Cover not available
Article published In:
Diachronica
Vol. 39:4 (2022) ► pp.525–564

Copying form without content

Relexification in ordinary contact-induced change

ORCID logo | Dynamique Du Langage, CNRS | Université de Lyon
Two major types of change are generally distinguished in language contact studies: the transfer of linguistic form (frequently taken to include transfer of concomitant meaning or function) and the transfer of structural and semantic patterns by themselves, without attendant form. A type of change that is less frequently discussed is so-called relexification. This involves the transfer of form without model-language semantic or syntactic specifications that is grafted onto an equivalent recipient-language lemma. Relexification has been suggested to play a role in the development of mixed languages or creoles, but as is shown here, it can also be identified in several ordinary situations of language contact from around the world. This type of change represents a mirror image of the transfer of patterns without lexical material and supports recent models of language selection in bilinguals.
Keywords: borrowing, loanwords, adpositions, conjunctions, derivational suffixes, extension by analogy, MAT, PAT
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Lamunkhin Even, its contact situation, and the data used in this study
  • 3.Sakha postpositions in Lamunkhin Even
    • 3.1The primary postposition dïlï ‘until’
    • 3.2The relational nouns bïːs- ‘between’ and tus- ‘about’
    • 3.3Different types of Sakha-derived postpositions in Lamunkhin Even
  • 4.Relexification in ordinary language contact
    • 4.1Quechua in contact with Spanish: The agent nominalizer -dor
    • 4.2Zoque in contact with Spanish: The concessive construction
    • 4.3Mosetén in contact with Spanish: The conjunction pero ‘but’
    • 4.4Totonac in contact with Spanish: The preposition hasta ‘until’
    • 4.5Domari in contact with Arabic: The preposition žamb ‘next to’
  • 5.Relexification – or simply extension by analogy?
  • 6.Discussion
    • 6.1Relexification and other types of contact-induced change
    • 6.2The role of pivot-matching in relexification
  • 7.Conclusions
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Abbreviations used in glosses
  • References
Published online: 26 April 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.20022.pak
References (94)
References
Aikhenvald, Alexandra & R. M. W. Dixon (eds). 2006. Grammars in contact: A crosslinguistic typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Aikhenvald, Alexandra Y. 2006. Grammars in contact: A cross-linguistic perspective. In Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald & R. M. W. Dixon (eds.), Grammars in contact: A crosslinguistic typology, 1–66. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Arkadiev, Peter. 2018. Borrowed preverbs and the limits of contact-induced change in aspectual systems. In Rosanna Benacchio, Alessio Muro & Svetlana Slavkova (eds.), The role of prefixes in the formation of aspectuality: Issues of grammaticalization, 1–21. Florence: Firenze University Press.Google Scholar
Backus, Ad & Margreet Dorleijn. 2009. Loan translations versus code-switching. In Barbara E. Bullock & Almeida Jacqueline Toribio (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of linguistic code-switching (Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics), 75–94. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Backus, Ad & Anna Verschik. 2012. Copiability of (bound) morphology. In Lars Johanson & Martine Robbeets (eds.), Copies versus cognates in bound morphology, 123–149. Leiden et al.: Brill.Google Scholar
Beck, David. 2004. A grammatical sketch of Upper Necaxa Totonac. Munich: LINCOM Europa.Google Scholar
. 2011. Upper Necaxa Totonac dictionary (Trends in Linguistics – Documentation 28). Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Beckett, Herbert W. 1951. Hand book of Kiluba (Luba-Katanga). Mulongo: Garenganze Evangelical Mission.Google Scholar
Blanco-Elorrieta, Esti & Alfonso Caramazza. 2021. A common selection mechanism at each linguistic level in bilingual and monolingual language production. Cognition 2131. 104625. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burykin, Aleksej A. 2004. Jazyk maločislennogo naroda v ego pis’mennoj forme. Sociolingvističeskie i sobstvenno lingvističeskie aspekty [The language of a minority people in its written form. Sociolinguistic and linguistic aspects]. St Petersburg: Peterburgskoe Vostokovedenie.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle. 1999. Historical linguistics: An introduction. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Chafe, Wallace L. 1980. The pear stories: Cognitive, cultural and linguistic aspects of narrative production. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Chamoreau, Claudine. 2012. Contact-induced change as an innovation. In Claudine Chamoreau & Isabelle Léglise (eds.), Dynamics of contact-induced language change, 53–76. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chamoreau, Claudine & Isabelle Léglise (eds.). 2012. Dynamics of contact-induced language change. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cincius, Vera I. & Ljubov’ D. Rishes. 1952. Russko-Evenskij slovar’ [Russian-Even dictionary]. Moscow: Gosudarstvennoe izdatel’stvo inostrannyx i nacional’nyx slovarej.Google Scholar
Cole, Peter. 1982. Imbabura Quechua (Lingua Descriptive Studies 5). Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
Curnow, Timothy Jowan. 2001. What language features can be “borrowed”? In Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald & R. M. W. Dixon (eds.), Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance: Problems in comparative linguistics, 412–436. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dikker, Suzanne. 2008. Spanish prepositions in Media Lengua: Redefining relexification. In Thomas Stolz, Dik Bakker & Rosa Salas Palomo (eds.), Hispanisation: The impact of Spanish on the lexicon and grammar of the Indigenous Languages of Austronesia and the Americas (Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 39), 121–146. Berlin New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Dimmendaal, Gerrit J. 2001. Areal diffusion versus genetic inheritance: An African perspective. In Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald & R. M. W. Dixon (eds.), Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance. Problems in comparative linguistics, 358–392. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Field, Fredric W. 2002. Linguistic borrowing in bilingual contexts (Studies in Language Companion 62). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gardani, Francesco. 2020. Borrowing matter and pattern in morphology. An overview. Morphology 30(4). 263–282. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gardani, Francesco, Peter Arkadiev & Nino Amiridze. 2015. Borrowed morphology: An overview. In Francesco Gardani, Peter Arkadiev & Nino Amiridze (eds.), Borrowed morphology (Language Contact and Bilingualism 8), 1–23. Berlin, Boston, Munich: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gast, Volker & Johan Van der Auwera. 2012. What is “contact-induced grammaticalization”? Examples from Mayan and Mixe-Zoquean languages. In Björn Wiemer, Bernhard Wälchli & Björn Hansen (eds.), Grammatical replication and borrowability in language contact, 381–426. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grossman, Eitan & Stéphane Polis. 2017. Polysemy networks in language contact. The borrowing of the Greek-origin preposition κατά (kata) in Coptic. In Peter Dils, Eitan Grossman, Tonio Sebastian Richter & Wolfgang Schenkel (eds.), Lingua Aegyptia Studia Monographica, 171. 229–262. Hamburg: Widmaier. [URL] (14 April, 2020).
Güldemann, Tom. 2008. Quotative indexes in African languages: A synchronic and diachronic survey (Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 34). Berlin [u.a.]: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hagège, Claude. 2010. Adpositions (Oxford Studies in Typology and Linguistic Theory). Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hammarström, Harald, Robert Forkel & Martin Haspelmath. 2019. Glottolog 4.11. Jena: Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History. (Available online at [URL], Accessed on 2020-04-15.)
Haspelmath, Martin. 2009. Lexical borrowing: Concepts and issues. In Martin Haspelmath & Uri Tadmor (eds.), Loanwords in the world’s languages: A comparative handbook, 35–54. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin & Uri Tadmor (eds.). 2009. Loanwords in the world’s languages: A comparative handbook. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haugen, Einar. 1950. The analysis of linguistic borrowing. Language 26(2). 210–231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heath, Jeffrey. 1978. Linguistic diffusion in Arnhem Land. Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.Google Scholar
Hock, Hans Henrich & Brian D. Joseph. 1996. Language history, language change and language relationship: An introduction to historical and comparative linguistics. 2nd edn. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Hollenbach, Fernando & Elena E. Hollenbach. 1975. Trique de San Juan Copala, Oaxaca (Archivo de Lenguas Indígenas de México 2). México: El Colegio de México.Google Scholar
Horvath, Julia & Paul Wexler. 1997. Relexification: Prolegomena to a research program. In Julia Horvath & Paul Wexler (eds.), Relexification in Creole and non-Creole languages: With special attention to Haitian Creole, modern Hebrew, Romani, and Rumanian, 11–71. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.Google Scholar
Jansasoy, Francisco Tandioy, Stephen H. Levinsohn & Domingo Tandioy Chasoy. 1997. Diccionario Inga [Inga dictionary]. Comité de Educación Inga de la Organización “Musu Runakuna.”Google Scholar
Johanson, Lars. 1999. The dynamics of code-copying in language encounters. In Bernt Brendemoen, Elizabeth Lanza & Else Ryen (eds.), Language encounters across time and space. Studies in language contact, 37–62. Oslo: Novus forlag.Google Scholar
. 2002. Contact-induced change in a code-copying framework. In Mari C. Jones & Edith Esch (eds.), Language change: The interplay of internal, external and extra-linguistic factors (Contributions to the Sociology of Language 86), 285–313. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008. Remodeling grammar: Copying, conventionalization, grammaticalization. In Peter Siemund & Noemi Kintana (eds.), Language contact and contact languages, 61–79. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Karatsareas, Petros. 2016. The Asia Minor Greek adpositional cycle: A tale of multiple causation. Journal of Greek Linguistics 16(1). 47–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Knudson, Lyle. 1980. Zoque de Chimalapa (Archivo de Lenguas indígenas de México 6). México: El Colegio de México.Google Scholar
Korkina, Evdokija Innokent’evna, Elizaveta Ivanovna Ubrjatova, Luka Nikiforovič Xaritonov & N. E. Petrov. 1982. Grammatika sovremennogo jakutskogo literaturnogo jazyka. Fonetika i morfologija. [A grammar of the modern Yakut literary language. Phonetics and morphology.]. Moskva: Izdatel’stvo ‛Nauka’.Google Scholar
Law, Danny. 2013. Inherited similarity and contact-induced change in Mayan languages. Journal of Language Contact 6(2). 271–299. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2020. Pattern borrowing, linguistic similarity, and new categories: Numeral classifiers in Mayan. Morphology 30(4). 347–372. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lefebvre, Claire. 1998. Creole genesis and the acquisition of grammar: The case of Haitian Creole (Cambridge Studies in Linguistics 88). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
. 2008. Relabelling: A major process in language contact. Journal of Language Contact 2(1). 91–111. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levinsohn, Stephen H. 1974. Una gramatica pedagogica del Inga (primera parte). Bogotá: Instituto Lingüístico de Verano + Ministerio de Gobierno – República de Colombia.Google Scholar
1976a. Una gramatica pedagogica del Inga (segunda parte). Bogotá: Instituto Lingüístico de Verano + Ministerio de Gobierno – República de Colombia.Google Scholar
1976b. The Inga language (Janua Linguarum: Series Practica 188). The Hague, Paris: Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Levy, Paulette. 1990. Totonaco de Papantla, Veracruz (Archivo de Lenguas indígenas de México 15). México: El Colegio de México.Google Scholar
Marra, Antonietta. 2012. Contact phenomena in the Slavic of Molise: Some remarks about nouns and prepositional phrases. In Martine Vanhove, Thomas Stolz, Aina Urdze & Hitomi Otsuka (eds.), Morphologies in contact, 265–282. Berlin: Akademie Verlag. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matras, Yaron. 2007. Grammatical borrowing in Domari. In Yaron Matras & Jeanette Sakel (eds.), Grammatical borrowing in cross-linguistic perspective (Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 38), 151–164. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009a. Language contact. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009b. Defining the limits of grammatical borrowing. In Angela Marcantonio (ed.), The Indo-European language family: Questions about its status (Journal of Indo-European Studies Monograph Series 55), 1–25. Washington DC: Institute for the Study of Man.Google Scholar
. 2012. A grammar of Domari (Mouton Grammar Library 59). Berlin, Boston: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matras, Yaron & Jeanette Sakel. 2007a. Investigating the mechanisms of pattern replication in language convergence. Studies in Language 31(4). 829–865. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(eds). 2007b. Grammatical borrowing in cross-linguistic perspective (Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 38). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miller, Laura. 1998. Wasei eigo: English “loanwords” coined in Japan. In Jane H. Hill, P. J. Mistry & Lyle Campbell (eds.), The life of language. Papers in linguistics in honor of William Bright (Trends in Linguistics Studies and Monographs 108), 123–140. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miura, Akira. 1985. “English” in Japanese. Tokyo: Yohan Publications.Google Scholar
Mous, Maarten. 2001. Paralexification in language intertwining. In Norval Smith & Tonjes Veenstra (eds.), Creolization and contact, 113–123. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Muysken, Pieter. 1981. Halfway between Quechua and Spanish: The case for relexification. In Arnold Highfield & Albert Valdman (eds.), Historicity and variation in creole studies, 52–78. Ann Arbor: Karoma Publishers.Google Scholar
. 2012. Spanish affixes in the Quechua languages: A multidimensional perspective. Lingua (Language Contact and Universal Grammar in the Andes) 122(5). 481–493. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nassenstein, Nico. 2015. Kisangani Swahili: Choices and variation in a multilingual urban space. Munich: LINCOM.Google Scholar
Pakendorf, Brigitte. 2007. Contact in the prehistory of the Sakha (Yakuts): Linguistic and genetic perspectives (LOT Dissertation Series 170). Utrecht: LOT.
. 2009. Intensive contact and the copying of paradigms: An Ėven dialect in contact with Sakha (Yakut). Journal of Language Contact 2(2). 85–110. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. A comparison of copied morphemes in Sakha (Yakut) and Ėven. In Francesco Gardani, Peter Arkadiev & Nino Amiridze (eds.), Borrowed morphology, 157–187. Berlin, New York: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2019. Direct copying of inflectional paradigms: Evidence from Lamunkhin Even. Language 95(3). e364–e380. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pakendorf, Brigitte & Eugénie Stapert. 2020. Sakha and Dolgan, the North Siberian Turkic languages. In Martine Robbeets & Alexander Savelyev (eds.), The Oxford guide to the Transeurasian languages, 430–445. Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peyronel, Stella & Ian Higgins. 2006. Basic Italian: A grammar and workbook. London, New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Poplack, Shana. 2017. L’anglicisme chez nous: Une perspective sociolinguistique [Our anglicisms: A sociolinguistic perspective]. In Recueil des actes du Colloque du réseau des Organismes francophones de politique et d’aménagement linguistiques (OPALE). Les anglicismes : des emprunts à intérêt variable?, Québec, 18 et 19 octobre 2016, 375–403. Montréal: Publications de l’Office québécois de la langue française.Google Scholar
Poplack, Shana & Nathalie Dion. 2012. Myths and facts about loanword development. Language Variation and Change 24(3). 279–315. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Poplack, Shana, David Sankoff & Christopher Miller. 1988. The social correlates and linguistic processes of lexical borrowing and assimilation. Linguistics 26(1). 47–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rooij, Vincent A. de. 1996. Cohesion through contrast. French-Swahili code-switching and Swahili style shifting in Shaba Swahili. Amsterdam: IFOTT (Institute for Functional Research into Language and Language Use). PhD Dissertation.
. 2000. French discourse markers in Shaba Swahili conversations. International Journal of Bilingualism 4(4). 447–466. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. Grammatical borrowing in Katanga Swahili. In Yaron Matras & Jeanette Sakel (eds.), Grammatical borrowing in cross-linguistic perspective (Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 38), 123–135. Berlin New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ross, Malcolm. 2001. Contact-induced change in Oceanic languages in North-West Melanesia. In Alexandra Y. Aikhenvald & R. M. W. Dixon (eds.), Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance, 134–166. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. 2007. Calquing and metatypy. Journal of Language Contact 1(1). 116–143. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sakel, Jeanette. 2004. A grammar of Mosetén (Mouton Grammar Library 33). Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007a. Types of loan: Matter and pattern. In Yaron Matras & Jeanette Sakel (eds.), Grammatical borrowing in cross-linguistic perspective (Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 38), 15–29. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
. 2007b. Mosetén borrowing from Spanish. In Yaron Matras & Jeanette Sakel (eds.), Grammatical borrowing in cross-linguistic perspective (Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 38), 567–580. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
. 2007c. Language contact between Spanish and Mosetén: A study of grammatical integration. International Journal of Bilingualism 11(1). 25–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sammartino, Antonio. 2004. Grammatica della lingua Croato-Molisana / Gramatika moliškohrvatskoga jezika [A grammar of Molise Croatian]. Montemitro, Zagreb: Fondazione “Agostina Piccoli” & Profil International.Google Scholar
Schadeberg, Thilo C. 1997. De Swahili-talen van Mozambique [The Swahili languages of Mozambique]. Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen: Mededelingen van de Afdeling Letterkunde, Nieuwe Reeks 60(2). 61–81.Google Scholar
2009. Loanwords in Swahili. In Martin Haspelmath & Uri Tadmor (eds.), Loanwords in the world’s languages: A comparative handbook, 76–102. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sebba, Mark. 1998. A congruence approach to the syntax of codeswitching. International Journal of Bilingualism 2(1). 1–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siemund, Peter & Noemi Kintana (eds.). 2008. Language contact and contact languages (Hamburg Studies on Multilingualism 7). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stapert, Eugénie. 2013. Contact-induced change in Dolgan: An investigation into the role of linguistic data for the reconstruction of a people’s (pre)history (LOT Dissertation Series 336). Utrecht: LOT.
Stolz, Christel & Thomas Stolz. 1996. Funktionswortentlehnung in Mesoamerika. Spanisch-amerindischer Sprachkontakt (Hispanoindiana II). STUF 49(1). 86–123. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tadmor, Uri. 2007. Grammatical borrowing in Indonesian. In Yaron Matras & Jeanette Sakel (eds.), Grammatical borrowing in cross-linguistic perspective (Empirical Approaches to Language Typology 38), 301–328. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Vanhove, Martine, Thomas Stolz, Aina Urdze & Hitomi Otsuka (eds.). 2012. Morphologies in contact. Berlin: Akademie Verlag. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Watters, James Kenneth. 1988. Topics in Tepehua Grammar. Berkeley: University of California PhD Dissertation.
Wiemer, Björn & Bernhard Wälchli. 2012. Contact-induced grammatical change: Diverse phenomena, diverse perspectives. In Björn Wiemer, Bernhard Wälchli & Björn Hansen (eds.), Grammatical replication and borrowability in language contact (Trends in Linguistics Studies and Monographs 242), 3–64. Berlin, Boston: de Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wiemer, Björn, Bernhard Wälchli & Björn Hansen (eds.). 2012. Grammatical replication and borrowability in language contact (Trends in Linguistics Studies and Monographs 242). Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Winford, Donald. 2005. Contact-induced changes. Classification and processes. Diachronica 22(2). 373–427. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013. On the unity of contact phenomena: The case for imposition. In Carole de Féral (ed.), In and out of Africa: Languages in question. In honour of Robert Nicolaï, Volume 1: Language contact and epistemological issues, 43–71. Louvain-la-Neuve, Walpole MA: Peeters.Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Tandy, James
2023. Tracing Eastern Mayan Perfect ‐maχ: Outcomes of Direct Affix Borrowing in the Sacapulas Corridor. Transactions of the Philological Society 121:3 ► pp. 495 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.