1

From Typology to Diachrony

(based on Croft 2003)

МД

2

Contents

Typologically informed comparative linguistics

From states to transitions From transitions to processes Grammaticalization (cline) Semantic maps

3

Typologically informed comparative linguistics

Jakobson, Greenberg Synchronically derived language universals

should not be violated in historical reconstruction

Jakobson on PIE stops Assumption: uniformitarianism

4

Typologically informed comparative linguistics

Absolute vs. statistical universals Can we apply statistical observations

to individual reconstructions?

Song: yes we can After all, the task is to reconstruct

probable (rather than possible) language states

5

From states to transitions

Greenberg: dynamicization of typology

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

A

C

B

D

E

F

Impossible under connectivity hypothesis

7

Frequency and stability

Greenberg Stability (out>) Frequency (>in) Связь с генеалогической и

географической дистрибуцией 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

Prep & NG

Prep & GN

Post & NG

Post & GN

Predicted:

*

*

Attested:

70

22

10

150

These *types must be possible! Why?

(Dryer 2001, quoted by Croft)

10

Markedness dynamicized

ZeroZeroZero Non-Zero

Non-Zero Non-ZeroNon-Zero Zero

Sg Pl

11

Markedness dynamicized

Du Pl

M -bari -ba

F -ba -ba

unmarked

Ngandi (Heath 1978), quoted by Croft

12

Markedness dynamicized

Origin LossStructural 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 ditinction 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

Reminder: transitions and population typology

Maslova: type shifts as probabilities

Erg Nom

14

From transitions to processes

States: L with no articles -> L with articles BYP…what exactly happened?

Processes: deictic dems -> anaphoric dems ->

articles

15

From transitions to processes

“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.)

16

From transitions to processes

“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?

17

From transitions to processes

Language variation …is language change in progress

(Labovian) Innovation and propagation (diffusion)

in typology - Croft

18

From transitions to processes

Intragenetic typology (Greenberg) 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

19

From transitions to processes

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

20

From transitions to processes

Greenberg on word order in Ethiosemitic Ge’ez: VSO, prep, AN, Ngen Daughter languages:

VSO & NA & NG & Prep (Ge’ez) SOV/vso & AN/NA & NG & Prep (Tigre) SOV & AN(na) & NG & Prep (Tigrinya) SOV & AN & GN & Prep N Post (Amharic) SOV & AN & GN & Prep N Post (Old

Harari) SOV & AN & GN & Post (Harari)

21

From transitions to processes

Cross-linguistic comparability problems of the same order as in synchronic typology

Both Greek and Spanish: *s > hBut:

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? đ -> d and d -> đBut is this the same process? đ -> d ~ θ -> t d -> đ ~ g -> γ ~ b -> βInterpretation of change requires

systemic context

23

Unidirectionality vs. connectivity?

Changes are unidirectional Transitions between language states

are cyclic WTH? Once again:

Transitions is what happens to languages

Processes is what happens to linguistic elements

25

Pragmatic inference (VLPL)

We are going to London[movement [intention [future]]]

We are going to have a party[movement [intention [future]]]

The trees are going to crack…[movement [intention [future]]]

26

Decategorialization (VLPL)

... or recategorization DistributionalFrench pas does not form an NP InflectionalFrench pas does not take articleThe books that / *those I lost(VLPL)

27

Grammaticalization cline

Content > Functional Item > Clitic > Inflectional Affix

Unidirectionality

Degrammaticalization?

28

Sources: guess whence

Heine, Kuteva 2002 Некоторые

любопытные источники грамматикализации

фр. chez? верификатив?

29

Famous semantic maps:Auwera & Plungian 1998

30

Famous semantic maps:Haspelmath 1999

31

Famous semantic maps:Haspelmath 1997