This chapter gives an overview of dictionaries, broadly conceived to include monolingual and bilingual wordlists for readers at all levels, in the history of English from the beginnings of Anglo-Saxon literacy to the present day. It argues against a reductive view of dictionaries as primarily agents of standardisation and authority, expressions of the ‘dismal sacred word’. Its arrangement is roughly chronological, beginning with Anglo-Saxon glossography and the lexicography of later medieval English, before turning to the bilingual and monolingual English dictionaries of the early modern period; to the monolingual dictionaries of the eighteenth century; and to the relationship of lexicography to two very important aspects of Late Modern English, namely its pluricentricity and its use as an acquired language. It concludes with a last look at the relationship of English lexicography with the ‘dismal sacred word’.

Reviews the following criterial tasks often used in conversation memory studies: free recall, recognition memory, cued recall, joint recall, delay intervals, dialogue reorganization, and online processing.

The New Cambridge History of the English Language is aimed at providing a contemporary and comprehensive overiew of English, tracing its roots in Germanic and investigating the contact scenarios in which the language has been an active participant. It discusses the various models and methodologies which have been developed to analyse diachronic data concisely and consistently. The new history furthermore examines the trajectories which the language has embarked on during its spread worldwide and presents overviews of the varieties of English found throughout the world today.

The development of English in the past few centuries is highlighted in this volume with the major issues of transmission and change forming the main focus. Different levels of languages are examined in individual chapters and individual case studies throw light on specifically relevant developments. The chronological range of the volume extends to the present with changes in Modern English viewed as continuations of trajectories established over a much longer preceding period. The role of ideology and prescriptivism in shaping the manner in which English was standardised in the Late Modern English period is also a central concern with the nature of networks, coalitions, communities of practice and enregisterment examined in detail.

Explores conversation memory among children, adolescents, and older adults.

In English, either the agent or the patient of an event can be topicalised. The active codes the first, unmarked option (A cat broke the vase), the second is achieved by the passive. This chapter discusses the complex history of the second option. While in Old English, passives were primarily adjectival. From Middle English onward, they became increasingly verbal, coding the outcome of a transitive event, and were used as a viewpoint construction, or to structure the discourse. Word order was also changing, restricting initial position more and more to an ever more versatile subject. The passive, catering for this versatile subject position, expanded to cross-linguistically uncommon forms such as the prepositional and recipient passives, and so did the novel mediopassive. The expansion saw its completion with the progressive passive in the eighteenth century. Special attention is devoted to the interconnectedness of these different passives, and their changing relations.

This chapter presents an overview of relative clauses and relativisation processes from Old English to Contemporary English, as well as in varieties of English around the world. It centres on adnominal restrictive relative clauses and addresses the factors determining the distribution of relativisers used to introduce the relative clause. Of particular interest will be the changing frequency of each relativiser over time, and the changing weight of the relevant predictors used, focusing on those of a semantic, morphosyntactic, social or stylistic nature. Also included will be a micro-analysis of recent changes in relation to relative constructions and individual relativisers, especially in less formal language, such as the demise of which in favour of that and the specialisation of who with human antecedents in subject function. Already widely reported in both standard and World Englishes, these innovations are likely to become part of the grammatical core of standard English.

This chapter addresses the history of the English system of clausal complementation. It is organised around four major questions. First, where do complement clauses (or CCs) come from? The history of English indicates that adverbial clauses can turn into CCs (e.g. lest-complements), or phrasal units undergo clausalisation (e.g. the gerund) – or both these mechanisms come into play (e.g. the to-infinitive). Second, what changes can CCs undergo? Changes to CCs may affect their internal syntax. For example, subjectless non-finite clauses have a strong tendency to develop subjects (e.g. ECM constructions, for…to-infinitives, secondary predicates). Often, CCs also undergo distributional change as they spread to new CC-taking predicates. The characteristic pattern is one of lexical diffusion. Third, how does the system change as a whole? English sees an unmistakable trend towards more non-finite complementation – a development known as the ‘Great Complement Shift’. This leads to a great number of variation hotspots, where finite CCs compete with non-finite alternatives, or non-finite alternatives compete among themselves. Fourth, what eventually becomes of CCs? At least two pathways of change appear to be open to CCs. In both cases CCs become more main-clause like. Either the matrix clause develops into an operator (i.e. an auxiliary or parenthetical), or the matrix clause disappears altogether, leading to insubordination.

Social networks are a valuable object of investigation in historical sociolinguistics, as they can contribute both to the onset of change and to the maintenance of linguistic norms. However, their characteristics make them complex to analyse, as their intrinsic variability may hinder the identification of phenomena that span different networks across time and space. This chapter is focused on Late Modern English materials, to present new resources through which network contiguities can be studied; this is the case, for instance, with the exchanges of emigrants, political activists, scholars and business correspondents. After addressing a few methodological issues, the chapter presents an overview of the materials at hand and outlines how networks and coalitions have had an impact, not only on the usage of participants (as shown in recent studies) but also on how language has been perceived, described and codified.

From the Middle English period grammatical relations that used to be coded by case-marked forms in Old English were increasingly expressed by prepositional constructions, without however completely replacing the former. Two prominent syntactic alternations arose as a result of this development, that is the dative and genitive variations: (1) Dative variation: John gave Mary a book vs. John gave a book to Mary. (2) Genitive variation: the king’s horse vs. the horse of the king. This chapter brings together research on these alternations, tracing their emergence and development, and focusing on the role of harmonic alignment (in particular, animacy). Although they are separate alternations, one operating on the VP level (datives) and the other on the NP level (genitives), their development shows some parallels, which are attributed to analogy based on functional overlap across the two alternations.

R-sounds (rhotics) have been a part of English phonology throughout its history. Although there is no agreement on the precise articulatory characteristics of these sounds, they have played a central phonological role in the language since the earliest times. The possible nature of rhotics in Old English, and hence in later periods of the language, is considered in detail. Various phonological processes, vowel breaking, vowel mergers, metathesis, a number of sandhi phenomena, have been triggered by R and many of these processes are still productive in Present-Day English. The scope of R sounds can be restricted by syllable position for some varieties of English which do not license any rhotics outside of a syllable-initial prevocalic position. The dynamics of R in varieties of English today are considered, with normative pronunciation models varying in their allowing non-prevocalic R or not.

When and why did English grammars first start to be written, and by whom? Who else were involved in the grammar-writing process apart from the grammarians? And what was the grammarians’ expertise based on to begin with? This chapter will address these questions by discussing the rise of the English grammar-writing tradition during the late sixteenth century down to the end of the eighteenth century. Focusing on the linguistic climate of the period, it will show how grammars were written at a time when only Latin grammar was available as a descriptive model, and that grammarians gradually developed an eye for features specific to the English language. Contextualising research on the subject by discussing traditional and state-of-the-art research tools, it will show that writing grammars for English was increasingly professionalised, and that female grammarians played an important role in the process.

This chapter presents one of the most recent additions to the historical sociolinguistic toolkit, a community of practice (CoP). The discussion of definitions and delimitations of this concept places it in the ‘three waves’ of sociolinguistic research and builds comparisons and contrasts with two neighbouring frameworks: social networks and discourse communities. The focus moves on to the applications of CoPs in historical sociolinguistics. The dimensions of practice – joint enterprise (or domain), mutual engagement, and shared repertoire – are redefined for the purpose of historical sociolinguistics and illustrated with examples from studies which engage with the sociohistorical and cultural context of communication. We show how language change – or, indeed, resistance to change – may be observed through a CoP lens. Prolific contexts where the concept of a CoP has been fruitfully employed include letter writing, the production of manuscripts and early prints, professional discourse, trial proceedings, multilingual practices and online blogging.