Syntactic change in diachrony versus contact-induced change: two sides of the same coin?

历时性句法变化与接触诱导性句法变化:是同一枚硬币的两面吗?

阅读:1

Abstract

Recent studies (e.g. Kupisch, Tanja & Maria Polinsky. 2022. Language history on fast forward: Innovations in heritage languages and diachronic change. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 25. 1-12) have rekindled an old debate concerning whether language change in contact (CIC) and language change in diachrony (CID) proceed along the same developmental path, or whether they diverge from one another in fundamental and predictable ways. This paper contributes to this ongoing debate; we propose a new heuristic to determine similarities and differences in syntactic change in CIC and CID. We postulate that the primary distinction boils down to the type of features related to the domain of syntax under investigation, i.e., situations involving (formal) ϕ-features lead to similar trajectories of change in both CIC and CID, while those driven by discourse-features show divergence. We test our hypothesis on a host of different empirical data, e.g., indexicals, (subject) clitics, and differential object marking (DOM) as evidence for our claim.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。