Book contents
- The New Cambridge History of the English Language
- The New Cambridge History of the English Language
- The New Cambridge History of the English Language
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors to Volume II
- General Preface
- Abbreviations for Corpora and Other Electronic Resources
- General Editor’s Introduction
- Introduction to Volume II
- Part I The Textual Record
- Part II Lighthouse Works and Authors
- Part III Genre and Medium in the Record
- Part IV Modelling the Record: Methods and Theories
- 27 Quantitative Methods and the History of English
- 28 Generative Accounts of Change
- 29 Functional Accounts of Change
- 30 Grammaticalisation
- 31 Cognitive Approaches to the History of English
- 32 Construction Grammar and English Historical Linguistics
- 33 Psycholinguistic Perspectives on Language Change
- Appendix: List of Corpora and Other Electronic Resources
- Index
- References
31 - Cognitive Approaches to the History of English
from Part IV - Modelling the Record: Methods and Theories
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 18 October 2025
Book contents
- The New Cambridge History of the English Language
- The New Cambridge History of the English Language
- The New Cambridge History of the English Language
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors to Volume II
- General Preface
- Abbreviations for Corpora and Other Electronic Resources
- General Editor’s Introduction
- Introduction to Volume II
- Part I The Textual Record
- Part II Lighthouse Works and Authors
- Part III Genre and Medium in the Record
- Part IV Modelling the Record: Methods and Theories
- 27 Quantitative Methods and the History of English
- 28 Generative Accounts of Change
- 29 Functional Accounts of Change
- 30 Grammaticalisation
- 31 Cognitive Approaches to the History of English
- 32 Construction Grammar and English Historical Linguistics
- 33 Psycholinguistic Perspectives on Language Change
- Appendix: List of Corpora and Other Electronic Resources
- Index
- References
Summary
This chapter explores the role of central aspects of cognition in historical linguistics. After describing and discussing the cognitive commitment and its theoretical background, this chapter highlights the relation to cognitive archaeology as well as historical psychology and explores the methodological prerequisites for cognitive approaches to the history of English, particularly the quantitative turn in cognitive linguistics. Case studies from different periods of English illustrate how cognitive factors can shed light on synchronic historical language stages and diachronic developments, and how these in turn can help us to further explore the cognitive commitment. Finally, we argue for a feedback loop, where modern cognitive linguistic theories feed into and guide historical enquiries, but are also checked and modified, if necessary, on the basis of historical findings.
Keywords
Information
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- The New Cambridge History of the English LanguageDocumentation, Sources of Data and Modelling, pp. 768 - 795Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2025
References
Alexander, Marc and Kay, Christian. 2018. ‘… all spirits, and are melted into air, thin air’: metaphorical connections in history of English. In Petré, Peter, Cuyckens, Hubert and D’hoedt, Frauke (eds.), Sociocultural Dimensions of Lexis and Text in the History of English. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 61–76.10.1075/cilt.343.03aleCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anthonissen, Lynn. 2020. Cognition in construction grammar: connecting individual and community grammars. Cognitive Linguistics 31.2: 309–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anthonissen, Lynn and Petré, Peter. 2019. Grammaticalization and the linguistic individual: new avenues in lifespan research. Language and Aging Research (ed. Gerstenberg, Annette). Special issue of Linguistics Vanguard: n.p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anttila, Raimo. 2003. Analogy: the warp and woof of cognition. In Joseph, Brian D. and Janda, Richard D. (eds.), The Handbook of Historical Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 425–440.Google Scholar
Baddeley, Alan D. 2007. Working Memory, Thought, and Action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Baddeley, Alan D. 2012. Working memory: theories, models, and controversies. Annual Review of Psychology 63: 1–29.Google ScholarPubMed
Barsalou, Lawrence. 1999. Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22.4: 577–660.Google ScholarPubMed
Bergs, Alexander. 2005. Social Network Analysis and Historical Sociolinguistics. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110923223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergs, Alexander. 2012a. The Uniformitarian Principle and the risk of anachronisms in language and history. In Hernández-Campoy, Juan M. and Conde-Silvestre, J. Camilo (eds.), The Handbook of Historical Sociolinguistics. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 80–99.10.1002/9781118257227.ch5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergs, Alexander. 2012b. Construction Grammar. In Bergs, Alexander and Brinton, Laurel (eds.), English Historical Linguistics: An International Handbook. Vol. 2 (HSK 34.2). Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton, pp. 1631–1645.Google Scholar
Bergs, Alexander. 2015. The linguistic fingerprints of authors and scribes: a medieval whodunnit. In Watts, Richard, Schreier, Daniel and Auer, Anita (eds.), Letter Writing and Language Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 156–181.Google Scholar
Bergs, Alexander. 2021. Linguistic change across a lifetime: a historical microperspective. Intra-Individual Variation across Time and Space – Sociolinguistics Meets Psycholinguistics (eds. Pfenninger, Simone and Bülow, Lars). Special issue of Linguistics Vanguard: n.p.Google Scholar
Bergs, Alexander and Hoffmann, Thomas (eds.). 2017. Cognitive Approaches to the History of English. Special issue of English Language and Linguistics 21.2.Google Scholar
Bergs, Alexander and Pentrel, Meike. 2015. Ælc þara þe þas min word gehierþ and þa wyrcþ … : psycholinguistic perspectives on early English. In Adams, Michael, Brinton, Laurel and Fulk, Robert D. (eds.), Studies in the History of the English Language VI: Evidence and Method in Histories of English. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton, pp. 249–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biber, Douglas and Conrad, Susan. 2012. Register, Genre, and Style. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan and Finegan, Edward. 1999. The Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Blevins, James P. and Blevins, Juliette. 2009. Introduction: analogy in grammar. In Blevins, James P. and Blevins, Juliette (eds.), Analogy in Grammar: Form and Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 1–12.Google Scholar
Börgerding, Pia, Benen, Marie-Christine and Bergs, Alexander. 2020. Expecting the unexpected? Predictive coding, pattern recognition, and surprise in narratives. Anglistik 31.1: 129–153.Google Scholar
Bratu, Christian. 2015. Literature. In Classen, Albrecht (ed.), Handbook of Medieval Culture. Fundamental Aspects and Conditions of the European Middle Ages. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton, pp. 864–901.Google Scholar
Budts, Sara. 2022. A connectionist approach to analogy: on the modal meaning of periphrastic do in Early Modern English. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 18.2: 337–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burnley, David. 1995. Scribes and hypertext. The Yearbook of English Studies 25: 41–62.10.2307/3508817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burridge, Kate and Bergs, Alexander. 2017. Understanding Language Change. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan. 2002. Word frequency and context of use in the lexical diffusion of phonetically conditioned sound change. Language Variation and Change 14: 261–290.10.1017/S0954394502143018CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, Joan. 2007. Diachronic linguistics. In Geeraerts, Dirk and Cuyckens, Hubert (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 945–987.Google Scholar
Carstensen, Broder. 1959. Studien zur Syntax des Nomens, Pronomens und der Negation in den Paston Letters. Bochum–Langendreer: Pöppinghaus.Google Scholar
Casasanto, Daniel and Gijssels, Tom. 2014. What makes a metaphor an embodied metaphor? Linguistics Vanguard 1.1: 327–337.Google Scholar
Castaño, Emilia and Verdaguer, Isabel. 2018. Metonymies and metaphors of sadness in the Old English vocabulary. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 5.2: 282–302.Google Scholar
Claridge, Claudia and Walker, Terry. 2001. Causal clauses in written and speech-related genres in Early Modern English. ICAME Journal 25: 31–64.Google Scholar
Coolidge, Frederick L., Noël Haidle, Miriam, Lombard, Marlize and Wynn, Thomas. 2016. Bridging theory and bow hunting: human cognitive evolution and archaeology. Antiquity 90.349: 219–228.Google Scholar
Coolidge, Frederick L. and Wynn, Thomas. 2005. Working memory, its executive functions, and the emergence of modern thinking. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 15: 5–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coolidge, Frederick L. and Wynn, Thomas. 2016. An introduction to cognitive archaeology. Current Directions in Psychological Science 25.6: 386–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, Jonathan and Kytö, Merja. 2010. Early Modern English Dialogues: Spoken Interaction as Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dąbrowska, Ewa. 2016. Seven deadly sins in Cognitive Linguistics. Cognitive Linguistics 27.4: 479–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Smet, Hendrik. 2017. Entrenchment effects in language change. In Schmid, Hans-Jörg (ed.), Entrenchment and the Psychology of Language Learning. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton, pp. 75–100.Google Scholar
De Smet, Hendrik and Fischer, Olga. 2017. The role of analogy in language change: supporting constructions. In Hundt, Marianne, Mollin, Sandra and Pfenninger, Simone E. (eds.), The Changing English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 240–268.Google Scholar
Diessel, Holger. 2008. Iconicity of sequence: a corpus-based analysis of the positioning of temporal adverbial clauses in English. Cognitive Linguistics 19.3: 465–490.Google Scholar
Disney, Stephen J. 2009. The grammaticalisation of be going to. Newcastle Working Papers in Linguistics 15: 63–81.Google Scholar
Ellegård, Alvar. 1953. The Auxiliary Do: The Establishment and Regulation of Its Use in English. (Gothenburg Studies in English 2). Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell.Google Scholar
Fabiszak, Małgorzata. 1999. A semantic analysis of emotion terms in Old English. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 24: 133–146.Google Scholar
Fertig, David. 2013. Analogy and Morphological Change. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Finegan, Edward and Biber, Douglas. 1997. Relative markers in English: fact and fancy. In Fries, Udo, Tottie, Gunnel and Schneider, Peter (eds.), From Ælfric to the New York Times: Studies in English Corpus Linguistics. Amsterdam and Atlanta: Rodopi, pp. 65–78.Google Scholar
Gaeta, Livio. 2010. Analogical change. In Luraghi, Silvia and Bubenik, Vit (eds.), Continuum Companion to Historical Linguistics. London: Continuum, pp. 147–160.Google Scholar
Geeraerts, Dirk and Gevaert, Caroline. 2008. Hearts and (angry) minds in Old English. In Sharifian, Farzad, Dirven, René, Yu, Ning and Niemeier, Susanne (eds.), Culture, Body, and Language: Conceptualizations of Internal Body Organs across Cultures and Languages. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 319–348.Google Scholar
Gevaert, Caroline. 2001. Anger in Old and Middle English: a ‘hot’ topic? Belgian Essays on Language and Literature: 89–101.Google Scholar
Gick, Mary L. and Holyoak, Keith J.. 1980. Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology 12: 306–355.Google Scholar
Gleason, Jean Berko. 1958. The child’s learning of English morphology. Word 14.2–3: 150–177.Google Scholar
Grund, Peter. 2007. From tongue to text: the transmission of the Salem witchcraft examination records. American Speech 82.2: 119–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd. 1993. Auxiliaries: Cognitive Forces and Grammaticalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henrich, Joseph, Heine, Steven J. and Norenzayan, Ara. 2010. The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33.2–3: 61–83.Google ScholarPubMed
Hilpert, Martin. 2015. Historical linguistics. In Dąbrowska, Ewa and Divjak, Dagmar (eds.), Handbook of Cognitive Linguistics. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton, pp. 347–366.Google Scholar
Hofstadter, Douglas and Sander, Emmanuel. 2013. Surfaces and Essences: Analogy as the Fuel and Fire of Thinking. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Hopper, Paul and Traugott, Elizabeth C.. 1993. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Itkonen, Esa. 2015. ANALOGY = SCHEMA = CONSTRUCTION = BLENDING = SEMPLATE. Paper presented at The Fifth Conference of the Scandinavian Association for Language and Cognition.Google Scholar
Janda, Laura. 2013. Quantitative methods in Cognitive Linguistics: an introduction. In Janda, Laura (ed.), Cognitive Linguistics: The Quantitative Turn. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton, pp. 1–9.10.1515/9783110335255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jou, Jerwen and Harris, Richard J.. 1990. Event order versus syntactic structure in recall of adverbial complex sentences. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 19.1: 21–42.Google ScholarPubMed
Kanetani, Masaru. 2011. Analogy in Construction Grammar: the case of just because of X doesn’t mean Y. Tsukuba English Studies 29: 77–93.Google Scholar
Kay, Christian. 2023. Metaphors we liveD by. In The Scottish Corpus of Texts & Speech. Glasgow: University of Glasgow. Retrieved July 2023, from www.scottishcorpus.ac.uk/document/?documentid=4. n.p.Google Scholar
Kuryłowicz, Jerzy. 1945. La nature des procès dits ‘analogiques’. Acta Linguistica 5: 15–37.10.1080/03740463.1945.10410880CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kytö, Merja. 2012. Corpus linguistics. In Bergs, Alexander and Brinton, Laurel (eds.), English Historical Linguistics: An International Handbook. Vol. 2 (HSK 34.2). Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton, pp. 1509–1530.Google Scholar
Kytö, Merja and Walker, Terry. 2003. The linguistic study of Early Modern English speech-related texts: how ‘bad’ can ‘bad’ data be? Journal of English Linguistics 31.3: 221–248.Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1994. Principles of Linguistic Change. Vol. 1: Internal Factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1990. The invariance hypothesis: is abstract reason based on image-schemas? Cognitive Linguistics 1.1: 39–74.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 2012. Explaining embodied cognition results. Topics in Cognitive Science 4.4: 773–785.10.1111/j.1756-8765.2012.01222.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lakoff, George and Johnson, Mark. 2003. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Langacker, Ronald. 2011. Grammaticalization and Cognitive Grammar. In Heine, Bernd and Narrog, Heiko (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Grammaticalization. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 79–91.Google Scholar
Lass, Roger. 1994. Historical Linguistics and Language Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mańczak, Witold. 1958. Tendances générales des changements analogiques. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Martin, Luther. 2014. Introduction to the issue. Journal of Cognitive Historiography 1.1: 10–13.10.1558/jch.v1i1.10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mollin, Sandra. 2007. The Hansard hazard: gauging the accuracy of British parliamentary transcripts. Corpora 2.2: 187–210.10.3366/cor.2007.2.2.187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moradi, Mohammad Reza and Pirzad Mashak, Shahrzad. 2013. A comparative and contrastive study of sadness conceptualization in Persian and English. English Linguistics Research 2.1: 107–112.Google Scholar
Muthukrishna, Michael, Henrich, Joseph and Slingerland, Edward. 2021. Psychology as a historical science. Annual Review of Psychology 72: 717–749.10.1146/annurev-psych-082820-111436CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Neubauer, Simon, Hublin, Jean-Jacques and Gunz, Philipp. 2018. The evolution of modern human brain shape. Science Advances 4.1: 1–8.10.1126/sciadv.aao5961CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nevalainen, Terttu. 2012. Historical sociolinguistics. In Bergs, Alexander and Brinton, Laurel (eds.), English Historical Linguistics: An International Handbook. Vol. 2 (HSK 34.2). Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton, pp. 1438–1457.Google Scholar
Newen, Albert, de Bruin, Leon and Gallagher, Shaun (eds.). 2018. The Oxford Handbook of 4E Cognition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198735410.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ogura, Mieko. 1993. The development of periphrastic do in English: a case of lexical diffusion in syntax. Diachronica 10.1: 51–85.Google Scholar
Pentrel, Meike. 2017. Connecting the present and the past: cognitive processing and the position of adverbial clauses in Samuel Pepys’s diary. English Language and Linguistics 21.2: 263–282.10.1017/S1360674317000120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petré, Peter. 2019. How constructions are born: the role of patterns in the constructionalization of be going to INF. In Busse, Beatrix and Möhlig-Falke, Ruth (eds.), Patterns in Language and Linguistics: New Perspectives on a Ubiquitous Concept. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton, pp. 157–192.Google Scholar
Prideaux, Gary. 1989. Text data as evidence for language processing principles: the grammar of ordered events. Language Sciences 11.1: 27–42.10.1016/0388-0001(89)90013-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prideaux, Gary and Baker, William. 1986. Strategies and Structures. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Renfrew, Colin and Zubrow, Ezra B. W. (eds.). 1994. The Ancient Mind: Elements of Cognitive Archeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg (ed.). 2017. Entrenchment and the Psychology of Language Learning. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg. 2020. The Dynamics of the Linguistic System. Usage, Conventionalization, and Entrenchment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198814771.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmid, Hans-Jörg and Mantlik, Annette. 2015. Entrenchment in historical corpora? Reconstructing dead authors’ minds from the usage profiles. Anglia 133.4: 583–623.10.1515/ang-2015-0056CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slingerland, Edward and Chudek, Maciej. 2011. The prevalence of mind–body dualism in early China. Cognitive Science 35.5: 997–1007.Google ScholarPubMed
Stefanowitsch, Anatol. 2011. Argument structure: item-based or distributed? Zeitschrift für Anglistik und Amerikanistik 59.4: 369–386.10.1515/zaa-2011-0407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tattersall, Ian. 2010. Human evolution and cognition. Theory in Biosciences 129: 193–201.Google ScholarPubMed
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 2012. On the persistence of ambiguous linguistic contexts over time: implications for corpus research on micro-changes. In Mukherjee, Joybrato and Huber, Magnus (eds.), Corpus Linguistics and Variation in English: Theory and Description. Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 231–246.Google Scholar
Trim, Richard. 2007. Metaphor Networks. The Comparative Evolution of Figurative Language. London: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Verdaguer, Isabel and Castaño, Emilia. 2018. The metaphorical conceptualization of sadness in the Anglo-Saxon elegies. Journal of Literary Semantics 47.2: 85–102.10.1515/jls-2018-2001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Visser, Fredericus Theodorus. 1963–1973. An Historical Syntax of the English Language. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Warner, Anthony. 1993. English Auxiliaries. Structure and History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Winters, Margaret. 1997. Kuryłowicz, analogical change, and Cognitive Grammar. Cognitive Linguistics 8: 359–386.10.1515/cogl.1997.8.4.359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winters, Margaret. 2010. Introduction. In Winters, Tissari and Allan (eds.), pp. 3–30.Google Scholar
Winters, Margaret. 2020. Historical Linguistics: A Cognitive Grammar Introduction. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/z.227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winters, Margaret, Tissari, Heli and Allan, Kathryn (eds.). 2010. Historical Cognitive Linguistics. Berlin: de Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Wyld, Henry Cecil. 1920. A History of Modern Colloquial English. London: T. Fisher Unwin.Google Scholar
Zerubavel, Eviatar. 1997. Social Mindscapes. An Invitation to Cognitive Sociology. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Accessibility standard: WCAG 2.0 A
Why this information is here
This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.Accessibility Information
The HTML of this chapter
conforms to version 2.0 of the
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
(WCAG), ensuring core accessibility principles are addressed and meets the basic
(A)
level of WCAG compliance, addressing essential accessibility barriers.
Content Navigation
Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Index navigation
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Reading Order & Textual Equivalents
Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
Short alternative textual descriptions
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
Visual Accessibility
Use of colour is not sole means of conveying information
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
Structural and Technical Features
ARIA roles provided
You gain clarity from ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) roles and attributes, as they help assistive technologies interpret how each part of the content functions.
You gain clarity from ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) roles and attributes, as they help assistive technologies interpret how each part of the content functions.