Cover not available
Part of
Normativity in Language and Linguistics
Edited by Aleksi Mäkilähde, Ville Leppänen and Esa Itkonen
[Studies in Language Companion Series 209] 2019
► pp. 183–212

Linguistic variation and change

A normative approach

This chapter offers a preliminary examination of linguistic variation and change from the normative perspective. Both key aspects of normativity, correctness and rationality, are discussed in the context of theoretical discussion and demonstrated by concrete examples drawn from the existing literature on normativity, sociolinguistics and historical linguistics. The goal is to show, how linguistic variation and change can be understood as empirical phenomena involving norms as constitutive (as opposed to merely evaluative or prescriptive) entities in the ontology of language. Of the three variation types thus identified, only the one involving indeterminable correctness appears central to language change. Finally, language change is conceptualized and discussed as a process of norm change (i.e. as an appearance, disappearance or replacement of norms).
Keywords: variation, change, sociolinguistics, historical linguistics, norms, normativity
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction: Normativity, variation, and change
  • 2.Metatheoretical foundations of sociolinguistics and historical linguistics
    • 2.1Defining linguistic variation
    • 2.2Defining language change
    • 2.3Rational explanation
  • 3.Conceptualizing variation in normative terms
    • 3.1Types of linguistic variation
    • 3.2Variation and norms
    • 3.3Norms and the speech community
    • 3.4Statistical description and a methodological note
  • 4.Ontology of language change
    • 4.1Change of norms, innovation and propagation
    • 4.2The “ontological leap” and the role of statistics
    • 4.3Phases of norm change: Methodological considerations
  • 5.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 4 December 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.209.07lep
References (69)
References
Adams, James N. 2013. Social Variation and the Latin Language. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alho, Tommi & Leppänen, Ville. 2016. Roman brick stamps: Evidence for the development of Latin case syntax. Glotta 92: 3–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017. On Roman brick stamps and the Latin -(a)es genitive. Pallas 103: 87–93. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Anderson, Stephen R. & Lightfoot, David W. 2006. Biology and language: A response to Everett (2005). Journal of Linguistics 42: 377–383. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Anttila, Raimo. 1989. Historical and Comparative Linguistics [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 6]. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bartsch, Renate. 1987. Norms of Language. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Bloomfield, Leonard. 1933. Language. New York NY: Henry Holt.Google Scholar
Campbell, Lyle. 2013. Historical Linguistics. An Introduction, 3rd edn. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Coseriu, Eugenio. 1974. Synchronie, Diachronie und Geschichte. Das Problem des Sprachwandels. München: Fink.Google Scholar
Croft, William. 2000. Explaining Language Change: An Evolutionary Approach. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
Everett, Daniel L. 2005. Biology and language: A consideration of alternatives. Journal of Linguistics 41: 157–175. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006. Biology and language: Response to Anderson & Lightfoot. Journal of Linguistics 42: 385–393. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fries, Charles C. & Pike, Kenneth L. 1949. Co-existent phonemic systems. Language 25: 29–50. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Givón, Talmy. 2002. Bio-linguistics. The Santa Barbara Lectures. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Guy, Gregory R. 2003. Variationist approaches to phonological change. In The Handbook of Historical Linguistics, Brian D. Joseph & Richard D. Janda (eds), 369–400. Malden MA: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halle, Morris. 1962. Phonology in generative grammar. Word 18: 54–72. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Haspelmath, Martin. 1999. Optimality and diachronic adaptation. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 18(2): 180–205.Google Scholar
Hockett, Charles F. 1958. A course in modern linguistics. New York: MacMillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoenigswald, Henry M. 1966. Language Change and Linguistic Reconstruction. Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Horrocks, Geoffrey. 2010. Greek. A History of the Language and its Speakers, 2nd edn. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1983. Causality in Linguistic Theory. A Critical Investigation into the Philosophical and Methodological Foundations of ‘Non-autonomous’ Linguistics. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
. 1984. On the ‘rationalist’ conception of language change. Diachronica 1(2): 203–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2003. What is Language? A Study in the Philosophy of Linguistics. Turku: University of Turku.Google Scholar
. 2005. Concerning the synthesis between intuition-based study of norms and observation-based study of corpora. SKY Journal of Linguistics 18: 357–377.Google Scholar
. 2008. The central role of normativity in language and in linguistics. In The Shared Mind. Perspectives on Intersubjectivity, Jordan Zlatev [Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research 12], Timothy P. Racine, Chris Sinha & Esa Itkonen (eds), 279–305. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2013/2014. On explanation in linguistics. Energeia 5: 10–40.Google Scholar
Kauhanen, Irina. 2006. Norms and sociolinguistic description. In A Man of Measure. Festschrift in Honour of Fred Karlsson on his 60th Birthday, Mickael Suominen, Antti Arppe, Anu Airola, Orvokki Heinämäki, Matti Miestamo, Urho Määttä, Jussi Niemi, Kari K. Pitkänen and Kaius Sinnemäki (eds). Special supplement to SKY Journal of Linguistics 19: 34–46.Google Scholar
Kauko, Mikko. 2015. Jöns Budde och hans skrifter – yngre fornsvenskt textmaterial och mannen bakom det [Annales Universitatis Turkuensis B 402]. PhD Dissertation, University of Turku. <[URL]> (4 July 2017).
King, Robert D. 1969. Historical Linguistics and Generative Grammar. Englewood Cliffs NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
1990. The transformational-generative model. In Polomé (ed.), 249–256.Google Scholar
Kluge, Friedrich & Seebold, Elmar. 2011. Etymologisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache, 25th edn. Berlin: De Gryuter.Google Scholar
Kroch, Anthony S. 1989. Reflexes of grammar in patterns of language change. Journal of Language Variation and Change 1(3): 199–244. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kroonen, Guus. 2013. Etymological Dictionary of Proto-Germanic. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Krug, Manfred, Schlüchter, Julia & Rosenbach, Anette. 2013. Introduction: Investigating language variation and change. In Research Methods in Language Variation and Change, Manfred Krug & Julia Schlüchter (eds), 1–13. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuczaj, Stan A. 1977. The acquisition of regular and irregular past tense forms. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 16: 589–600. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. 1972. Sociolinguistic Patterns. Philadelphia PA: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
. 1994. Principles of Linguistic Change, Volume 1: Internal Factors. Malden MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
. 2001. Principles of Linguistic Change, Volume 2: Social Factors. Malden MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
. 2006. The Social Stratification of English in New York City, 2nd edn. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. Transmission and diffusion. Language 83(2): 344–387. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008. Quantitative reasoning in linguistics. <[URL]> (16 March 2017).
Lass, Roger. 1997. Historical Linguistics and Language Change. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leppänen, Ville. 2014. Review on Horrocks 2010. Journal of Greek Linguistics 14: 127–135. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2017. Gothic evidence for Greek historical phonology. In Ancient Greek Linguistics. New Approaches, Insights, Perspectives, Felicia Logozzo & Paolo Poccetti (eds), 35–56. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lightfoot, David. 1979. Principles of Diachronic Syntax. Cambridge: CUP.Google Scholar
. 1999. The Development of Language. Acquisition, Change and Evolution. Malden MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Martinet, André. 1955. Économie des changements phonétiques. Traité de phonologie diachronique. Berne: Francke.Google Scholar
Meillet, Antoine. 1926. Linguistique historique et linguistique générale, 2nd edition. Paris: Librairie Ancienne Honoré Champion.Google Scholar
Milroy, James. 2006. Language change and the speaker. In Variation and Reconstruction [Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 268], Thomas D. Cravens (ed.), 145–163. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Milroy, James & Milroy, Lesley. 1993. Real English. The Grammar of English Dialects in the British Isles. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Opfermann, Andreas. 2018. Gedanken über einen oskischen Graffito: ST Po 79 und das Pronomen osk. pis.pis. In Priscis libentius … et liberius novis. Indogermanistische und sprachwissenschaftliche Studien. Festschrift für Gerhard Meiser zum 65. Geburtstag, Olav Hackstein & Andreas Opfermann (eds), 111–130. Hamburg: Baar Verlag.Google Scholar
Pintzuk, Susan. 2003. Variationist approaches to syntactic change. In The Handbook of Historical Linguistics, Brian D. Joseph & Richard D. Janda (eds), 509–528. Malden MA: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Polomé, Edgar C. (ed.). 1990. Research Guide on Language Change. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1990. Language change and the Saussurean dichotomy: Diachrony versus synchrony. In Polomé (ed.), 3–10. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rauch, Irmegard. 1990. Evidence of language change. In Polomé (ed.), 37–70.Google Scholar
Ringe, Don & Eska, Joseph F. 2013. Historical Linguistics. Toward a Twenty-First Century Reintegration. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Salmons, Joseph. 1990. The context of language change. In Polomé (ed.), 71–96.Google Scholar
Sankoff, Gillian (ed.). 1980. The Social Life of Language. Philadelphia PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schleicher, August. 1861/1862. Compendium der vergleichenden Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen. Weimar: H. Boehlau.Google Scholar
Southworth, Franklin C. 1990. Synchronic manifestations of linguistic change. In Polomé (ed.), 25–36.Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. 1998. Was/were variation across the generations: View from the city of York. Language Variation and Change 10(2): 153–191. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2006. Analysing Sociolinguistic Variation. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012. Variationist Sociolinguistics. Change, Observation, Interpretation. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Walker, James A. 2010. Variation in linguistic systems. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Weinreich, Uriel, Labov, William & Herzog, Marvin I. 1968. Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. In Directions for Historical Linguistics. A Symposium, Winfred P. Lehmann & Yakov Malkiel (eds), 95–195. Austin TX: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Weiss, Michael. 2011. Outline of the Historical and Comparative Grammar of Latin, 2nd corrected printing. Ann Arbor MI: Beech Stave Press.Google Scholar
Winter, Werner. 1990. Linguistic reconstruction: The scope of historical and comparative linguistics. In Polomé (ed.), 11–21.Google Scholar
Zipser, Katharina. 2012. Spracherwerb und syntaktischer Wandel. Synchronie und Diachronie im Wechselspiel. Innsbruck: Institut für Sprachwissenschaft.Google Scholar