Abstract
This paper examines, on the basis of a longitudinal corpus of 50 early modern authors, how change at the aggregate level of the community interacts with variation and change at the micro-level of the individual language user. In doing so, this study aims to address the methodological gap between collective change and entrenchment, that is, the gap between language as a social phenomenon and the cognitive processes responsible for the continuous reorganization of linguistic knowledge in individual speakers. Taking up the case of the prepositional passive, this study documents a strong community-wide increase in use that is accompanied by increasing schematicity. A comparison of the 50 authors reveals that regularities arising at the macro-level conceal highly complex and variable individual behavior, aspects of which may be explained by studying the larger (social) context in which these individuals operate (e. g., age cohorts, community of practice, biographical insights). Further analysis, focusing on how authors use the prepositional passive in unique and similar ways, elucidates the role of small individual biases in long-term change. Overall, it is demonstrated that language change is an emergent phenomenon that results from the complex interaction between individual speakers, who themselves may change their linguistic behavior to varying degrees.
Acknowledgements
The research reported on in this paper is part of the Mind-Bending Grammars project, which is funded by the ERC Horizon 2020 programme (Project ID 639008; www.uantwerpen.be/mind-bending-grammars/), and is hosted at the University of Antwerp. Both institutions are hereby gratefully acknowledged. I would also like to thank three anonymous reviewers for very helpful feedback on an earlier draft.
References
Anthonissen, Lynn. 2019. Constructional change across the lifespan: The nominative and infinitive in early modern writers. In Kristin Bech & Ruth Möhlig-Falke (eds.), Grammar – discourse – context: Grammar and usage in language variation and change, 125–156. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110682564-005Search in Google Scholar
Anthonissen, Lynn & Peter Petré. 2019. Grammaticalization and the linguistic individual: New avenues in lifespan research. Linguistics Vanguard 5(s2). 1–12. doi: 10.1515/lingvan-2018-0037.Search in Google Scholar
Barðdal, Jóhanna. 2008. Productivity: Evidence from case and argument structure in Icelandic. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/cal.8Search in Google Scholar
Baxter, Gareth & William Croft. 2016. Modeling language change across the lifespan: Individual trajectories in community change. Language Variation and Change 28. 129–173.10.1017/S0954394516000077Search in Google Scholar
Beckner, Clay, Richard Blythe, Joan Bybee, Morten H. Christiansen, William Croft, Nick C. Ellis, John Holland, Jinyun Ke, Diane Larsen-Freeman & Tom Schoenemann. 2009. Language is a complex adaptive system. Language Learning 59. 1–26.10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00533.xSearch in Google Scholar
Bergs, Alexander. 2005. Social networks and historical sociolinguistics: Studies in morphosyntactic variation in the Paston Letters (1421–1503). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110923223Search in Google Scholar
Birch, Barbara M. 1995. Quaker plain speech: A policy of linguistic divergence. International Journal of the Sociology of Language 116(1). 39–60.10.1515/ijsl.1995.116.39Search in Google Scholar
Blythe, Richard A. & William Croft. 2012. S-curves and the mechanisms of propagation in language change. Language 88(2). 269–304.10.1353/lan.2012.0027Search in Google Scholar
Brinton, Laurel J. & Elizabeth Closs Traugott. 2005. Lexicalization and language change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511615962Search in Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan L. 2013. Usage-based theory and exemplar representations of constructions. In Thomas Hoffmann & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), The Oxford handbook of construction grammar, 49–69. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.013.0004Search in Google Scholar
Couper-Kuhlen, Elizabeth. 1979. The prepositional passive in English: A semantic-syntactic analysis, with a lexicon of prepositional verbs. Tübingen: Niemeyer.10.1515/9783111630724Search in Google Scholar
Dąbrowska, Ewa. 2020. Language as a phenomenon of the third kind. Cognitive Linguistics 31(2).10.1515/cog-2019-0029Search in Google Scholar
De Smet, Hendrik. 2009. Analysing reanalysis. Lingua 119. 1728–1755.10.1016/j.lingua.2009.03.001Search in Google Scholar
De Smet, Hendrik. 2016. The root of ruthless: Individual variation as a window on mental representation. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 21(s2). 250–271.10.1075/ijcl.21.2.05desSearch in Google Scholar
De Smet, Hendrik. 2020. What predicts productivity: Theory meets individual. Cognitive Linguistics 31(2).10.1515/cog-2019-0026Search in Google Scholar
Denison, David. 1985. Why Old English had no prepositional passive. English Studies 66(3). 189–204.10.1080/00138388508598384Search in Google Scholar
Denison, David. 1993. English historical syntax: Verbal constructions. London: Longman.Search in Google Scholar
Denison, David. 2003. Log(ist)ic and simplistic S-curves. In Raymond Hickey (ed.), Motives for language change, 54–70. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486937.005Search in Google Scholar
Dreschler, Gea. 2015. Passives and the loss of verb second: A study of syntactic and information-structural factors. Utrecht: LOT.Search in Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga. 2008. On analogy as the motivation for grammaticalization. Studies in Language 32(2). 336–382.10.1075/sl.32.2.04fisSearch in Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga. 2010. An analogical approach to grammaticalization. In Katerina Stathi, Elke Gehweiler & Ekkehard König (eds.), Grammaticalization: Current views and issues, 181–218. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/slcs.119.11fisSearch in Google Scholar
Fonteyn, Lauren. 2017. The aggregate and the individual: Thoughts on what non-alternating authors reveal about linguistic alternations – a response to Petré. English Language and Linguistics 21(2). 215–262.10.1017/S1360674317000119Search in Google Scholar
Francis, W. Nelson & Henry Kučera. 1982. Frequency analysis of English usage: Lexicon and grammar. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.Search in Google Scholar
Goh, Gwang-Yoon. 2000. The synchrony and diachrony of the English prepositional passive: Form, meaning and function. Ohio State University dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Goldberg, Adele E. 1995. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Search in Google Scholar
Gries, Stefan Th. & Anatol Stefanowitsch. 2004. Extending collostructional analysis: A corpus-based perspective on alternation. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 9(1). 97–129.10.1075/ijcl.9.1.06griSearch in Google Scholar
Harris, Alice C. & Lyle Campbell. 1995. Historical syntax in cross-linguistic perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511620553Search in Google Scholar
Hoffmann, Thomas. 2011. Preposition placement in English: A usage-based approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511933868Search in Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul J. & Elizabeth Closs Traugott. 2003. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139165525Search in Google Scholar
Inada, Toshiaki. 1981. Problems of reanalysis and preposition stranding. Studies in English Linguistics 9. 120–131.Search in Google Scholar
Kroch, Anthony. 1989. Reflexes of grammar in patterns of language change. Language Variation and Change 1. 199–244.10.1017/S0954394500000168Search in Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1994. Principles of linguistic change. Vol. 1: Internal factors. Blackwell: Oxford.Search in Google Scholar
Labov, William. 2007. Transmission and diffusion. Language 83. 344–387.10.1353/lan.2007.0082Search in Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald W. 1977. Syntactic reanalysis. In Charles N. Li (ed.), Mechanisms of syntactic change, 57–139. Austin: University of Texas Press.10.7560/750357-005Search in Google Scholar
Lehmann, Christian. 2004. Theory and method in grammaticalization. Zeitschrift für germanistische Linguistik 32(2). 152–187.10.1515/zfgl.2004.32.2.152Search in Google Scholar
Mayer, Robert. 1994. Nathaniel Crouch, bookseller and historian: Popular historiography and cultural power in late seventeenth-century England. Eighteenth-Century Studies 27(3). 391–419.10.2307/2739362Search in Google Scholar
Neels, Jakob. 2020. Lifespan change in grammaticalisation as frequency-sensitive automation: William Faulkner and the let alone construction. Cognitive Linguistics 31(2).10.1515/cog-2019-0020Search in Google Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu, Helena Raumolin-Brunberg & Heikki Mannila. 2011. The diffusion of language change in real time: Progressive and conservative individuals and the time depth of change. Language Variation and Change 23. 1–43.10.1017/S0954394510000207Search in Google Scholar
Noël, Dirk. 2016. For a radically usage-based diachronic construction grammar. Belgian Journal of Linguistics 30. 39–53.10.1075/bjl.30.03noeSearch in Google Scholar
Petré, Peter. 2015–. Mind-Bending Grammars. Website of the project (ID 639008), ERC Horizon 2020 programme. Antwerp: University of Antwerp. www.uantwerpen.be/en/projects/mind-bending-grammars/.Search in Google Scholar
Petré, Peter & Lynn Anthonissen. 2020. Individuality in complex systems: A constructionist approach. Cognitive Linguistics 31(2).10.1515/cog-2019-0033Search in Google Scholar
Petré, Peter, Lynn Anthonissen, Sara Budts, Enrique Manjavacas, Emma-Louise Silva, William Standing & Odile A. O. Strik. 2019. Early Modern Multiloquent Authors (EMMA): Designing a large-scale corpus of individuals’ languages. ICAME Journal 43. 83–122.10.2478/icame-2019-0004Search in Google Scholar
Petré, Peter & Freek Van de Velde. 2018. The real-time dynamics of the individual and the community in grammaticalization. Language 94(4). 867–901.10.1353/lan.2018.0056Search in Google Scholar
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey N. Leech & Jan Svartvik. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Search in Google Scholar
Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena & Arja Nurmi. 2011. Grammaticalization and language change in the individual. In Heiko Narrog & Bernd Heine (eds.), The Oxford handbook of grammaticalization, 251–262. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199586783.013.0020Search in Google Scholar
Riddle, Elizabeth & Gloria Sheintuch. 1983. A functional analysis of pseudopassives. Linguistics and Philosophy 6(4). 527–563.10.1007/BF00636289Search in Google Scholar
Riddle, Elizabeth, Gloria Sheintuch & Yael Ziv. 1977. Pseudo-passivization: On the role of pragmatics in determining rule unity. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences 7. 147–156.Search in Google Scholar
Rogers, Everett M. 1983. Diffusion of innovations. 3rd edn. New York: MacMillan.Search in Google Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg. 2015. A blueprint of the entrenchment-and-conventionalization model. Yearbook of the German Cognitive Linguistics Association 3. 1–27.10.1515/gcla-2015-0002Search in Google Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg. 2017. A framework for understanding linguistic entrenchment and its psychological foundations. In Hans-Jörg Schmid (ed.), Entrenchment and the psychology of language learning: How we reorganize and adapt linguistic knowledge, 9–35. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1037/15969-002Search in Google Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg. 2020. The dynamics of the linguistic system: Usage, conventionalization, and entrenchment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198814771.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Seoane, Elena. 1999. The consolidation of the indirect and prepositional passive in Early Modern English: Evidence from the Helsinki Corpus. Estudios Ingleses De La Universidad Complutense 7. 119–139.Search in Google Scholar
Söderlind, Johannes. 1951. Verb syntax in John Dryden’s prose. vol. 1. Uppsala: Almqvist & Wiksells.Search in Google Scholar
Takami, Ken-ichi. 1992. Preposition stranding: From syntactic to functional analyses. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9783110870398Search in Google Scholar
Thornburg, Linda. 1985. The history of the prepositional passive in English. Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 11. 327–336.10.3765/bls.v11i0.1918Search in Google Scholar
Timberlake, Alan. 1977. Reanalysis and actualization in syntactic change. In Charles N. Li (ed.), Mechanisms of syntactic change, 141–177. Austin: University of Texas Press.10.7560/750357-006Search in Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Graeme Trousdale. 2010. Gradience, gradualness and grammaticalization: How do they interact? In Elizabeth Closs Traugott & Graeme Trousdale (eds.), Gradience, gradualness and grammaticalization, 19–44. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.90.04traSearch in Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs & Graeme Trousdale. 2013. Constructionalization and constructional changes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199679898.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
van Riemsdijk, Hendrik Cornelis. 1978. A case study in syntactic markedness: The binding nature of prepositional phrases. Lisse: Peter de Ridder.Search in Google Scholar
Vandrei, Martha. 2018. Queen Boudica and historical culture in Britain: An image of truth. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198816720.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Visser, Fredericus Theodorus. 1973. An historical syntax of the English language. vol. 3, pt. 2: Syntactical units with two and with more verbs. Brill: Leiden.Search in Google Scholar
Yáñez-Bouza, Nuria. 2015. Grammar, rhetoric and usage in English: Preposition placement 1500–1900. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511732522Search in Google Scholar
© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
