Neophilologus

, Volume 95, Issue 1, pp 1–26 | Cite as

The Functional Nature of Pronominal Change: Innovative Plural Pronouns in English and Dutch

Article

Abstract

At least since Gilliéron’s seminal work on lexical change, it is well-known that language change may be motivated by factors relating to the meaning and/or function of the elements involved. In more recent times, however, such functional accounts of language change have generally met with criticism. More specifically, there is disagreement as to whether grammar really is subject to processes of homonymy avoidance. This paper discusses examples of pronominal change from English and Dutch, in which new plural forms are formed which are, historically, compounds of a traditional pronoun and an element marking plurality (e.g. you guys in English, jij lieden or jullie in Dutch). Such innovative pronouns typically emerge in contact varieties, as reinforced pronouns or calques, and they appear to spread much more easily wherever they fill a disturbing gap in the pronominal paradigm, viz. in situations of so-called ‘horizontal homophony’. Thus, homonymy avoidance has played a crucial role in the processes by which innovative plural pronouns have diffused. This shows that pronominal change qualifies as a clear exception to the alleged rarity of functionally motivated change in grammar.

Keywords

Language change Functional explanation Pronoun Dutch Homonymy avoidance 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aalberse, S. (2009). Inflectional economy and politeness. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
  2. Acetto, M. (2004). Eastern Caribbean English-derived language varieties: Morphology and syntax. In B. Kortmann, E. Schneider, et al. (Eds.), A handbook of varieties of English. Volume 2: Morphology and syntax (pp. 439–453). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  3. Bailey, C.-J. (1973). Variation and linguistic theory. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
  4. Barbiers, S., Bennis, H., De Vogelaer, G., Devos, M., & van der Ham, M. (2005). Syntactic atlas of Dutch dialects. Volume 1 (pronouns, agreement and dependencies). Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Burridge, K. (2004). Synopsis: Morphological and syntactic variation in the Pacific and Australasia. In B. Kortmann, E. Schneider, et al. (Eds.), A handbook of varieties of English. Volume 2: Morphology and syntax (pp. 1116–1131). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  6. Bynon, T. (1977). Historical linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Coussé, E. (2010). Een digitaal compilatiecorpus historisch Nederlands. Lexikos, 20. Google Scholar
  8. Croft, W. (1990). Typology and universals. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Croft, W. (2000). Explaining language change: An evolutionary approach. Harlow: Longman.Google Scholar
  10. Cysouw, M. (2003). The paradigmatic structure of person marking. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Dal Negro, S. (2004). The decay of a language: The case of a German dialect in the Italian Alps. Bern: Lang.Google Scholar
  12. De Rooij, J. (1990). Over hun en hen, en hun. Vorm en functie van de niet-gereduceerde voorwerpsvormen van het persoonlijk voornaamwoord in de derde persoon meervoud, in standaardtaal, ouder Nederlands en dialect. Taal en Tongval, 42, 107–147.Google Scholar
  13. De Vogelaer, G. (2006). Actuation, diffusion, and universals: Change in the pronominal system in Dutch dialects. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik, 73, 259–274.Google Scholar
  14. De Vogelaer, G. (2008). De Nederlandse en Friese subjectsmarkeerders: Geografie, typologie en diachronie. Gent: Koninklijke Academie voor Nederlandse Taal- en Letterkunde.Google Scholar
  15. De Vogelaer, G., Coussé, E. (2008). De kracht van disambiguering: nieuwe meervoudspronomina van het Middelnederlands tot nu. Taal en Tongval, Theme issue 21 (Dialectgeografie en interne factoren), 13–35.Google Scholar
  16. Denison, D. (2003). Log(ist)ic and simplistic S-curves. In R. Hickey (Ed.), Motives for language change (pp. 54–70). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Faraclas, N. (2004). Nigerian Pidgin English: Morphology and syntax. In B. Kortmann, E. Schneider, et al. (Eds.), A handbook of varieties of English. Volume 2: Morphology and syntax (pp. 828–855). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  18. Geeraerts, D. (2010). Theories of Lexical Semantics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Gilliéron, J., & Roques, M. (1910). études de géographie linguistique 12–13. Revue de philologie française, 24, 278–307.Google Scholar
  20. Goeman, T., van Oostendorp, M., van Reenen, P., Koornwinder, O., van den Berg, B., & van Reenen, A. (2008). Morphological atlas of the Dutch dialects. Volume 2. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Goossens, J. (1994). Sprachatlas des Nördlichen Rheinlands und des Südöstlichen Niederlands. Zweite Lieferung. Marburg: Elwert Verlag.Google Scholar
  22. Goossens, J. (2000). Onslieden en ons leden. In S. Gillis, J. Nuyts, & J. Taeldeman (Eds.), Met taal om de tuin geleid: Een bundel opstellen voor Georges De Schutter ter gelegenheid van zijn pre-emeritaat (pp. 187–191). Antwerpen: UIA.Google Scholar
  23. Haspelmath, M. (1999). Optimality and diachronic adaptation. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft, 18, 180–205.Google Scholar
  24. Hickey, R. (2003). Rectifying a standard deficiency: Second-person pronominal distinction in varieties of English. In I. Taavitsainen & A. Jucker (Eds.), Diachronic perspectives on address term systems (pp. 345–374). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  25. Hopper, P., & Traugott, E. (2003). Grammaticalization [second edition]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Howe, S. (1996). The personal pronouns in the Germanic languages: A study of personal pronoun morphology and change in the Germanic languages from the first records to the present day. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  27. Jourdan, C. (2004). Solomon Islands English: Morphology and syntax. In B. Kortmann, E. Schneider, et al. (Eds.), A handbook of varieties of English. Vol. 2: Morphology and syntax (pp. 702–719). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  28. Kloeke, G. (1941). Over ‘jullie’ en enige andere pronomina. Nieuwe Taalgids, 35, 161–170.Google Scholar
  29. Kortmann, B., & Szmrecsanyi, B. (2004). Global Synopsis: Morphological and syntactic variation in English. In B. Kortmann, E. Schneider, et al. (Eds.), A handbook of varieties of English. Volume 2: Morphology and syntax (pp. 1142–1202). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kroch, A. (1989). Reflexes of grammar in patterns of language change. Language Variation and Change, 1, 199–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Labov, W. (1994). Principles of Linguistic Change. Volume 1: Internal factors. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  32. Lass, R. (1997). Historical linguistics and language change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Lipski, J. (1993). ‘Y’all’ in American English: From black to white, from phrase to pronoun. English World-Wide, 14, 23–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Maynor, N. (1996). The pronoun y’all: Questions and some tentative answers. Journal of English Linguistics, 24, 288–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Montgomery, M. (1992). The etymology of ‘y’all’. In J. Hall, N. Doane, & D. Ringler (Eds.), Words of honor: Essays presented to Frederic G. Cassidy (pp. 356–369). New York: Garland.Google Scholar
  36. Mühlhäusler, P., & Harré, R. (1990). Pronouns and people: The linguistic construction of social and personal identity. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  37. Oostdijk, N. (2000). Het Corpus Gesproken Nederlands. Nederlandse Taalkunde, 5, 280–284.Google Scholar
  38. Samuels, M. (1972). Linguistic evolution, with special reference to English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Siewierska, A. (1999). From anaphoric pronoun to grammatical agreement marker: Why objects don’t make it. Folia Linguistica, 33, 225–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Siewierska, A., & Bakker, D. (1996). The distribution of subject and object agreement and word order type. Studies in Language, 20(1), 115–161.Google Scholar
  41. Thompson, S., & Longacre, R. (1985). Adverbial clauses. In T. Shopen (Ed.), Language typology and syntactic description. Volume II (pp. 171–234). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Tillery, J., Wikle, T., & Bailey, G. (2000). The nationalization of a Southernism. Journal of English Linguistics, 28, 280–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Trudgill, P. (2004). The dialect of East Anglia: morphology and syntax. In B. Kortmann, E. Schneider, et al. (Eds.), A handbook of varieties of English. Volume 2: Morphology and syntax (pp. 142–153). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  44. Van Bree, C. (1987). Historische Grammatica van het Nederlands. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.Google Scholar
  45. Van Hout, R. (1989). De structuur van taalvariatie: Een sociolinguïstisch onderzoek naar het stadsdialect van Nijmegen. Dordrecht: Foris.Google Scholar
  46. Van Hout, R. (2003). Pronominale meervoudsvorming in de Nederlandse dialecten. Leuvense Bijdragen, 92, 257–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Van Loey, A. (1958). Over pronomina van het type ‘wijlieden’. In W. Pée, et al. (Eds.), Album Edgard Blancquaert (pp. 319–322). Tongeren: Michiels, Tongeren.Google Scholar
  48. Vermaas, H. (2002). Veranderingen in de Nederlandse aanspreekvormen van de dertiende t/m de twintigste eeuw. Utrecht: LOT.Google Scholar
  49. Wright, S. (1997). ‘Ah’m going for to give youse a story today’: remarks on second person plural pronouns in Englishes. In J. Cheshire & D. Stein (Eds.), Taming the vernacular: From dialect to written standard language (pp. 170–184). London: Longman.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Research Foundation Flanders (FWO)/Department of Dutch LinguisticsGhent UniversityGhentBelgium
  2. 2.Department of Dutch LinguisticsGhent UniversityGhentBelgium

Personalised recommendations