6.
Historical Linguistics
I) The nature and causes of language change:
Language change is both obvious and rather mysterious. Historical linguistics is
concerned with both the description & explanation of language change.
All languages undergo changes over time. English has undergone continuous & dramatic
change throughout its 3 major periods: Old English (roughly from 450 to 1100), Middle
English (1100-1500), and Modern English (from 1500 to the present). All components of
the grammar from meaning (semantics) to individual sounds (phonology) are subject to
change. A striking fact about language change in general is its regularity and
systematicity. (E.g.: the development of a fixed SVO basic word order in Eng. didn’t
affect just a few verbs; all Vs in ModE appear before rather than after the O d.) The
inevitability of language change is guaranteed by the way in which lg. is handed down
from one generation to the next. Children don’t begin with an intact grammar of he lg.
being acquired but rather must construct a grammar on the basis of the available data. In
such a situation it’s hardly surprising that differences will arise, even if only subtle ones,
from 1 generation to the next.
Principal cause of language change: articulatory simplification spelling pronunciation,
analogy and reanalysis, language contact.
II) Sound change:
Sound changes have a physiological basis. Since such changes typically result in
articulatory simplification, they have traditionally been related to the idea of ‘ease of
articulation’.
1.) Articulatory simplification occurs in people’s everyday life: deletion of a consonant,
insertion of a vowel to break up a complex cluster (e.g.: [fifθs][fifs];
[æθlijt][æθəlijt]).
2.) A minor, but important source of sound change in Eng. + other lg.-es is spelling
pronunciation. Since the written form of a word can differ significantly from the way
it is pronounced, a new pronunciation can arise which seems to reflect more closely the
spelling of the word. E.g.: “often” was pronounced with a [t] in earlier Eng., it was
subsequently lost: [ɔfən]. Since spelling tends to remain stable even though sound
changes have occurred, spelling pronunciation can reintroduce a pronunciation that was
earlier altered through spelling pron.
3.) Cognitive factors also play a role in change. 2 sources of such change are: analogy +
re-analysis. Analogy reflects the preference of speakers for regular patterns over
irregular ones. Both phonological & semantic characteristics can serve as basis for
analogy (e.g.: on the basis of similarity with such Vs as sting/stung, swing/swung, in
some dialects “bring” has developed a form “brung”). Reanalysis is particularly
common in morphological change. Morphological reanalysis often involves an attempt
to attribute a compound or root + affix structure to a word that formerly wasn’t broken
into component morphemes (e.g.: hamburgeroriginally: type of meat patty deriving
its name from the city of Hamburgreanalysed as: ham + burger “burger” has since
appeared in several new forms, e.g.: fishburger, chickenburger, etc.). The resulting
reanalysis need not necessarily be correct.
4.) Language contact: (=borrowing)  all components of the grammar, esp. the lexicon,
is affected. (Eng. has borrowed many Am. Words, e.g.: Canada, moccasin, totem,
tomahawk, moose, etc.) Effects of borrowing: introduction of new phonemes or
allophones. If there are a number of borrowings from another lg., the borrowed foreign
segment can eventually become a phoneme. (MidE London dialect had [f] but not [v]
in word initial position, it was later introduced file—vile). Language contact also
results in hypercorrection, which occurs when a speaker who is attempting to speak
another dialect or lg. overgeneralizes particular rules. (E.g.: Am. dialect no
distinction btw. [t] & [d]  latter—ladder both pronounced with an intervocalic flap
[D].)
III) Phonetic vs. phonological change:
Several types of sound change can be distinguished. Most of them begin as subtle
alterations in the sound pattern of a lg. in particular environments. The ling’c processes
underlying such phonetically conditioned sound change are identical to the ones found in
the phonology of currently spoken languages. The application of such processes usually
brings about an articulatory simplification. All aspects of phonology (tone, stress, syllable
structure, etc.) are subject to change over time. Most sound changes involve sequences of
segments, this is called sequential change. There’s also a type of change called
segmental change. The most common type of phonetically conditioned change is
assimilation, which has the effect of increasing efficiency of articulation through a
simplification of articulatory movements. Partial assimilation, involving place or manner
of articulation is a very common change, which can result in total assimilation. Types of
assimilation: voicing ~ (slǣpdeslǣpte = ‘slept); ~ of nasality (stefnstemn = ‘stem
(of a tree)); palatalization, which is often the 1st step in affrication (e.g.: Lat.: centum [k]
 Old French: cent [ts], It.: ciento [ʧ].
Nasalization refers to the nasalising effect that a nasal consonant can have on an adjacent
vowel.
Umlaut: the effect a vowel or sometimes a glide in one syllable can have on the vowel of
another syllable, usually a preceding one. Umlaut played an important role in OE & is the
source of irregular plurals such as goose/geese, mouse/mice in ModE.
Dissimilation: the process whereby 1 segment is made less like another segment in its
environment. This occurs when it would be difficult to articulate or perceive 2 similar
sounds in close proximity (e.g.: Lat.: anma ‘soul’  Spanish alma) ~ can also operate at
a distance to affect non-adjacent segments.
Epenthesis: sound change that involves the insertion of a consonant or vowel into a
particular environment (e.g.: OE earlier form: ganra—later form: gandra “gander”).
The epenthetic segment serves as a bridge for the transition btw. the segments on either
side. In other cases, the vowel e serves to break up a sequence of sounds which would
otherwise be difficult to pronounce or even inconsistent with the phonotactic patterns of
the lg. (e.g.: ath[ə]lete; Lat.: schola [sk] Sp.: escuela [esk] => prothesis).
1
Metathesis: A change in the relative positioning of segments. This also can affect
adjacent segments or segments at a distance (e.g.: OE: earlier form: wæpslater form:
wæsp “wasp”). Both vowels and consonants are also susceptible to outright deletion as
well as to various weakening processes. Vowel deletion may involve a word-final vowel
(apocope) or a word-internal vowel (syncope). A vowel in an unstressed syllable is
particularly susceptible to deletion, esp. when a nearby neighbouring syllable is stressed.
The effects of syncope are apparent in the loss of the medial vowel in ModE words such
as vegetable, interest, family, which are frequently pronounced as [vɛ́ʤtəbl], [intrɛst],
[fǽmlij].
Vowel deletion is commonly preceded by vowel reduction, in which a full vowel is
reduced to a short central vowel [ə]. Vowel reduction typically affects short vowels in
unstressed syllables. (E.g.: OE: stanas [a] MidE: stones [ə] {=> vowel
reduction}Early ModE: stones ø {=> syncope}; OE: nama [a] ME: name [ə] {=>
vowel reduction}EModE: name ø {=> apocope}.)
Consonant deletion is also a very common sound change. F.e., the word-initial cluster
[kn] was found in O + MidE as the spelling of such words as knight, knit, and knee, but k
was subsequently lost. Consonant weakening, just like vowel red., can also be
identified. Geminates weaken to non-geminates (degemination), stops weaken to
fricatives (frication), voiceless stops or voiceless fricatives weaken to voiced stops or
voiced fricatives respectively (voicing). Weakening can ultimately result in the deletion
of the consonant. (Degen.: Lat.: mittere Sp.: meter; Voicing: Lat.: mātūrusOldSp.:
maduro; Fricaion: OSp.: maduroSp.: maduro [ð]; Deletion: OFr.: [mađyr]Fr.: mûr).
Rhotacism is a relatively common type of weakening that typically involves the change
of [z] to [r]. Often, ~ is preceded by a stage involving the voicing of [s] to [z]. (E.g.:
ModE: rhotacism is the source of alteration btw. [z] & [r] in was & were.)
Consonantal strengthening: just as Cs weaken, they can also strengthen. Glide
strengthening: strengthening of a glide to an affricate particularly common in wordinitial position. (E.g.: Lat.: iuvenis [j]->It.: giovane [ʤ] ‘young’.)
Auditory factors also play a role in sound change. Substitution: a type of audition-based
change involving the replacement of one segment with another similar sounding segment
(e.g.: MidE: laugh [x]ModE: laugh [f]).
Phonetic sound change: 1st stage of a sound change results in the creation of a new
allophone of an already existing phoneme. E.g.: the laxing of short high vowels that has
developed in Canadian Fr.
Sometimes sound changes can lead to changes in a lg.’s phonological system by adding,
eliminating, or rearranging phonemes. Such phonological change can involve splits,
mergers, or shifts. In a phonological split, allophones of the same phoneme come to
contrast with each other due to the loss of the conditioning environment, with the result
that 1 or more phonemes are created. Eng. phoneme [η]: result of a phonological split: the
original phoneme split into 2 phonemes: /n/ (i) /n/, (ii) /η/.
Mergers: 2 phonemes collapse into a single one, thereby reducing the number of
phonemes in the lg. (Cockney Eng.: /θ//f/ => /θ/ & /f/ merged into one /f/  thin + fin
pronounced as /fin/. /θ/ + /f/ /f/; /ð/ + /v/ /v/.)
Shifts: a change in which a series of phonemes is systematically modified so that their
organization with respect to each other is altered. E.g.: Great Eng. Vowel Shift. Lg.-es
with 7 or more vowels often undergo diphthongisation. This can be the seen as a
reaction to the overcrowding of the phonological space. Its effect is to reduce the 7 vowel
system to a 5 vowel system.
IV) Morphological change:
Borrowing has been a very important source of affixes in English (e.g.: -ment from Fr.,
-able). However, not all new affixes are the result of borrowing. Words can develop into
affixes in a process called fusion. If 2 words are frequently adjacent, over time they can
become fused together to form a single unit consisting of a stem & an affix. Fusion can
result in either prefixes or suffixes. A number of ModE suffixes are derived from earlier
words by means of fusion(e.g.: -hoodOE word: hād ‘state, condition, rank’; -domOE
word: dōm ‘condition, power’, etc).
Just as affixes can be added to the grammar, they can also be lost. Sometimes affixes
simply fall into disuse for no apparent reason. F.e., a number of OE derivational affixes,
including –bǣre & -bora, are no longer used (e.g.: lustbǣre ‘pleasant, agreeable’;
mundbora ‘protector’). It’s also very common for affixes to be lost through sound change
(e.g.: OE case & gender markings got lost).
By the 15th century, Eng. case endings had changed radically. Consonant deletion resulted
in the loss of the earlier [m] of the dative plural suffix & through vowel reduction all the
unstressed vowels of the case endings were reduced to the central vowel [ə], which was
later lost through vowel deletion. Consequently, many of the earlier case and gender
distinctions were obliterated. (E.g.: ModE gen. sing. hund’s, plural: hunds, gen.:
hunds’.) OE has 5 distinct affixes for cases; MidE only 2 (-e, -es); ModE: -s for
possessive & plural.
Since lg.-es vary in the complexity of their morphology, linguists often make a
distinction btw analytic and synthetic lg.-es. Analytic lg.-es have very few affixes (like
ModE), synthetic lg.-es have many (e.g. Lat., OE). Sound change and fusion ensure that
there is an endless transition in the morphology of a lg over time. Fusion also ensures the
rise of new synthetic forms; through fusion a lg. with analytic morphology can become
much more synthetic over time. (E.g.: ModE coulda represents the fusion of could +
have.)
The drastic effect that sound change can have on the morphology of a lg. are
often alleviated through analogy. E.g. OE hand  plural was handa  vowel reduction
+ apocope applying to handa would have yielded a ModE plral form identical with the
singular form, namely hand; obviously, then the ModE plural form hands cannot be the
direct consequence of sound change. Rather, it’s a result of earlier analogy with words
such as MidE hund ‘hound’ which did form the plural with the suffix –a other plural
forms besides hands that were created on the basis of analogy including eyes (eyen in
MidE) & shoes (shoen).
Reanalysis can also result in a new morphological structure for a word. BUT the
reanalysis exemplified by hamburger is rather called folk etymology, ‘cos it commonly
involves changes in pronunciation reflecting the new morphological analysis & isn’t
2
based on correct analysis of the word by the speaker. Examples of folk etymology: belfry
from belfrey; bridegroom from bridegome; muskat from musquash. Affixes can also be
affected by reanalysis; e.g.: -ly (ModE adverbial suffix) developing from OE –lic(e).
(N+-lic = Adj; Adjlic + -e = Adv) it was reanalysed as an adverbial suffix, and ten used
by analogy to derive Adv.-s from Adj.-s in forms where it was not used earlier (e.g.:
deeply, etc).
V) Syntactic change:
VI) Lexical and semantic change:
An obvious type of lg change involves modifications to the lexicon. 2 types: addition &
loss, which often reflect cultural changes that include novel objects & notions &
eliminate outdated ones.
Addition is often the result of technological innovations or contact with other cultures.
Such developments result in lexical gaps, which can be filled by adding new words to the
lexicon  either by borrowing or by word formation processes, e.g.:
- Compounding & derivation (sunbeam, childish) (BUT conversion was not
available in OE)
Depending on the cultural relationship holding btw. lg.-es, 3 types of influence of 1 lg. on
the other are traditionally identified: substratum, adstratum and superstratum.
Substratum: influence or effect of a politically or culturally nondominant lg. on a
dominant one. (E.g. Amerindian on N-Am. & Canadian Fr.). In the history of Eng., the
influence of Celtic substratum is also evident. (E.g.: place names: Thames, London,
Dover). Borrowed words are often restricted to place names & unfamiliar items or
concepts.
Superstratum: effect of a politically or culturally dominant lg. on another lg. E.g.: the
Athapaskan lg. Gwich has borrowed a number of governmental terms from Eng. In the
case of Eng., Norman Fr had a superstratum influence (after Norman Conquest, 1066)
Fr. terms for political, judicial & cultural notions (+ science, warfare, religion). (E.g.: tax,
revenue, government, prayer, sermon, fashion, army, navy, art).
Adstratum: situation where 2 lg.-es are in contact & neither is (clearly) dominant. E.g.:
Scandinavian influence on Eng. => ~ usually results in the borrowing of everyday words
(Sc. words e.g.: anger, cake, egg, root, score, etc).
Just as words can be added to the lexicon, they can be lost as a result of changes
in society esp. where the object or notion a word refers to becomes obsolete (E.g.: OE
flÿtme – ‘a blood letting instrument).
Words rarely jump from one meaning to an unrelated one. The change are step
by step and involve either semantic broadening, ~ narrowing, amelioration, pejoration,
weakening or semantic shift & metaphor.
Semantic broadening is the process in which the meaning of a word becomes more
general or more inclusive than its historically earlier form (e.g.: aunt  old meaning:
‘father’s sister’, new: ‘father’s or mother’s sister’).
Semantic narrowing is the process in which the meaning of a word becomes less general
or less inclusive than its historically earlier meaning (e.g.: hound  old m.: ‘any dog’,
new: ‘a hunting breed’).
Amelioration: In ~, the meaning of a word becomes more positive of favourable. The
opposite change, pejoration, also occurs (e.g.: wench = ‘girl’, new: ‘wanton woman,
prostitute’)
Weakening of meaning also frequently occurs (e.g.: soon  old m.: ‘immediately’, new:
‘in the near future’).
Semantic shift is a process in which a word loses its former meaning, taking on a new,
but often related meaning (e.g.: bead  old m.: ‘prayer’, new: ‘prayer bead, bead’).
One of the most striking types of semantic meaning is triggered by metaphor, a figure of
speech based on a perceived similarity btw. distinct objects or actions. Metaphorical
change usually involves a word with a concrete meaning, taking on a more abstract sense,
although the word’s original meaning is not lost. (E.g.: grasp  ‘understand’; high 
‘on drugs’; dull  ‘stupid’.)
3