From Typology to Diachrony based on Croft 2003

From Typology to Diachrony (based on Croft 2003) 1

Contents n n n Typologically informed comparative linguistics From states to transitions From transitions to processes Grammaticalization (cline) Semantic maps 2

Typologically informed comparative linguistics n Jakobson, Greenberg n n Synchronically derived language universals should not be violated in historical Jakobson on PIE stops (ph >> bh) n Assumption: uniformitarianism 3

Typologically informed comparative linguistics n Absolute vs. statistical universals n n Can we apply statistical observations to individual reconstructions? Song: yes we can n After all, the task is to reconstruct probable (rather than possible) language states 4

Reminder: transitions and population typology n Maslova: type shifts as probabilities Nom Erg 5

From states to transitions Greenberg: dynamicization of typology n n typological constraints regulate language type shift, not properties of language population (Croft, Cristofaro) connectivity hypothesis – languages of any one type may develop into languages of any other type (perhaps passing through other types) 6

From state to transitions B A F C E D Impossible under connectivity hypothesis 7

Frequency and stability Greenberg: Stability (out>), Frequency (>in) n Связь с генеалогической и географической дистрибуцией n n genealogical concentration geographical spread (worldwide) 8

Frequency and stability areal genealogical cross-typing Example features wide consistent frequent & stable adpositions, SVO, SOV wide inconsistent frequent & unstable nasal vowels, definite articles rare consistent infrequent & stable vowel harmony, VSO rare inconsistent infrequent & unstable OVS 9

Transitory states Predicted: Attested: Prep & NG 70 * Prep & GN 22 * Post & NG 10 Post & GN 150 These *types must be possible! Why? (Dryer 2001, quoted by Croft) 10

Markedness dynamicized Sg Pl Zero Non-Zero 11

Markedness dynamicized Ngandi (Heath 1978), quoted by Croft Du Pl M -bari -ba F -ba unmarked 12

Markedness dynamicized Origin Loss Structural coding: A non-zero morpheme to indicate a marked value will arise first A non-zero morpheme to indicate a marked value will be lost last Behavorial property: A grammatical distinction will arise in the unmarked value of a cross-cutting category first A grammatical distinction will be lost in the unmarked value of a cross-cutting category first 13

From transitions to processes n States: n n n L with no articles -> L with articles BYP…what exactly happened? Processes: n deictic dems -> anaphoric dems -> articles 14

From transitions to processes n n “In the same way that contemporary linguistics, including typology, seeks universals of language structure, historical linguistics seeks universals of processes of language change. Diachronic typology is historical linguistics using a typological method” (p. 246) E. g. : Каталог семантических переходов (Анна А. Зализняк et al. ) 15

From transitions to processes n n “In the same way that contemporary linguistics, including typology, seeks universals of language structure, historical linguistics seeks universals of processes of language change. Diachronic typology is historical linguistics using a typological method” (p. 246) But: what is the source of these generalizations? 16

From transitions to processes n …language variation… n n is language change in progress (Labovian) Innovation and propagation (diffusion) in typology - Croft 17

From transitions to processes n Intragenetic typology (Greenberg) n n on assumption that the observed variation across sister languages represents different stages of change from the protolanguage Greenberg on word order in Ethiosemitic Kibrik used intragenetic typology for synchronic functional interpretation, not diachronic explanation 18

From transitions to processes Greenberg on word order in Ethiosemitic n Ge’ez: VSO, prep, AN, Ngen n Daughter languages vary in all, but: n Adj/N > Gen/N > Adp 19

From transitions to processes Greenberg on word order in Ethiosemitic n Ge’ez: VSO, prep, AN, Ngen n Daughter languages (al[habetically): n n n SOV SOV/vso SOV & & & AN AN/NA AN(na) & GN & NG & Prep N Post (Amharic) & Post (Harari) & Prep N Post (Old Harari) & Prep (Tigre) & Prep (Tigrinya) 20

From transitions to processes Greenberg on word order in Ethiosemitic n Ge’ez: VSO, prep, AN, Ngen n Daughter languages: n n n VSO SOV/vso SOV SOV & & & NA AN/NA AN(na) AN AN AN & NG & GN & Prep (Ge’ez) & Prep (Tigre) & Prep (Tigrinya) & Prep N Post (Amharic) & Prep N Post (Old Harari) & Post (Harari) 21

From transitions to processes Cross-linguistic comparability problems of the same order as in synchronic typology n Both Greek and Spanish: *s > h But: n n In Greek, the change first happened word-inititally and intervocally, and then spread In Spanish, the change first took place in the word final and post-consonantal position and then spread Are these two instances of the same change? 22

From transitions to processes Unidirectionality failure? n đ -> d and d -> đ But is the same process? n đ -> d ~ θ -> t n d -> đ ~ g -> γ ~ b -> β Interpretation of change requires systemic context n 23

Unidirectionality vs. connectivity? n n n Changes are unidirectional Transitions between language states are cyclic WTH? Once again: n n Transitions is what happens to languages Processes is what happens to linguistic elements 24

Jespersen’s negation cycle n n Stage 1: negation is expressed by one negative marker Stage 2: negation is expressed by a negative marker in combination with a negative adverb or a noun phrase Stage 3: the second element takes the function of expressing negation by itself, the original negative marker becomes optional Stage 4: the original negative marker becomes extinct 26

Pragmatic inference (VLPL) n We are going to London [movement [intention [future]]] n We are going to have a party [movement [intention [future]]] n The trees are going to crack… [movement [intention [future]]] 27

Decategorialization (VLPL). . . or recategorization n Distributional French pas does not form an NP n Inflectional French pas does not take article The books that / *those I lost (VLPL) 28

Grammaticalization cline Content > Functional Item > Clitic > Inflectional Affix n Unidirectionality n Degrammaticalization? 29

Unidirectionality From nasals to nasalization n From contextually determined alternations to non-segmental morphology n From discourse to syntax n From word to clitic to morpheme n From spatial form to abstract case … but not the other way round n 30

Localism In case systems, abstract cases develop from local cases n Agent from Source n Recipient from Goal n Instrument from Path (simplistically) but not vice versa 31

Famous semantic maps: Auwera & Plungian 1998 33

Famous semantic maps: Bybee, Perkins and Pagliucca 1994 Indirect Evidence ‘be’/’have’ RESULTATIVE ANTERIOR ‘come’ COMPLETIVE ‘finish’ directionals Inference from results AORIST/ PRAETERITUM Derivational perfective 34

Famous semantic maps: Haspelmath 1999 35

Famous semantic maps: Haspelmath 1997 36