Linguistic Cyclicity

Elly van Gelderen

Arizona State University

Madison, 25 January 2013

Outline• Views on the cycle and on causes• Micro and macrocyles• Four examples

– Negative– Subject– Copula– Demonstrative

• Explanations for the loss and renewal• Some concerns

Heine et al’s three types1. “isolated instances of grammaticalization”,

as when a lexical item grammaticalizes and is then replaced by a new lexeme. For instance, the lexical verb go (or want) being used as a future marker.

2. “subparts of language, for example, when the tense-aspect-mood system of a given language develops from a periphrastic into an inflexional pattern and back to a new periphrastic one” or when negatives change.

and

3. “entire languages and language types” but there is “more justification to apply the notion of a linguistic cycle to individual linguistic developments”, e.g. the development of future markers, of negatives, and of tense, rather than to changes in typological character, as in from analytic to synthetic and back to analytic.

Caution about the third kind

Heine et al’s reasons for caution about the third type of change, i.e. a cyclical change in language typology, is that we don’t know enough about older stages of languages.

Most linguists are comfortable with cycles of the first and second kind but they are not with cycles of the third kind, e.g. Jespersen (1922; chapter 21.9).

Macroparameters and microparameters

Baker (2001) and, more recently, Biberauer & Roberts (2012) have formulated macro and micro parameters.

Macroparameters for Baker define the character of a particular language, e.g. polysynthetic or not, whereas microparameters for B&R may involve the features of a particular lexical item.

Macrocycles and microcycles

In the same vein, it is possible to distinguish two kinds of cycles, a macrocycle and a microcycle.

A microcyle involves just one aspect of the language, for instance, negatives or demonstratives being reinforced by adverbs, as in English those people there. They include Heine et al’s first and second kind.

Macrocycles, more controversially, concern the entire linguistic system, i.e. Heine et al’s third kind.

von der Gabelentz 1901

Nun bewegt sich die Geschichte der Sprachen in der Diagonale zweier Kräfte: des Bequemlichkeitstriebes, der zur Abnutzung der Laute führt, und des Deutlichkeitstriebes, der jene Abnutzung nicht zur Zerstörung der Sprache ausarten lässt. Die Affixe verschleifen sich, verschwinden am Ende spurlos; ihre Funktionen aber oder ähnliche drängen wieder nach Ausdruck.

ctd

Diesen Ausdruck erhalten sie, nach der Methode der isolierenden Sprachen, durch Wortstellung oder verdeutlichende Wörter. Letztere unterliegen wiederum mit der Zeit dem Agglutinationsprozesse, dem Verschliffe und Schwunde, und derweile bereitet sich für das Verderbende neuer Ersatz vor ... ; immer gilt das Gleiche: die Entwicklungslinie krümmt sich zurück nach der Seite der Isolation, nicht in die alte Bahn, sondern in eine annähernd parallele. Darum vergleiche ich sie der Spirale. (von der Gabelentz 1901: 256)

Comfort + Clarity = Grammaticalization + Renewal

Von der Gabelentz’ examples of comfort: the unclear pronunciation of everyday expressions, the use of a few words instead of a full sentence, i.e. ellipsis (p. 182-184), “syntaktische Nachlässigkeiten aller Art” (`syntactic carelessness of all kinds’, p. 184), and loss of gender.

Examples of clarity: special exertion of the speech organs (p. 183), “Wiederholung” (`repetition’, p. 239), periphrastic expressions (p. 239), replacing words like sehr `very’ by more powerful and specific words such as riesig `gigantic’ and schrecklich `frightful’ (243), using a rhetorical question instead of a regular proposition, and also replacing case with prepositions (p. 183).

Grammaticalization = one stepHopper & Traugott 2003: content item >

grammatical word > clitic > inflectional affix. The loss in phonological content is, however, not a

necessary consequence of the loss of semantic content (see Kiparsky 2011; Kiparsky & Condoravdi 2006; Hoeksema 2009).

Kiparsky (2011: 19) writes “in the development of case, bleaching is not necessarily tied to morphological downgrading from postposition to clitic to suffix.” Instead, according to Kiparsky, unidirectionality is the defining property of grammaticalization and any exceptions to the unidirectionality (e.g. the Spanish inflectional morpheme –nos changing to a pronoun) are instances of analogical changes.

In acknowledging weakening of pronunciation (“un affaiblissement de la pronunciation”), Meillet (1912: 139) writes that what provokes the start of the (negative) cycle is the need to speak forcefully (“le besoin de parler avec force”).

Kiparsky & Condoravdi (2006) find no evidence for phonetic weakening in Jespersen’s Cycle in Greek and similarly suggest pragmatic and semantic reasons. A simple negative cannot be emphatic; in order for a negative to be emphatic, it needs to be reinforced, e.g. by a minimizer. When emphatic negatives are overused, their semantic impact weakens and they become the regular negative and a new emphatic will appear.

ctd

L’Arrivée (2010) argues that a specific pragmatic function, namely accessibility of a proposition to the hearer, plays a role.

Language internal reasons have also been argued as responsible for grammaticalization (and the cycle) in Roberts & Roussou (2003) and van Gelderen (2004; 2011). These authors have suggested that the child in acquiring its language makes choices based on economy principles

Microcycle(1)a. I’m gonna leave for the summer.

b. *I’m gonna to Flagstaff for the summer.Nesselhauf (2012) provides a very precise account of the

changes in the various future markers (shall, will, ‘ll, be going to, be to, and the progressive) in the last 250 years. She identifies three crucial features, intention, prediction, and arrangement, and argues that as the sense of intention is lost and is replaced by the sense of prediction, new markers of intention will appear:

want has intention in (4a) and it is starting to gain the sense of prediction, as in (4b).

(2) a. The final injury I want to talk about is brain damage ... (Nesselhauf 2012: 114).b. We have an overcast day today that looks like it wants to rain. (Nesselhauf 2012: 115).

Going to

Nesselhauf’s data on BE going to show that its use as a future marker has increased, both in the intention and prediction sense, and that the proportion of pure prediction is increasing.

Once the sense of prediction prevails, another verb may be taking over to compensate for the feature of intention.

MacrocyclesHodge (1971):Proto-Afroasiatic analytic *SmOld Egyptian synthetic sMLate Egyptian analytic SmCoptic synthetic sM

August Wilhem von Schlegel seems to be the first in 1818 to use the terms analytic and synthetic where languages are concerned.

Morphemes per word?

Attachment Type Cycle

Isolating

Inflectional Agglutinative

Four (micro)cycles I will look atNegative Cycles

negative argument > negative adverb > negative particle > zero

negative verb > auxiliary > negative > zeroSubject Agreement Cycle

demonstrative/emphatic > pronoun > agreement > zero

Copula Cyclesdemonstrative/verb/adposition > copula > zero

Demonstrative > article/copula/tense marker

Two Negative Cycles

I Indefinite phrase > negative = Jespersen’s CycleNegation weakens and is renewed. For instance:(1) I can’t do that >(2) I can’t see nothing

II Verb > negative(3) is-i ba-d-o

she-NOM disappear-PF-PST`She disappeared' (Binyam 2007: 7).

(4) ‘is-i dana ‘ush-u-wa-nni-koshe-NOM beer drink-PRES-not_exist-3FS-FOC‘She does (will) not drink beer.’ (Binyam 2007: 9).

Negative Cycle in Old English450-1150 CE

a. no/ne early Old English

b. ne (na wiht/not) after 900, esp S

c. (ne) not after 1350

d. not > -not/-n’t after 1400

Old English:

(1) Men ne cunnon secgan to soðe ... hwa

Man not could tell to truth ... who

`No man can tell for certain ... who'.

(2) Næron 3e noht æmetti3e, ðeah ge wel ne dyden

not-were you not unoccupied. though you well not did

`You were not unoccupied, though you did not do well'.

Weakening and renewal(1) we cannot tell of (Wycliff Sermons from

the 1380s)

(2) But I shan't put you to the trouble of farther Excuses, if you please this Business shall rest here. (Vanbrugh, The Relapse1680s).

(3) that the sonne dwellith therfore nevere the more ne lasse in oon signe than in another (Chaucer, Astrolabe 665 C1).

(4) No, I never see him these days (BNC - A9H 350)

Negative source is a verb

(1) wo mei you shu ChineseI not exist book`I don't have a book.’

(2) Yao Shun ji mo ... Old ChineseYao Shun since died`Since Yao and Shun died, ...' (Mengzi, Tengwengong B, from Lin 2002: 5)

(3)yu de wang ren mei kunan, ... Early Mandarinwish PRT died person not-be suffering`If you wish that the deceased one has no suffering, ...' (Dunhuang Bianwen, from Lin 2002: 5-6)

Two Cycles

• Using an indefinite, e.g. nothing/never/a bit– English, French, Arabic

• Using a new verb– Chinese

• Using both– Koorete, Athabaskan

The Negative Cycle

XP

Spec X'

na wiht X YP

not > n’t …

According to Lin, mei went through a perfective stage, so:

(4) dayi ye mei you chuan, jiu zou le chulai

coat even not PF wear, then walk PF out

`He didn't even put on his coat and walked out.' (Rulin Waishi, from Lin 2002: 8)

(5) NegP

Neg ASPP

mei

ASP VP

mei

V ...

mei

The Subject Cycle

A. demonstrative > third person pron > clitic > agreement

B. oblique > emphatic > first/second pron > clitic > agreement

noun >

(1) Shidiné bizaad yíní-sh-ta'I Navajo language 3-1-study‘As for me, I am studying Navajo.’

Some stagesJapanese and Urdu/Hindi: full pronoun(1) watashi-wa kuruma-o unten-suru kara.

I-TOP car-ACC drive-NONPST PRT‘I will drive the car'. (Yoko Matsuzaki p.c.)

(2)a. mẽy nee us ko dekha1S ERG him DAT saw

b. aadmii nee kitaab ko peRha man ERG book DAT read

(3) ham log `we people‘(4) mẽy or merii behn doonõ dilii mẽy rehtee hẽ

I and my sister both Delhi in living are

English: in transition(a) Modification, (b) coordination, (c) position, (d) doubling, (e) loss of V-movement, (f) Code switching

Coordination (and Case)(1) Kitty and me were to spend the day.(2) %while he and she went across the hall.

Position(3) She’s very good, though I perhaps I shouldn’t say

so.(4) You maybe you've done it but have forgotten.(5) Me, I was flying economy, but the plane, … was

guzzling gas

Doubling and cliticization(1) Me, I've tucking had it with the small place.(2) %Him, he ....(3) %Her, she shouldn’t do that (not

attested in the BNC)(4) *As for a dog, it should be happy.

CSE-FAC:uncliticized cliticized total

I 2037 685 (=25%) 2722you 1176 162 (=12.1%) 1338he 128 19 (=12.9%) 147

Loss of V-movement and Code switching

(5) What I'm go'n do?

`What am I going to do'

(6) How she's doing?

`How is she doing‘(7) *He ging weg `he went away’ Dutch-English CS

(8) The neighbor ging weg

French

(1) Se je meïsme ne li di Old French

If I myself not him tell

`If I don’t tell him myself.’ (Franzén 1939:20, Cligès 993)

(2) Renars respond: “Jou, je n’irai”

‘R answers “Me, I won’t go”.’

(Coronnement Renart, A. Foulet (ed.) 1929: 598, from Roberts 1993: 112)

(1)a. *Je heureusement ai vu ça I I probably have seen that`I’ve probably seen that.’

b.Kurt, heureusement, a fait beaucoup d'autres choses.Kurt fortunately has done many other things`Fortunately, Kurt did many other things’ (google search of French websites)

(2) Où vas-tu Standard Frenchwhere go-2S

(3) tu vas où Colloquial French2S go where‘Where are you going?'

The flavors of copulas

e.g. English be, become, go, fall, turn, seem, appear, stay, and remain.

semantic features

be remain seem, appear stay

[location] [duration] [visible] [duration]

[equal]

Demonstrative and adverbial source

(1) a. Mi da i tatá Saramaccan I am your father

‘I am your father.’ (McWhorter 1997: 87)

b. Hεn dà dí Gaamá

he is the chief

‘He's the chief.’ (McWhorter 1997: 98)

(2) Dí wómi dε a wósu

the woman is at house

`The woman is at home.’ (McWhorter 1997: 88)

Cape Verdean CreoleIndividual-level

(3) a. (El) e nha pai

‘He is my father.’

b. (El) e spertu‘S/he is smart.’

Stage-level

(4) Bu sta livri

‘You are free.’ (Baptista 2002: 255)

Demonstratives > articles

(1) demonstrative/adverb > definite article > Case/non-generic > class marker > 0

(2) gife to … þa munecas of þe mynstregive to … the monks of the abbey

(Peterborough Chron. 656)

(3) * the

Reduction of the article and renewal

(3) Morret's brother came out of Scoteland for th'acceptacion of the peax

(The Diary of Edward VI, 1550s)

(4) Oh they used to be ever so funny houses you know and in them days … They used to have big windows, but they used to a all be them there little tiny ones like that. (BNC - FYD 72)

Demonstratives, pronouns, and pro-drop in Old English

(1) þæt fram ham gefrægn Higelaces þegn, god mid Geatum, Grendles dæda; se wæs moncynnes mægenes strengest on þæm dæge þysses lifes, æþele ond eacen.

`Hygelac’s thane heard about Grendel’s deeds while in Geatland; he (=Hygelac’s thane) was mankind’s strongest man on earth, noble and powerful.

Old English ctdHet him yðlidan godne gegyrwan, cwæð, he

guðcyning ofer swanrade secean wolde, mærne þeoden, þa him wæs manna þearf. ðone siðfæt him snotere ceorlas lythwon logon, þeah he him leof wære.

(He) ordered himself a good boat prepared and said that he wanted to seek the king over the sea since he (=the king) needed men. Wise men did not stop him (=Hygelac’s thane) though he was dear to them.’ (Beowulf 194-98)

Traugott (1992: 171)(2) Þa clypode an ðæra manna Zebeus gehaten and cwæð to ðam cyninge;

`Then cried one of-the men Zebeus called and said to the king:

Eala ðu cyning þas fulan wuhta þu scoldest awurpan of ðinum rice. Oh you king the foul creatures you should throw-out of your kingdom

ðylæs ðe hi mid heora fylðe us ealle besmiton; in-case that they [= the foul creatures] with their filth us all affect

Hi habbað mid him awyriedne engel. mancynnes feond. They [= the foul creatures] have with them corrupt angel, mankind’s enemy

and se hæfð andweald on ðam mannum ðe heora scyppend forseoð. and he [the angel] has power over those men that their creator despise

and to deofolgyldum bugað; and to idols bow.’

(DOE Segment 8 Ælfric’s Catholic Homilies, second series M. Godden 1979, p. 283. 110 – 115)

Cf. Dutch:

(3) Hij had Stern gesproken en aan deze enige woorden en zaken uitgelegd, die hij niet begreep. Die Stern niet begreep, meen ik.

`He had talked to Stern and explained to this one some words and matters which he did not understand. Which Stern did not understand, I mean'. (Multatuli, Max Havelaar, chap 4, van Gelderen 1998).

Around 1200: a reanalysis(1) & gaddresst swa þe clene corn

`and so you gather the clear wheat.’ (Ormulum 1484-5, Holt edition)

(2) 3ho wass … Elysabæþ 3ehatenn `She was called Elisabeth.’ (Ormulum 115)

(3) & swa þe33 leddenn heore lif Till þatt te33 wærenn alde `and so they led their lives until they were old.’ (Ormulum 125-6)

(4) þin forrme win iss swiþe god, þin lattre win iss bettre. `Your earlier wine is very good, your later wine is better.’ (Ormulum 15409)

What happens?

Externally: a `strengthening’ of the third person features in the pronoun and a shift in the relationship with the demonstrative.

This reinforcement through external pronouns, she and they, brought about a reanalysis of the features of the pronoun as deictic.

Internal Externalse --> the seo --> she

that --> that hi --> they

him/her --> himself/herself

a.se/that > the

[i-loc]/[i-phi] [u-T]/[u-ps] (= -Ps)

b.he/hi is replaced by he

heo/ha is replaced by she (possibly via seo)

hi/hie is replaced by they

[i-phi] [i-phi]/[i-loc]

Demonstrative

[i-phi]

[i-loc]

 article pronoun Ccopula

[u-phi] [i-phi] [u/i-T] [u-phi]

[u-T] [i-loc]

Feature Economy:

Utilize semantic features: use them as for functional categories, i.e. as formal features.

Types of minimalist features

The semantic features of lexical items (which have to be cognitively based not UG)

The interpretable ones relevant at the Conceptual-Intentional interface.

Uninterpretable features act as `glue’ so to speak to help out merge. For instance, person and number features (=phi-features) are interpretable on nouns but not on verbs.

The importance of features

Chomsky (1965: 87-88): lexicon contains information for the phonological, semantic, and syntactic component.

Sincerity +N, -Count, +Abstract...)

Chomsky (1995: 230ff; 236; 277ff):

semantic (e.g. abstract object),

phonological (e.g. the sounds),

and formal features:

intrinsic or optional.

Features of airplane and build

(adapted from Chomsky 1995: 231)

airplane buildsemantic: e.g. [artifact] e.g. [action]phonological: e.g. [begins with a vowel; e.g. [one syllable]

two syllables]formal:

intrinsic optional intrinsic optional[nominal] [number] [verbal] [phi][3 person] [Case] [assign accusative] [tense][non-human]

The "much more important distinction“ (1995: 277):

Formal features are: interpretable and uninterpretable

airplane build

Interpr. [nominal] [verbal]

[3 person] [assign [non-human]

accusative]

Uninterpr [Case] [phi]

Simplifying checking

He reads books

before

checking [i-3S] [u-phi] [i-3P]

after

checking [i-3S] [u-phi] [i-3P]

That’s why `me sees him’ is ok!

Semantic and formal overlap:Chomsky (1995: 230; 381) suggests: "formal

features have semantic correlates and reflect semantic properties (accusative Case and transitivity, for example)."

I interpret this: If a language has nouns with semantic phi-features, the learner will be able to hypothesize uninterpretable features on another F (and will be able to bundle them there).

Feature Economy

(a) Utilize semantic features: use them as for functional categories, i.e. as formal features.

(b) If a specific feature appears more than once, one of these is interpretable and the others are uninterpretable

Innate vs learned

shapes grammatical number

negatives negation

`if’

real-unreal irrealis

mass-count

duration progressive

Loss of semantic features

Full verbs such as Old English will with

[volition, expectation, future] features are reanalyzed as having only the feature [future] in Middle English.

And the negative

OE no/ne > ME (ne) not > -n’t

> ModE –n’t ... nothing, never, etc

The various cycles in terms of features

The cycle of agreement

noun > emphatic > pronoun > agreement > 0

[sem] [i-phi] [i-phi]/[u-phi] [u-phi]

The cycles of negation

a Adjunct/Argument Specifier Head (of NegP) affix

semantic > [i-NEG]> [u-NEG] > --

b. Lexical Head > (higher) Head > (higher) Head > 0

[neg] [i-NEG]/[F] [F]

Verb and demonstrative to copula

Assume copulas have:be remain seem[i-loc] [i-loc] [i-loc]

[i-ASP] [i-M] Source for [loc]? Verbs and demonstratives

D > copula > zero[i-loc] > [i-loc] > --[i-phi] > [u-phi][u-T]

Demonstrative

[i-phi]

[i-loc]

 

article pronoun C copula

[u-phi] [i-phi] [u/i-T] [i-loc]

[u-T]

ConclusionsRecent shift towards third factors and

parametric features: we need to be careful how many mechanisms we allow.

All change is in the lexicon: sem>i-F>u-F

What does the Poverty of the Stimulus argument mean for vocabulary acquisition?

Explanations of the Cycle

Head Preference and Late Merge?

Or Feature Economy? What is it?

– Maximize syntax?– Keep merge going?– Lighter?