Historical Linguistics:Historical Linguistics:Change, reconstructionChange, reconstruction

LING 400LING 400

Winter 2010Winter 2010

OverviewOverview

ReconstructionReconstruction– Time-depthTime-depth– Conversative vs. innovative languagesConversative vs. innovative languages– Reconstruction and prehistoryReconstruction and prehistory

More historical changeMore historical change– Morphological, morphosyntacticMorphological, morphosyntactic– SemanticSemantic

For further learning about historical linguistics: LING 454

please turn off your cell phone

Time-depthTime-depth

““Persian is an Persian is an old language.”old language.”

All (modern) All (modern) daughters of daughters of proto-language proto-language have equal have equal time-depth.time-depth.

Time-depthTime-depth

Proto-Indo-European: 5000-6000 years agoProto-Indo-European: 5000-6000 years ago– Proto-Germanic: 2500-3500Proto-Germanic: 2500-3500

Oldest IE written documentsOldest IE written documents– Hittite 1300 B.C.Hittite 1300 B.C.– Sanskrit 1200 B.C.Sanskrit 1200 B.C.– Greek 1000 B.C. (Mycenean earlier)Greek 1000 B.C. (Mycenean earlier)

ReconstructionReconstruction

The comparative methodThe comparative method– assemble cognatesassemble cognates– deduce proto-form, meaningdeduce proto-form, meaning

““Reconstructible”Reconstructible”– Not necessarily attested in all branchesNot necessarily attested in all branches– *ēg̤�*ēg̤�ww- ‘drink’- ‘drink’

HittiteHittite Latin ēbrius ‘drunk’Latin ēbrius ‘drunk’

A cognate setA cognate set

Sanskrit [snuSanskrit [snuʂʂā́;ā́;] ‘daughter-in-law’] ‘daughter-in-law’ Old English [snoru] ‘daughter-in-law’Old English [snoru] ‘daughter-in-law’ Old Church Slavonic [snOld Church Slavonic [snŭŭxa] ‘daughter-in-law’xa] ‘daughter-in-law’ Latin [nurus] ‘daughter-in-law’Latin [nurus] ‘daughter-in-law’ Greek [nuGreek [nuóós] ‘daughter-in-law’s] ‘daughter-in-law’ Armenian [nu] ‘bride, daughter-in-law’Armenian [nu] ‘bride, daughter-in-law’ Albanian [nuse] ‘bride’Albanian [nuse] ‘bride’

ReconstructionReconstruction *sn… or *n…? ‘daughter-in-law’*sn… or *n…? ‘daughter-in-law’

– Latin Latin nix, niv-nix, niv- ‘snow’ ‘snow’– English English snow snow – PIE *sneigPIE *sneig ��ww- ‘to snow’- ‘to snow’

vs.vs.– Latin Latin ne- ne- ‘not’‘not’– Old English Old English nene ‘not’ ‘not’– PIE *ne ‘not’PIE *ne ‘not’

[u], OCS [[u], OCS [ŭ], OE [o] < *uŭ], OE [o] < *u Medial *s? *Medial *s? *ʂʂ?? r? r?

– Sanskrit *s > Sanskrit *s > ʂ / u__ʂ / u__– Latin s > r/ V__V, Latin s > r/ V__V, Germanic Germanic– Greek, Armenian *s > 0 / V__V Greek, Armenian *s > 0 / V__V

… … (ending, accent)(ending, accent) PIE *snuPIE *snu||sossos ‘‘daughter-in-law’ or ‘bride’?daughter-in-law’ or ‘bride’?

– most early IE societies patriarchal and patrilocalmost early IE societies patriarchal and patrilocal– ‘‘daughter-in-law’ in most; ‘bride’ restricteddaughter-in-law’ in most; ‘bride’ restricted

Conservative vs. innovativeConservative vs. innovative

Sanskrit [snuSanskrit [snuʂʂā́;ā́;] < *snu] < *snu||sossos– conserves [sn], [u]; accentconserves [sn], [u]; accent

– innovates *s > innovates *s > ʂ / u__ʂ / u__ Albanian [nuse] ‘bride’Albanian [nuse] ‘bride’

– conserves [u], medial [s]conserves [u], medial [s]

– innovates *s > 0 / __n, semantics innovates *s > 0 / __n, semantics

Reconstruction and prehistoryReconstruction and prehistory

Calvert Watkins: ‘the lexicon of a language Calvert Watkins: ‘the lexicon of a language remains the single most effective way of remains the single most effective way of approaching and understanding the culture of approaching and understanding the culture of its speakers…The reconstruction of its speakers…The reconstruction of vocabulary can offer a fuller, more interesting vocabulary can offer a fuller, more interesting view of the culture of a prehistoric people than view of the culture of a prehistoric people than archaeology precisely because it includes archaeology precisely because it includes nonmaterial culture.’nonmaterial culture.’

Proto-Indo-EuropeanProto-Indo-European

*med*med ��u- ‘mead, honey’u- ‘mead, honey’ *daiwer- ‘husband’s brother’*daiwer- ‘husband’s brother’

– *wife’s relatives*wife’s relatives *sneig*sneig ��ww- ‘snow’- ‘snow’ *laks- ‘salmon’ (*laks- ‘salmon’ (loxlox)) *mori- ‘body of water; lake (?), sea (?)’ (*mori- ‘body of water; lake (?), sea (?)’ (mermermaidmaid)) *gr*gr ̩̩-no ‘grain’ (> -no ‘grain’ (> corncorn)) *owi- ‘sheep’ (> *owi- ‘sheep’ (> eweewe)) *dem*deməə- ‘house, household’- ‘house, household’

– *dem(*dem(əə)- ‘to build’ (> )- ‘to build’ (> timbertimber)) *k*kwwel- ‘to revolve, go around’, *kel- ‘to revolve, go around’, *kww(e)-k(e)-kwwl-o- ‘wheel’l-o- ‘wheel’

Historical linguisticsHistorical linguistics

1786 Sir William Jones observed similarities 1786 Sir William Jones observed similarities between Sanskrit, Ancient Greek, Latin, between Sanskrit, Ancient Greek, Latin, Gothic, Celtic, Old PersianGothic, Celtic, Old Persian

1919thth century: reconstruction of PIE century: reconstruction of PIE 2020thth century on century on

– Hittite, TocharianHittite, Tocharian– Comparative method applicable elsewhereComparative method applicable elsewhere

Major branches of Athabaskan familyMajor branches of Athabaskan family

38 daughter languages

Language changeLanguage change

Languages may change on various levelsLanguages may change on various levels– phonetics, phonologyphonetics, phonology– morphologymorphology– syntaxsyntax– semanticssemantics

Morphemes disappearMorphemes disappear

PAPA Deg Xinag Witsuwit’en Tsek’eneDeg Xinag Witsuwit’en Tsek’ene

‘‘man’s daughter’ *-tsman’s daughter’ *-tshheeʔ ʔ -[t-[tθθhhɑʔ] ɑʔ] -[ts-[tshhɛʔ] ɛʔ] ----

‘‘arm’ *-qarm’ *-qɑ!ɑ! :ne:neʔʔ -[qon] -- -[k -[qon] -- -[kòònnèèʔ]ʔ]

Paradigm levelingParadigm leveling

Elimination of irregularity among Elimination of irregularity among morphologically related formsmorphologically related forms

Babine-CarrierBabine-Carrier Witsuwit’enWitsuwit’en

progressiveprogressive futurefuture progressiveprogressive futurefuture

1sS1sS *i-s-*i-s- *t*thh-i-s--i-s- i-s-i-s- tthh--ɑ-ɑ-s-s-

2sS2sS **ɑɑ-n--n- *t*thh--ɑɑ-n--n- i-n-i-n- tthh--ɑ-ɑ-n-n-

3sS3sS *i-*i- *t*thh-i--i- i-i- tthh--ɑɑ--

‘Leveled’ progressive paradigm (uniformly [i])

‘Leveled’ future paradigm (uniformly [ɑ])

Semantic change

Reduction (hyponym formation) Proto-Athabaskan Proto-Athabaskan

Tsek’ene Tsek’ene *-*-ʁəʁəmm ‘snore, growl’ ‘snore, growl’

-[hxõ -[hxõ ̀̀h] ‘snore’h] ‘snore’

Witsuwit’enWitsuwit’en *-nt*-ntɑ!ɑ! :c ‘dance’ :c ‘dance’

-[ntec] ‘(white -[ntec] ‘(white people) dance’people) dance’

Extension Extension Hypernym formation Proto-Proto-

Athabaskan Athabaskan Tsek’ene Tsek’ene

*ci*ci !!:ce: :ce: ‘blueberry’ ‘blueberry’ ʧɪ̀ʧ̀eʧɪ̀ʧ̀e ‘berry’ ‘berry’

Where was Proto-Where was Proto-Athabaskan Athabaskan

spoken?spoken?

Michael KraussMichael Krauss– the PA homeland the PA homeland

(Urheimat) ‘was in (Urheimat) ‘was in eastern Alaska, eastern Alaska, interior, perhaps interior, perhaps extending into extending into Canada already.’Canada already.’

ConsiderationsConsiderations

Deep vs. shallow differentiationDeep vs. shallow differentiation Location of related languagesLocation of related languages Reconstructed vocabularyReconstructed vocabulary

DifferentiationDifferentiation

Deep Deep differentiation: differentiation: long occupation long occupation of territoryof territory– Alaska, western Alaska, western

BCBC Closely related: Closely related:

recent spreadrecent spread– Mackenzie R.Mackenzie R.– Pacific Coast Pacific Coast – ApacheanApachean

Na-Dene familyNa-Dene family

Related languagesRelated languages

Usually nearby Usually nearby EyakEyak

– mouth of Copper R.mouth of Copper R.

TlingitTlingit– Alaska panhandleAlaska panhandle

Reconstructed vocabularyReconstructed vocabulary

Mountains and snowMountains and snow– *ts*tsəəɬɬ ‘mountain’‘mountain’ – **ʔʔa:ça:ç ‘ ‘snowshoe’snowshoe’ – **ɬɬu:u: ‘ice, icicle, glacier’‘ice, icicle, glacier’

1910 map

Hudson Bay Mt., B.C.

SummarySummary

All languages change over timeAll languages change over time Change occurs at all levels of grammarChange occurs at all levels of grammar Earlier stages can often be reconstructed, with Earlier stages can often be reconstructed, with

implications for prehistoryimplications for prehistory

QuestionQuestion

Bronze Age 3300-1200 BC (bronze < Bronze Age 3300-1200 BC (bronze < copper+tin)copper+tin)– PIE *ajes- ‘copper or bronze’ (attested in Latin, PIE *ajes- ‘copper or bronze’ (attested in Latin,

Greek, Sanskrit)Greek, Sanskrit)

Iron Age (1300 BC on) (iron, steel)Iron Age (1300 BC on) (iron, steel)– *isarno ‘iron’ only attested in Germanic, Celtic*isarno ‘iron’ only attested in Germanic, Celtic

Are *ajes and *isarno relevant to dating of Are *ajes and *isarno relevant to dating of PIE? (PIE estimated 5000-6000 BC.)PIE? (PIE estimated 5000-6000 BC.)