Historical linguistics, also known asdiachronic linguistics, is the scientific study of howlanguages change over time.[1] It seeks to understand the nature and causes of linguistic change and to trace the evolution of languages. Historical linguistics involves several key areas of study, including the reconstruction of ancestral languages, the classification of languages intofamilies, (comparative linguistics) and the analysis of thecultural and social influences on language development.[2][3]
This field is grounded in theuniformitarian principle, which posits that the processes of language change observed today were also at work in the past, unless there is clear evidence to suggest otherwise.[4][not verified in body] Historical linguists aim to describe and explain changes in individual languages, explore the history of speech communities, and study the origins and meanings of words (etymology).[4]
Modern historical linguistics dates to the late 18th century, having originally grown out of the earlier discipline ofphilology,[5] the study of ancient texts and documents dating back to antiquity. Initially, historical linguistics served as the cornerstone ofcomparative linguistics, primarily as a tool forlinguistic reconstruction.[6] Scholars were concerned chiefly with establishing language families and reconstructing unrecordedproto-languages, using thecomparative method andinternal reconstruction.[6] The focus was initially on the well-knownIndo-European languages, many of which had long written histories; scholars also studied theUralic languages, another Eurasian language-family for which less early written material exists. Since then, there has been significant comparative linguistic work expanding outside of European languages as well, such as on theAustronesian languages and on various families ofNative American languages, among many others. Comparative linguistics became only a part of a more broadly-conceived discipline of historical linguistics. For the Indo-European languages, comparative study is now a highly specialized field.
Some scholars have undertaken studies attempting to establish super-families, linking, for example, Indo-European, Uralic, and other families intoNostratic. These attempts have not met with wide acceptance. The information necessary to establish relatedness becomes less available as the time increases. The time-depth of linguistic methods is limited due to chance word resemblances and variations between language groups, but a limit of around 10,000 years is often assumed.[7] Several methods are used to date proto-languages, but the process is generally difficult and its results are inherently approximate.
In linguistics, asynchronic analysis is one that views linguistic phenomena only at a given time, usually the present, but a synchronic analysis of a historical language form is also possible. It may be distinguished from diachronic, which regards a phenomenon in terms of developments through time. Diachronic analysis is the main concern of historical linguistics. However, most other branches of linguistics are concerned with some form of synchronic analysis. The study of language change offers a valuable insight into the state of linguistic representation, and because all synchronic forms are the result of historically evolving diachronic changes, the ability to explain linguistic constructions necessitates a focus on diachronic processes.[8]
Swiss linguist Ferdinand de Saussure
Initially, all of modern linguistics was historical in orientation. Even the study of modern dialects involved looking at their origins.Ferdinand de Saussure's distinction betweensynchronic and diachronic linguistics is fundamental to the present day organization of the discipline. Primacy is accorded to synchronic linguistics, anddiachronic linguistics is defined as the study of successive synchronic stages. Saussure's clear demarcation, however, has had both defenders and critics.
In practice, a purely-synchronic linguistics is not possible for any period before the invention of thegramophone, as written records always lag behind speech in reflecting linguistic developments. Written records are difficult to date accurately before the development of the moderntitle page. Often, dating must rely on contextual historical evidence such as inscriptions, or modern technology, such ascarbon dating, can be used to ascertain dates of varying accuracy. Also, the work ofsociolinguists on linguistic variation has shown synchronic states are not uniform: the speech habits of older and younger speakers differ in ways that point to language change. Synchronic variation is linguistic change in progress.
Synchronic and diachronic approaches can reach quite different conclusions. For example, aGermanic strong verb (e.g. Englishsing ↔sang ↔sung) isirregular when it is viewed synchronically: thenative speaker's brain processes them as learned forms, but the derived forms of regular verbs are processed quite differently, by the application of productive rules (for example, adding-ed to the basic form of a verb as inwalk →walked). That is an insight ofpsycholinguistics, which is relevant also forlanguage didactics, both of which are synchronic disciplines. However, a diachronic analysis shows that the strong verb is the remnant of a fully regular system of internal vowel changes, in this case theIndo-European ablaut; historical linguistics seldom uses the category "irregular verb".
The principal tools of research in diachronic linguistics are thecomparative method and the method ofinternal reconstruction. Less-standard techniques, such asmass lexical comparison, are used by some linguists to overcome the limitations of the comparative method, but most linguists regard them as unreliable. The findings of historical linguistics are often used as a basis for hypotheses about the groupings and movements of peoples, particularly in the prehistoric period. In practice, however, it is often unclear how to integrate the linguistic evidence with thearchaeological orgenetic evidence. For example, there are numerous theories concerning the homeland and early movements of theProto-Indo-Europeans, each with its own interpretation of the archaeological record.
Classification of Indo-European languages. Red: Extinct languages. White: categories or unattested proto-languages. Left half:centum languages; right half:satem languages
Comparative linguistics, originallycomparativephilology, is a branch of historical linguistics that is concerned with comparing languages in order to establish their historical relatedness. Languages may be related byconvergence throughborrowing or by genetic descent, thus languages can change and are also able to cross-relate.Genetic relatedness implies a common origin among languages. Comparative linguists constructlanguage families, reconstructproto-languages, and analyze the historical changes that have resulted in the documented languages' divergences.
Etymology studies the history ofwords: when they entered a language, from what source, and how their form and meaning have changed over time. Words may enter a language in several ways, including being borrowed asloanwords from another language, being derived by combining pre-existing elements in the language, by a hybrid known asphono-semantic matching.
In languages with a long and detailed history, etymology makes use ofphilology, the study of how words change from culture to culture over time. Etymologists also apply the methods ofcomparative linguistics to reconstruct information about languages that are too old for any direct information (such as writing) to be known. By analysis of related languages by thecomparative method, linguists can make inferences about their shared parent language and its vocabulary. In that way,word roots that can be traced all the way back to the origin of, for instance, theIndo-Europeanlanguage family have been found. Although originating in the philological tradition, much current etymological research is done inlanguage families for which little or no early documentation is available, such asUralic andAustronesian.
Dialectology is the scientific study of linguisticdialect, the varieties of a language that are characteristic of particular groups, based primarily on geographic distribution and their associated features. This is in contrast to variations based on social factors, which are studied insociolinguistics, or variations based on time, which are studied in historical linguistics. Dialectology treats such topics as divergence of two local dialects from a common ancestor andsynchronic variation.[9]
Dialectologists are concerned with grammatical features that correspond to regional areas. Thus, they are usually dealing with populations living in specific locales for generations without moving, but also with immigrant groups bringing their languages to new settlements. Immigrant groups often bring their linguistic practices to new settlements, leading to distinct linguistic varieties within those communities. Dialectologists analyze these immigrant dialects to understand how languages develop and diversify in response to migration and cultural interactions.
Phonology is a sub-field of linguistics which studies the sound system of a specific language or set of languages. Whereasphonetics is about the physical production andperception of the sounds of speech, phonology describes the way sounds function within a given language or across languages. Phonology studies when sounds are or are not treated as distinct within a language. For example, thep inpin isaspirated, but thep inspin is not. In English these two sounds are used incomplementary distribution and are not used to differentiate words so they are consideredallophones of the samephoneme. In some other languages likeThai andQuechua, the same difference of aspiration or non-aspiration differentiates words and so the two sounds, orphones, are considered to be distinct phonemes. In addition to the minimal meaningful sounds (the phonemes), phonology studies how sounds alternate, such as the/p/ in English, and topics such assyllable structure,stress,accent, andintonation.
Principles of phonology have also been applied to the analysis ofsign languages, but the phonological units do not consist of sounds. The principles of phonological analysis can be applied independently ofmodality because they are designed to serve as general analytical tools, not language-specific ones.
Morphology is the study of patterns of word-formation within a language. It attempts to formulate rules that model the knowledge of speakers. In the context of historical linguistics, formal means of expression change over time. Words as units in the lexicon are the subject matter oflexicology. Along withclitics, words are generally accepted to be the smallest units ofsyntax; however, it is clear in most languages that words may be related to one another by rules. These rules are understood by the speaker, and reflect specific patterns in how word formation interacts with speech. In the context of historical linguistics, the means of expression change over time.
Syntax is the study of the principles and rules for constructingsentences innatural languages. Syntax directly concerns the rules and principles that govern sentence structure in individual languages. Researchers attempt to describe languages in terms of these rules. Many historical linguistics attempt to compare changes in sentence between related languages, or finduniversal grammar rules that natural languages follow regardless of when and where they are spoken.[10]
In terms of evolutionary theory, historical linguistics (as opposed to research into theorigin of language) studiesLamarckian acquired characteristics of languages. This perspective explores how languages adapt and change over time in response to cultural, societal, and environmental factors. Language evolution within the framework of historical linguistics is akin to Lamarckism in the sense that linguistic traits acquired during an individual's lifetime can potentially influence subsequent generations of speakers.[11]
Historical linguists often use the termsconservative andinnovative to describe the extent of change within a language variety relative to that of comparable varieties. Conservative languages change less over time when compared to innovative languages.
^Studdert-Kennedy, Michael (1991). "Language Development from an Evolutionary Perspective". In Krasnegor, Norman A.; Rumbaugh, Duane M.;Schiefelbusch, Richard L.;Studdert-Kennedy, Michael;Thelen, Esther; et al. (eds.).Biological and Behavioral Determinants of Language Development. New York: Psychology Press (published 2014). p. 6.ISBN978-1-317-78389-3. Retrieved2016-12-27.[...] biological evolution does not proceed by the transmission of acquired characters across generations, and this is precisely what an evolutionary model of language change requires. We therefore must distinguish the cultural, or Lamarckian, evolution of language, a concern of historical linguistics, from its biological, or neo-Darwinian, evolution, a concern of developmental biology.
Kortmann, Bernd:English Linguistics: Essentials, Anglistik-Amerikanistik, Cornlesen, pp. 37–49
Radford, Andrew (1999).Linguistics: An Introduction. With co-authors Martin Atkinson, David Britain, Harald Clahsen, Andrew Spencer. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
April McMahon,Understanding Language Change (Cambridge University Press, 1994)ISBN0-521-44665-1
James Milroy,Linguistic Variation and Change (Blackwell, 1992)ISBN0-631-14367-X
A. C. Partridge,Tudor to Augustan English: a Study in Syntax and Style, from Caxton to Johnson, in series,The Language Library, London: A. Deutsch, 1969; 242 p. SBN 233-96092-9
M.L. Samuels,Linguistic Evolution (Cambridge University Press, 1972)ISBN0-521-29188-7
R. L. Trask (ed.),Dictionary of Historical and Comparative Linguistics (Fitzroy Dearborn, 2001)ISBN1-57958-218-4
August Schleicher:Compendium der vergleichenden Grammatik der indogermanischen Sprachen. (Kurzer Abriss der indogermanischen Ursprache, des Altindischen, Altiranischen, Altgriechischen, Altitalischen, Altkeltischen, Altslawischen, Litauischen und Altdeutschen.) (2 vols.) Weimar, H. Boehlau (1861/62); reprinted by Minerva GmbH, Wissenschaftlicher Verlag,ISBN3-8102-1071-4
Zuckermann, Ghil'ad (2003).Language Contact and Lexical Enrichment in Israeli Hebrew. Palgrave Macmillan.ISBN1-4039-1723-X.
.svg){kind=icon}
