- families) • the relationships between languages are described using female terms: most often daughter (and mother)
  • 7.
    Indo-European (IE) • Anearly sketch from the late 1800s, more or less accurate even today
  • 8.
    Italic • The Romancelanguages descended from Latin are the only Italic languages spoken today • Ibero-Romance: Portuguese, Spanish • Gallo-Romance: French, Catalan, Romansch • Italo-Romance: Italian, Sardinian • Balkano-Romance: Romanian
  • 9.
    Germanic • English ispart of the Germanic family.
  • 10.
    Clear Cognates English Dutch Danish one een en two twee to three drie tre four vier fire five vijf fem six zes seks seven zeven syv eight acht otte nine negen ni ten tien ti
  • 11.
    Classifying Languages: Indo-European •We also notice that there are similarities between Latin (Romance), English / German (Germanic) and yet other languages: Greek and Sanskrit, for example. • Sir William Jones, in the 1780s, was the first to notice them.
  • 12.
    More Distant Relatives English Lithuanian Greek one vienas heis two du duo three trys treis four keturi tettares five penki pente six sheshi heks seven septyni hepta eight ashtuoni oktô nine devyni ennea ten deshimt deka
  • 13.
  • 14.
    Language Classification: How? Werely on two things: • the Uniformitarian Principle • The regularity of sound-change
  • 15.
    The Uniformitarian Principle ‘knowledgeof processes that operated in the past can be inferred by observing ongoing processes in the present’ or, for language: ‘Language must work now in the same way as it ever did’
  • 16.
    Regularity of Sound-Change •Most of historical linguistics relies on the assumption that • sound-change is regular and exceptionless • That is, any sound-change will affect all the words that contain that (combination of) sound(s).
  • 17.
    “regular and exceptionless’ •Consider: • OE cnafa /knava/ > ModE knave /nejv/ • OE cniht /knixt/ > ModE knight /najt/ • So what’s the rule? • And what’s the ModE reflex of OE cyning /kyniŋ/?
  • 18.
    “regular and exceptionless’ •OE /kyniŋ/ > ModE /kɪŋ/ • Why not /nɪŋ/? • Because the rule that deletes initial /k/ only applies before /n/. • So, the rule getting rid of initial /k/ is exceptionless, but it has a specific environment when it applies, just like phonological rules
  • 19.
    The Comparative Method •If we assume that sound-change is regular and exceptionless in this way, we can use systematic comparison of languages to see the relationships between them. This is known as the Comparative Method.
  • 20.
    Grimm’s Law • Importantresult of the comparative method • Grimm’s Law: consonant changes between Proto-Indo-European and Proto-Germanic
  • 21.
    Grimm’s Law • ptk>fθx •became fricatives in Germanic, but stayed same in Latin & Greek • bdg>ptk • devoiced in Germanic, but stayed same in Latin & Greek • bh dh gh > b d g • deaspirated in Germanic, but fricatives in Latin (f, f, h), devoiced in Greek (ph, th, kh), retained in Sanskrit, Hindi
  • 22.
    p>f Sanskrit pita padam Greek pate:r poda Latin pate:r pedem Gothic fadar fotu English father foot PIE *pǝter- *ped- (majority rule here in the inference about PIE)
  • 23.
    Completed Chain Shift •e.g. The Great Vowel Shift
  • 24.
    Chain Shift inProgress • e.g. The Northern City Shift (around the Great Lakes, esp Syracuse, Rochester, Detroit, Chicago) • ӕ > ej (ɪj), ɑ > a (ӕ), ᴐ > ɑ, ɛ > ʌ, backing of ʌ ɪ ↘ ɛ → a
  • 25.
    Northern Cities Shift • ӕ > ej: laughs at it • ɑ > a: on • ᴐ > ɑ: all • ɛ > ʌ: seventeen • ʌ > ᴐ: fund
  • 26.
    Phonological and Morphological Change • Old English had rich case inflection • Modern English has almost none • Phonological change led to morphological change
  • 27.
    Case • Nominative = subject marker • Accusative = object marker • Dative = indirect object marker • Genitive = possessive marker Se cniht geaf gief-e þӕs hierd-es sun-e the youth.NOM gave gift-ACC the shepherd-GEN son-DAT “The youth gave the shepherd’s son a gift.”
  • 28.
  • 29.
    Sound Changes • Dative:consonant deletion results in loss of plural –m • All cases: unstressed vowels reduced to schwa • All cases: schwa deleted • So, what’s left?
  • 30.
    Modern English SG PL NOM hound hounds ACC hound hounds GEN hound’s hounds’ DAT hound hounds
  • 31.
    Morphological Change • Reanalysis(folk etymology) – speakers provide a morphological analysis that doesn’t correspond (historically) to the derivation of the word • e.g. hamburger
  • 32.
    Morphological Change • Reanalysis •e.g. earwig • Old English: ēarwicga ear+insect – would have been earwidge in Modern English • “widge” is lost as an independent word • Middle English: arwygyll ear+wiggle • Modern English: earwig
  • 33.
    Morpho-Syntactic Change • e.g.Latin had no pronounced determiners • the distinction between a and the (new vs old information) was marked through word order – latrâvit canis “a dog barked” – canis latrâvit “the dog barked”
  • 34.
    Morphological Change • Over-regularization– irregular morphology becomes regular • e.g. Old English Comparatives – Adjective + ra, with stem change (similar to certain irregular past tense, e.g., say-said) • long ~ lengra – Adjectives + ra, no stem change • wearm ~ wearmra • Expected in Modern English: • warm ~ warmer, long ~ lenger! • Instead, overregularization yielded longer
  • 35.
    Semantic Change • Otherexamples of semantic change – Broadening: dogge used to be a specific breed – Narrowing: • meat used to be “food” (flesh was “meat”) • deer originally meant “animal” (cf the related German word Tier “animal”), but became restricted – Shifting: nice used to mean “ignorant”
  • 36.
    Syntactic Change • ModernEnglish: – auxiliary verb raises to Tense – main verb stays in VP – result: main verb follows adverbs: John often went skiing. • French: – auxiliary verb raises to Tense – main verb raises to Tense – result: verb (aux or main) precedes adverbs: John went often skiing
  • 37.
    Syntactic Change • Oldand Middle English: Here men vndurstonden ofte by this nyght the night of synne here men understood often by this night the night of sin
  • 38.
    Syntactic Change • ModernEnglish – I to C in questions – result: aux verb to C in questions • French – I to C in questions – result: verb (aux or main) to C in questions
  • 39.
    Rise of ModEPatterns
  • 40.
    Why do LanguagesChange? • Natural processes in language use – rapid or casual speech produces assimilation, vowel reduction, deletion – this pronunciation can become conventionalized, and so end up being produced even in slower, more careful speech
  • 41.
    Child Language • What’snatural for kids was natural for our ancestors as well. • “scant” was “skamt”: m became n in the neighborhood of t (assimilation: K.I.S.S.) history bug-gug: child
  • 42.
    Why do LanguagesChange? • Language Learning • The child must construct their language based on the input received • This process is imperfect • Bias towards regularization – learning an irregular form requires more input • Also random differences may spread, especially through a small population
  • 43.
    Why do LanguagesChange? • Language Contact • Through migration, conquest, trade • Adults may learn the new language as a second language • Children may be fully bilingual • Results in borrowing of words, sounds, even syntactic constructions
  • 44.
    Borrowing • Borrowed wordswith sounds not in the borrowing language may be “nativized” – e.g. Russian does not have [h] – German words with [h] borrowed into Russian change to [g] – German Hospital -> Russian gospital
  • 45.
    Borrowing • Or, theborrowed sounds may be incorporated into the new language (Bach [x]) • If the borrowing is extensive enough, a new phoneme may be added to the borrowing language
  • 47.
    Language change: goodor bad? • Not an aesthetic question! • All stages of language are valid expressions of our language instinct (Universal Grammar) • Just as all languages and dialects are valid expressions of our language instinct