Skip to main content Accessibility help

Reflexes of grammar in patterns of language change

  • Anthony S. Kroch (a1)


When one form replaces another over time in a changing language, the new form does not occur equally often in all linguistic contexts. Linguists have generally assumed that those contexts in which the new form is more common are those in which the form first appears and in which it advances most rapidly. However, evidence from several linguistic changes (most importantly the rise of the periphrastic auxiliary do in late Middle English) shows that the general assumption is false. Instead, at least for syntactic cases, change seems to proceed at the same rate in all contexts. Contexts change together because they are merely surface manifestations of a single underlying change in grammar. Differences in frequency of use of a new form across contexts reflect functional and stylistic factors, which are constant across time and independent of grammar.



Hide All
Adams, Marianne Patalino. (1987a) From Old French to the theory of Pro-drop. NLLT 5:132.
Adams, Marianne Patalino. (1987b) Old French, null subjects, and verb second phenomena. Ph.D. dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.
Aldrich, John & Nelson, Forrest. (1984). Linear probability, logit, and probit models. Quantitative applications in the social sciences. London: Sage.
Altmann, G., et al. (1983). A law of change in language. In Brainard, B. (ed.), Historical linguistics. Bochum, FRG: Studienverlag Dr. N. Brockmeyer. 104115.
Bailey, Charles-James. (1973). Variation and linguistic theory. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.
Bock, J. Kathryn & Kroch, Anthony. (1989). The isolability of syntactic processing. In Carlson, G. & Tanenhaus, M. (eds.), Linguistic structure in language processing. Boston: Kluwer. 157196.
Chomsky, Noam. (1957). Syntactic structures. The Hague: Mouton.
Chomsky, Noam. (1986). Barriers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Denison, David. (1985). The origins of periphrastic do: Ellegård and Visser reconsidered. In Eaton, Roger et al. (eds.), Papers from the 4th International Conference on English Historical Linguistics. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 4560.
Ellegård, Alvar. (1953). The auxiliary do: The establishment and regulation of its use in English (Gothenburg Studies in English). Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell.
Emonds, Joseph. (1978). The complex v–v' in French. Linguistic Inquiry 9:151175.
Engblom, W. (1938). On the origin and early development of the auxiliary do. Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup.
Fontaine, Carmen. (1985). Application de méthodes quantitatives en diachronie: l'inversion du sujet en français. M.A. thesis, Université du Québec à Montréal.
Hirschbühler, Paul & Junker, Marie-Odile. (1988). Remarques sur les sujets nul en subordonnées en ancien et en moyen français. In Hirschbühler, Paul & Rochette, Anne (eds.), Aspects de la syntaxe historique du français. Québec: Association Québécoise de Linguistique. 6384.
Hirschbühler, Paul & Rochette, Anne. (eds.). (1988). Aspects de la syntaxe historique du français. Québec: Association Québécoise de Linguistique.
Joshi, A. K. (1985). Processing of sentences with intrasentential code-switching. In Dowty, D., Karttunen, L. & Zwicky, A. (eds.), Natural language parsing: Psychological, computational, and theoretical perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 190205.
Koopman, Hilda. (1984). The syntax of verbs. Dordrecht: Foris.
Kottler, Barnet & Markman, Alan M. (1966). A concordance to five Middle English poems. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Kroch, Anthony. (1982). Grammatical theory and the quantitative study of syntactic change. Paper presented at NWAVE 11,Georgetown University.
Kroch, Anthony. (1989). Function and grammar in the history of English: Periphrastic “do.” In Fasold, Ralph (ed.), Language change and variation. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 133172.
Kroch, Anthony, Pintzuk, Susan & Myhill, John. (1982). Understanding “do.” In Tuite, K. et al. (eds.), Papers from the 18th Regional Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society. Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society. 282294.
Kroch, Anthony, Santorini, Beatrice & Heycock, Caroline. (1987). Bare infinitives and external arguments. In Blevins, J. & Carter, J. (eds.), Proceedings of the 18th Annual Meeting of the North Eastern Linguistics Society. Amherst: Department of Linguistics, University of Massachusetts at Amherst. 271285.
Labov, William. (1975a). The use of the present to explain the past. In Heilmann, L. (ed.), Proceedings of the 11th International Congress of Linguists. Bologna: Il Molino. 825851.
Labov, William. (1975b). What is a linguistic fact? Lisse, Netherlands: Peter de Ridder.
Labov, William. (1982). Building on empirical foundations. In Lehmann, W. & Malkiel, Y. (eds.), Perspectives on historical linguistics. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 1782.
Lightfoot, David. (1979). Principles of diachronic syntax. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lightfoot, David. (1988). Syntactic change. In Newmeyer, Frederick (ed.), Linguistics: The Cambridge survey (Vol. 1). New York: Cambridge University Press. 303323.
Lightfoot, David. (1989). The child's trigger experience: Degree-0 learnability. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 12:321334; commentary 334375.
Mossé, Fernand. (1952). A handbook of Middle English. Trans. by Walker, James A.. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
Noble, Shawn. (1985). To have and have got. Paper presented at NWAVE 14,Georgetown University.
Oliveira e Silva, Giselle. (1982). Estudo da regularidade na variação dos possessivos no português do Rio de Janeiro. Ph.D. dissertation, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro.
Osgood, Charles & Sebeok, Thomas. (1954). Psycholinguistics: A survey of theory and research problems. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 49(4, part 2):1203.
Piotrovskaja, A. & Piotrovskij, R. (1974). Matematiceskie Modeli Diachronii i Tekstoobrazovanija. In Statistika Reci i Avtomaticeskij Analiz Teksta. Leningrad: Nauka. 361400.
Platzack, Christer & Holmberg, Anders. (1990). The role of AGR and finiteness in some European vo languages. Unpublished manuscript, University of Lund.
Pollock, Jean-Yves. (1989). Verb movement, universal grammar and the structure of ip. Linguistic Inquiry 20:365424.
Priestley, L. (1955). Reprise constructions in French. Archivum Linguisticum 7:128.
Prince, E. F. (1984). Topicalization and left-dislocation: A functional analysis. In White, S. J. & Teller, V. (eds.), Discourses in reading and linguistics. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. (Vol. 433). 213225.
Prince, E. F. (1988). Discourse analysis: A part of the study of linguistic competence. In Newmeyer, F. (ed.), Linguistics: The Cambridge survey (Vol. 2) Linguistic theory: Extensions and implications. New York: Cambridge University Press. 164182.
Roberts, Ian. (1985). Agreement parameters and the development of the English modal auxiliaries. NLLT 3(1):2158.
Rousseau, Pascale & Sankoff, David. (1978). Advances in variable rule methodology. In Sankoff, David (ed.), Linguistic variation: Models and methods. New York: Academic. 5769.
Rydén, M. (1979). An introduction to the historical study of English syntax. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.
Sankoff, David & Poplack, Shana. (1981). A formal grammar for code-switching. Papers in Linguistics 14:346.
Santorini, Beatrice. (1989). The generalization of the verb-second constraint in the history of Yiddish. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.
Saussure, Ferdinand de. (1966). Course in general linguistics. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Spiess, Eliot. (1989). Genes in populations. New York: Wiley.
Steele, Susan, et al. (1981). The encyclopedia of AUX. A study of cross-linguistic equivalence. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Stein, Dieter. (1986). Syntactic variation and change: The case of do in questions in Early Modern English. Folia Linguistica Historica 7(1):121149.
Tatlock, John & Kennedy, Arthur. (1927). A concordance to the complete works of Geoffrey Chaucer. Washington, DC: The Carnegie Institution.
Tukey, John. (1977). Exploratory data analysis. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Vance, Barbara. (1988). L'évolution de Pro-drop en français médiéval. In Hirschbühler, Paul & Rochette, Anne (eds.), Aspects de la syntaxe historique du français. Québec: Association Québécoise de Linguistique. 85109.
van Kemenade, Ans. (1989). The diffusion and implementation of the category modal in Middle English. Paper presented at International Conference on Historical Linguistics IX,Rutgers University.
Visser, Frederick Th. (19631973). An historical syntax of the English language. Leiden: Brill.
Warner, Anthony. (1982). Complementation in Middle English and methodology of historical syntax. University Park: The Pennsylvania State University Press.
Warner, Anthony. (1983). Review of D. Lightfoot, Principles of diachronic syntax. Journal of Linguistics 19:187209.
Weinreich, Uriel, Labov, William & Herzog, M. I. (1968). Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. In Lehmann, W. P. (ed.), Directions for historical linguistics: A symposium. Austin: University of Texas Press. 95195.
Woolford, E. (1983). Bilingual code switching and syntactic theory. Linguistic Inquiry 14:520536.
Zanuttini, Raffaella. (1989). The position of negative markers in Romance languages. Paper presented at the Generative Linguistics in the Old World Colloquium,Utrecht.

Reflexes of grammar in patterns of language change

  • Anthony S. Kroch (a1)


Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed