Cover not available
Part of
The Determinants of Diachronic Stability
Edited by Anne Breitbarth, Miriam Bouzouita, Lieven Danckaert and Melissa Farasyn
[Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 254] 2019
► pp. 215–244

Chapter 9
What is a diachronically stable system in a language-contact situation?

The case of the English recipient passive

ORCID logo | Universität Stuttgart
| Universität Mannheim | University of Westminster
| Universität Mannheim

In this paper we present data showing that the development of the English recipient passive (RP) was linked predominantly to verbs of French origin, although Old French (OF) did not have an RP. We present two explanations of the role that contact with French could have played in this development. The first explanation builds on the fact that only structurally case-marked arguments can become subjects of passive clauses and assumes that the RP was developed with French verbs because the OF structural dative was copied to Middle English (ME). The second explanation is that clause-taking ditransitive verbs in Anglo-French (AF, the variety of OF spoken in England) showed case idiosyncracies that licensed the RP in AF and may thus have acted as a bridge construction. We relate both explanations to current approaches in contact linguistics as well as to the degrees of stability of the three languages involved, ME, OF, and AF.

Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The Recipient passive in the history of English
    • 2.1Previous studies and first occurrences
    • 2.2Middle English data extracted from the PPCME2 and the PCEEC
  • 3.Structural datives: A case of copying abstract case features?
  • 4.Clause-taking verbs: A possible bridge construction?
  • 5.Contact and stability
  • 6.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 20 March 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/la.254.09ste
References
Abraham, Werner
2006 Introduction. In Datives and Other Cases [Studies in Language Companion Series 75], Daniel Hole, André Meinunger & Werner Abraham (eds), 3–46. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alexiadou, Artemis, Anagnostopoulou, Elena & Sevdali, Christina
2014 Opaque and transparent datives, and how they behave in passives. Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 17(1): 1–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Allen, Cynthia
1995 Case Marking and Reanalysis: Grammatical Relations from Old to Early Modern English. Oxford: OUP.Google Scholar
Arteaga, Deborah L. & Herschensohn, Julia
2013 A diachronic view of Old French genitive constructions. In Research on Old French: The State of the Art, Deborah L. Arteaga (ed.), 19–44. Dordrecht: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bernolet, Sarah, Hartsuiker, Robert J. & Pickering, Martin J.
2009 Persistence of emphasis in language production: A cross-linguistic approach. Cognition 112: 300–317. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bock, Kathryn
1986 Syntactic persistence in language production. Cognitive Psychology 18: 355–387. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Coetsem, Frans
1988 Loan Phonology and the Two Transfer Types in Language Contact [Publications in Language Sciences 27]. Dordrecht: Foris. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2002 A General and Unified Theory of the Transmission Process in Language Contact. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag C. Winter.Google Scholar
Denison, David
1993 English Historical Syntax. Harlow: Pearson Longman.Google Scholar
Dupuy, Estèle
2010 La voix passive et les auxiliaires factitifs en moyen français: Maillage inter-verbal des systèmes valentico-référentiels. In Actes du XXVe Congrès International de Linguistique et de Philologie Romanes, Tome VI, Maria Iliescu, Heidi Siller-Runggaldier & Paul Danler (eds), 105–114. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Emirkanian, Louisette & Jebali, Adel
2013 Acquiring argument structure in French L2: The case of ditransitive structures. In Conference Proceedings of 6th ICT for Language Learning, Florence, Italy, 14–15 November, Pixel (ed.), 469–473. Padova: Libreria universitaria.Google Scholar
Feldman, Harry
1978 Passivizing on datives in Greek. Linguistic Inquiry 9(3): 499–502.Google Scholar
van Gelderen, Elly
2006 A History of the English Language. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haeberli, Eric
2010 Investigating Anglo-Norman influence on Late Middle English syntax. In The Anglo-Norman Language and its Contexts, Richard Ingham (ed.), 143–163. Woodbridge: Boydell and Brewer.Google Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane
2016 Canonical goal passives in Dutch and its dialects. Ms.Google Scholar
Hartsuiker, Robert J., Pickering, Martin J. & Veltkamp, Eline
2004 Is syntax separate or shared between languages? Cross-linguistic syntactic priming in Spanish-English bilinguals. Psychological Science 15(6): 409–414. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heine, Bernd & Kuteva, Tania
(eds) 2005 Language Contact and Grammatical Change. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herschensohn, Julia
1996 Case Suspension and Binary Complement Structure in French [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 132]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herslund, Michael
1980 Problèmes de syntaxe de l’ancien français. Compléments datifs et génitifs. Uppsala: Akademisk Forlag.Google Scholar
Ingham, Richard
2012 Middle English and Anglo-Norman in contact. Bulletin de l’Association des Médiévistes Anglicistes de l’Enseignement Supérieur 81: 1–23.Google Scholar
2017 The Middle English prepositional dative: Grammaticalisation and contact with French. Talk held at the SLE 2017 in Zurich.Google Scholar
Jensen, Frede
1990 Old French and Comparative Gallo-Romance Syntax [Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie 232]. Tübingen: Niemeyer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Johanson, Lars
2002 Contact-induced change in a code-copying framework. In Language Change: The Interplay of Internal, External and Extralinguistic Factors, Mari C. Jones & Edith Esch (eds), 285–313. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Koopman, Willem
1990 The Double Object Construction in Old English. In Papers from the 5th International Conference on English Historical Linguistics, Sylvia Adamson Vivien A. Law, Nigel Vincent & Susan Wright (eds), 225–243. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kroch, Anthony & Taylor, Ann
(eds) 2000 The Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Middle English, 2nd edn (PPCME2). Philadelphia PA: University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Lieber, Rochelle
1979 The English passive: An argument for historical rule stability. Linguistic Inquiry 10(4): 667–688.Google Scholar
Lightfoot, David
1991 How to Set Parameters: Arguments from Language Change. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Lucas, Christopher
2012 Contact-induced grammatical change. Towards an explicit account. Diachronica 29(3): 275–300. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McFadden, Thomas
2002 The rise of the to-dative in Middle English. In Syntactic Effects of Morphological Change, David Lightfoot (ed.), 107–123. Oxford: OUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Parkvall, Mikael
2008 Which parts of language are the most stable? Sprachtypologie und Universalienforschung 61(3): 234–250.Google Scholar
Rothwell, William
2001 The teaching and learning of French in later medieval England. Zeitschrift für französische Sprache und Literatur 111: 2–18.Google Scholar
Rothwell, William & Trotter, David
(eds) 2001 The Anglo-Norman Online Hub. London: Aberystwyth University and Swansea University.Google Scholar
Russom, Jacqueline Haring
1982 An examination of the evidence for OE indirect passives. Linguistic Inquiry 13(4): 677–680.Google Scholar
Santoro, Maurizio
2007 Second language acquisition of Italian accusative and dative clitics. Second Language Research 23(1): 37–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Short, Ian
1980 Bilingualism in Anglo-Norman England. Romance Philology 33(4): 467–479.Google Scholar
Sleeman, Petra
2010 L2 acquisition of clitics: Old French as an interlanguage. In Movement and Clitics: Adult and Child Grammar, Vincent Torrens et al.. (eds), 389–416. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
Taylor, Ann, Nurmi, Arja, Warner, Anthony, Pintzuk, Susan & Nevalainen, Terttu
(eds) 2006 Parsed Corpus of Early English Correspondence (PCEEC). York and Helsinki: Universities of York and Helsinki.Google Scholar
Thomason, Sarah Grey & Kaufman, Terrence
1988 Language Contact, Creolization, and Genetic Linguistics. Berkeley CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Togeby, Knud
1974 Précis historique de grammaire française. Odense: Akademisk Forlag.Google Scholar
Toyota, Junichi
2008 Diachronic Change in the English Passive. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trips, Carola & Stein, Achim
2018 A comparison of multi-genre and single-genre corpora in the context of contact-induced change. In Diachronic Corpora, Genre and Language Change [Studies in Corpus Linguistics 85], Richard Whitt (ed.), 241–280. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019 Contact-induced changes in the argument structure of Middle English verbs on the model of Old French. Journal of Language Contact 12(1): 232–267. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Troberg, Michelle
2008 Dynamic Two-place Indirect Verbs in French: A Synchronic and Diachronic Study in Variation and Change of Valence. PhD Thesis: University of Toronto.Google Scholar
Vasilyeva, Marina & Waterfall, Heidi
2012 Beyond syntactic priming: Evidence for activation of alternative syntactic structures. Journal of Child Language 39(2): 258–283. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vasilyeva, Marina, Waterfall, Heidi, Gamez, Perla, Gomez, Ligia, Bowers, Edmond & Shimpi, Priya
2010 Cross-linguistic syntactic priming in bilingual children. Journal of Child Language 37(5): 1047–1064. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Visser, Fredericus Theodorus
1963 An Historical Syntax of the English Language. Leiden: E. J. Brill.Google Scholar
Weber, Kirsten & Indefrey, Peter
2009 Syntactic priming in German-English bilinguals during sentence comprehension. Neuroimage 46(4): 1164–1167. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Winford, Donald
2003 Contact-induced changes: Classification and processes. Ohio State University Working Papers in Linguistics 57: 129–150.Google Scholar
Woolford, Ellen
2006 Lexical case, inherent case, and argument structure. Linguistic Inquiry 37(1): 111–130. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yanagi, Tomohiro
2012 Ditransitive alternation and theme passivization in Old English. In Studies in Variation, Contacts and Change in English, Vol. 10: Outposts of Historical Corpus Linguistics: From the Helsinki Corpus to a Proliferation of Resources, Jukka Tyrkkö et al.. (eds). Helsinki: Varieng. [URL]Google Scholar
Zehentner, Eva
2017 Ditransitives in Middle English: On semantic specialisation and the rise of the dative alternation. English Language and Linguistics 22(1): 149–175. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Stein, Achim
2019. Le rôle de l’ancien français dans le développement du passif indirect en anglais. Zeitschrift für romanische Philologie 135:2 ► pp. 356 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 22 april 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.