80 <N> The English Language: A Linguistic History

, -, II' have become ModE 1(sg.), we (pl.)

e. OE ic 'I', wit 'we two , we we a

, d -,had 'womanhood' are masculine; their

f. OE wlfmann 'woman an w1,1
ModE equivalents are feminine and neuter, respectively

g. ModE acorn from OE e2cern 'field fruit, mast (fallen nuts)' (OE e2cer 'fie'.d'
> ModE acre) by way of ME akkorn, which is believed to be a combin-

ation of ake 'oak' and corn ' k e r n e l ' - - - - - - - - - - - -

h. ModE oakum 'loose fiber often used in caulking' from OE acumba 'flax
fibers separated by combing' (a- 'out'+ cemba 'to comb')----

Semantic Change t
Semantic change is an alteration in the lexical meaning of words and morphemes.
Of all the components of language, lexical meaning is most susceptible to change.
Semantics is not rule-governed in the same way that grammar is because the connec-
tion between sound and meaning is arbitrary and conventional. Furthermore, although
we look to dictionaries to give us the one correct meaning of a word, meanings are in
fact very flexible and fluid. Some words (such as much or many) are inherently vague;
others are used vaguely. Meanings are also subjective, with individual speakers often
holding different notions about the meaning of a word. For some speakers of English,
decimate means 'to destroy or remove one in every ten', while for others it means 'to
destroy or remove a large proportion' or 'to subject to severe loss'. Finally, semantic
change is more obviously linked to cultural, social, and political changes than are
phonological, morphological, and syntactic changes.
The meaning of a word often departs radically from its original or etymological
meaning. This should not surprise us, nor should we, like the eighteenth-century gram-
marians, insist upon the sanctity of the etymological meaning, which is simply the first
recor~ed definition of the word. Sometimes it is difficult to see how the etymological
~eanmg relates to the present one. For example, the word snack originally meant 'dog
bite' but comes to mean a 'light refreshment'. At other times, as shown in Figure 3.2,
we can construct a logical chain of shifts in meaning from the earliest to the latest
meaning of a w~rd, as in the case of silly (OE gescelig). Until we construct this chain,
?ow~ver, the shift from the OE meaning of 'happy, blessed' to the current sense of
foolish, senseless, stupid' might be incomprehensible.
Pre-OE happy
OE
happy blessed
13th c. 13th c.
I l l l l
happy blessed pious innocen t, helpless, deserving weak,
harmless defenseless of pity poor, feeble

-I
:::r
:,;;;,
m
15th c. m
n
QI
16th c. C
16th c. ID
"'
"'
QI
::::,
simple, feeble-minded, foolish a.
rustic, imbecile senseless ~
ID
n
ignorant stupid =r
QI
::::,
;;;·
3
"'g_
,...
QI
::::,
IC
C
19th c.
l IC
QI

ID
n=r
QI
::::,
IC
ID

20th c.
G
n with Special Reference to English (Cambridge: Cambridge University 00
Figure 3.2 Seman tic Chang es of silly (from M.L. Samuels, Linguistic Evolutio ...
Press, 1972], p. 66, © Cambr idge University Press)
 82 <N> The English Language: A L" guistic History
,n

Types of Semantic Chan ge

. see the intension or t~ec:nnons1on
xte . ° f a word may
In semantic change, as we ~111 tations, and they may
change. Words may change eithe th~ir den otation_ o~ their difficult to
nti
r Although it is often h y will chsay why word
either add or delete sema c features. . wh en ange, we can
. oss ible to say if or t e
meanings change and usu~ly ~m f semantic change.
say something about the d1rectto p ech an ism s, an d typ es o
n, m
. . . n
Generalization and S~ecr.a_ . all ing it to denote a
liz~tio of a word's meaning, f ow the denotation must
Generalization is the w1demng i~:
greater variety of referents. For ~o{c\appen, specific parts o emantic features. For
. . the number of s
be dropped; as a resuIt, there is a reduction 10 .
example, the word holiday origin d only to 'ho1Ydays, ' but now it can refer
ally referre . set aside as non-work days, su
to days without any religious sig ch
nificance which arteake a vacatio
as Labor Day or we can go on 'h 1·d s' when we n. Th us, the feature of
'
holiness has been deleted. Sim . . 1
°i ay . · ally d
referre to a 'hO1Y P1ace ' ,
ilar Y, a sanctuary on gm
d ·ers to any safe, but not ne
which was therefore a safe place, the wor re1, ces-
but now . . san ctuary
sarily holy, place, such as a bu. d . Othe r ex amples of
sanctuary or a po1itica1
generalization include the follow
ing:
box, formerly 'a small containe
r made of bo~wood'
butcher, formerly 'one who sla
ughters goats ki ,
. ely ,
scent, no longer exclusiv an an1·m_a1od , or used for trac ng
carry, formerly 'to transport in
a vehicle
junk, formerly 'worn out pieces
of rop_e' ,
crisis, formerly 'a turning point
of a disease
divest, formerly 'to take off on
e's clothes'
bonfire, formerly meaning 'fir
e of bones'
A more common process than
this is specialization, the narro
the meaning of a word. The nu wing in scope of
mber of semantic features of the
and hence the number of refere denotation increases,
nts of the word decreases. Th
a subcategory of the category e word ends up naming
it originally named. Specializa
in tandem with borrowing: a na tion sometimes occurs
tive word is specialized, and
over the more general meaning a borrowed word takes
. For example, the native wo
'desire in general' (as the cogn rd lust originally meant
ate word still does in Modern
expressed by the French borro German), a meaning now
wing desire, with lust special
Free meant 'free or noble' in Ol ized to 'se xu al desire' .
d English; the latter meaning
the French borrowing noble. Fe is now expressed by
ather meant 'feather' in the sin
plural until the Old Norse borro gular but 'w in g' in the
wing wing took over the word
meaning 'a seat for one person', 's plural meaning. Stool,
became specialized to a backles
loan word chair taking on its s seat with the French
other meaning. Whether this
process i~ a matter of the
 THREE I Causes and Mechanisms of Language Change G'9
83

borrowed word forcing the native word to be specialized or, conve

rsely, the specializa-
tion causing a need for a more general term to be borrowed is not
entirely clear. Other
examples of specialization include the following:

acorn, formerly 'wild fruit'

gum, formerly 'inside of the mouth'
sermon, formerly 'a speech, discourse'
adder, formerly 'a snake'
adventure, formerly 'happening'
cellar, formerly 'a storehouse'
meat, formerly 'food '
gestation, formerly 'carrying'

Pejoration and Amelioration

Pejoration is the acquisition of a less favorable meaning. In a pejora
tive change, there is
a lowering in the value judgment associated with the referent. Pejor
ation is a complex
change, affecting the denotation of a word, its referents, and its
connotations. It often
combines with specialization. For example, villain formerly referr
ed to a 'low- born or
common perso n', clown to a 'rural person', idiot to an 'ignorant
perso n', blackguard
to a 'scullery assistant', and hussy to a 'housewife' (< OE hus
+ wlf). In all of these
cases, there is a recognizable direction of change to a less value
d referent. Words other
than nouns also undergo pejorative change by the acquisition
of a negative meaning:
for example, cunning, formerly meaning 'know ledge able';
coy, forme rly mean ing
'quiet or shy'; carp, formerly meaning 'to talk, boast '; admo
nish, formerly mean ing
'to advis e'; and immoral, formerly meaning 'not custo mary '.
Observe the specializa-
tion in the following pejorative changes: grumble, changing
from 'to mum ble' to 'to
mumble in disco ntent ', and addict, changing from 'one who devot
es himse lf to some -
thing' to 'one who devotes himse lf to harmful substances or ways
'. Other examples of
pejoration can be seen in the following:

harlot, formerly 'vaga bond '

expletive, formerly 'filling out'
poison, formerly 'potio n, drink '
smug, formerly 'neat'
sly, formerly 'able to strike'
surly, formerly 'mast erful, lordly (from sir)'
corpse, formerly 'body '
rustle, no longe r exclusively 'to move with soft fluttering or crack
ling sound '

A rather recen t chang e involving pejor ation is the word judgm

ental , whic h origin ally
meant 'incli ned to make judgm ents', where as today it is almo
st alway s used pejor a-
tively to mean 'incli ned to make uncha ritabl e or negative judgm
ents, overl y critic al'.
 84 «N> The English Language: A Linguistic History . .
f vorable meaning, agam
. · 'tion of a more a . levation in the
In contrast, amelioration is the acqms1 tat1·ons. There is an e .
• & t and conno ccompames spe-
involving change in intension, re1eren ' 1· ration also often a f h . t ,
value judgment involved in the referent. Ame 10 d to the 'overseer O t e pt~ s Y
cialization. For example, steward formerly referre , boy to a 'rascal, servant ' and
(< OE stig + wear<!), engineer to a 'plotter, sche~er ~ion in other parts of speec~ are
mansion to a 'house, dwelling'. Examples of ame w;a 'useless, worthless'; and Jolly,
esteem fonnerly 'to put a value on'; bare, former~ lude the following:
,
fonnerly 'arrogant, wanton, lustful ' . Other examples me

marshal, fonnerly 'horse servant, groom' re and luxury'

epicure, fonnerly 'a person devoted to sensual p1easu
success, fonnerly 'outcome, result'
rapture, fonnerly 'abduction'
shrewd, fonnerly 'wicked'
spill, fonnerly meaning 'to shed blood'
revolution, fonnerly 'rolling over'
compliment, fonnerly 'filling up'
nice, fonnerly 'silly, simple'

Weakening and Strengthening . h .

We sometimes use words which are weaker or stronger than reqmred by t e crrcum-
stances. Use of a weaker word than is required by the context is a kind of understatement
that may lead to strengthening of that word; employing a stronger word, on the other
hand, is a kind of overstatement that may result in its weakening. For example, the
word molest, originally used as a more socially accepted word, or euphemism (from
the Greek word meaning 'to speak favorably'), for rape has led to that word acquiring
the denotation 'to subject to unwanted or improper sexual activity'. On the other hand,
in the expression awfully nice, the word awfully, which once held a sense of 'causing
dread and awe', is a hyperbole that has become weakened to 'very'. Where weakening
or strengthening occurs, the words often end up being replaced.
We tend to avoid the direct terms for topics that we find difficult to talk about
s~ch as unpleasant jobs, parts of the body, sex, pregnancy, birth, bodily functions:
disease, _old age, _and death; this avoidance is called a linguistic taboo. Instead, we use
eupheffilsms, which can be formed by a variety of means:

• generalization - use of a wider or more general term su h h& '

' d' · ~ , . , c as growt 1or can-
cer ' con ztwn ior disease'' procedure for 'o eration' .
'police suspect'' or voiding for 'defecation or upn· t· ; person of interest for
• /' . fi na 10n
sp zttzng eatures - lessening the impact b d. .d.
between two words (each innocuous o ·t y 1v1 mg the semantic features
n 1 s own) such • b .
ethnic cleansing for 'pogrom genoc·d , ' as1o action for 'strike',
' 1 e ' or pre-owned for 'used'
 THREE I Causes and Mechanisms of Language Change <NJ 8S

• borro~ing w~rds - use of a neo-Latin or Greek pseudo-technical term, such as

perspire expire abd . .
' • omen, mortuary, expectorate, sputum, or halitosis
• figure of speech - use of a metaphor, such as belly button or pass (away), or a
metonymy, such as glow for 'sweat' or in his cups for 'drunk'
• semantic shift - use of the name of one part of the process to denote another
part, su_ch ~s to sleep with, to make love with/to, or to go to the bathroom
• phonetic distortion (or taboo deformation) - alteration of the phonetic form of
t~e ~or~, such as gad, darn, doggone, son of a gun, or shoot
• diminutives - addition of a diminutive suffix, such as fanny, tummy, or tipsy, or
the use of reduplication, such as wee-wee or pooh-pooh
• acronyms or initialisms - such as VD for 'venereal disease', TB for 'tuberculo-
sis', DTs for 'delirium tremens', or SOB for 'son of a bitch'

Euphemisms are in continual need of renewal. If the euphemism displaces the

original word completely, then it may itself come to be considered too strong or direct
a word and thus need to be replaced. The word toilet is a euphemism deriving from the
diminutive of the French word for the 'towel, cloth' covering a dressing table, toilette.
However, this word is today associated with the actual plumbing fixture and thought
too direct, so a range of euphemisms are substituted: washroom, bathroom, WC, loo,
ladies' room, lavatory, comfort station, gents, the necessary, etc.
A primitive attitude toward language seems to underlie euphemism, one that sees
an essential link between the word and the thing denoted; this makes the word very
powerful because it evokes the thing named. Apart from delicacy or squeamishness,
euphemisms may result from deliberate political deception, as with words like paci-
fication, relocation camp, or final solution. However, the oldest euphemisms in the
language are motivated by fear or awe. Out of respect, religious people often do not use
a personal name for their god, but refer instead to a Father, Lord, or Master. (The word
god originally meant 'the invoked one'.) Respect may also prevent us from calling our
parents by their personal names. Animals may be the object of superstition and hence
referred to indirectly, perhaps out of fear of summoning them: the Germanic word for
'bear' means 'the brown one', while its Slavic equivalent means 'the honey eater' .
Similarly, the word for 'wolf' in Indo-European undergoes phonetic deformation as
a result of taboo. In a different realm, the left side is often the source of superstition,
since it is associated with ill omens or bad luck. We see this in the Latin word sinister,
meaning 'on the left' but also 'unfavorable, unfortunate, unlucky, inauspicious'. It is
interesting that the two euphemisms used for 'left' in Classical Greek are arister6s
(from arist6s 'best, noblest') and euonumos ('well-named').
The opposite of the understatement found in euphemisms is the hyperbole
which is especially common with a class of adverbs called intensifiers (e.g. very).
These undergo a continual process of weakening, and progressively stronger words
must replace them. Apart from awful mentioned earlier, adjectives such as fabulous
 • · tic History
86 ~ The English Language: A Linguis d' th
. t') outrag
eous ('excee. mg e
r astomshmen ' d ·nto intensifiers and
('fabled'), marvelous ('causing wond:r o d') have all been tu~e 1h r words as well:
limits') and incredible ('not to be believe_ be observed mot e
' , , W, akenmg can
semanticaJly weakened to very • e
• d" · • to 'like'
adore from 'worship as ivme . , to 'be hot'
swelter from 'faint from excessive he~t t strongly'
fascinate from 'bewitch by spe II' to 'mteres
starve from 'die' to 'be hungry' ,
. kind: I'm dying to(= I want
. · hY_perbole_ of th
We have many expressions mvolvmg 'I' ishungry'), I 'd love tO (-
-
'I'd l"k
1e
.
to'), I'm freezing(= 'I' m coId'), J'mfiamzshed (- m
to'), that's terrible(= 'that's bad'), etc.

Figurative Shifts . .d ays leap, a transfer of meaning

. . l a kind of s1 ew .
Figurative shifts in meanmg mvo ve ble each other m respect to at
from one referent to another. When two things resem& rred to the other. There are a
an be trans1e .
least one feature, then the name for one c h t wi·dely known 1s metaphor
. h"ft T e mos '
number of different types of figurative s 1 · . . semantic features of two ref-
1
which contains an implied comparison based on s;;m ar associated with the second
erents; the qualities belonging to the first referent echomde_ that is when the meta'
. . ' . ' Wh a metap or ies- , -
as m 'love 1s a rose' or John is a rat ·. en art of the denotation of th
phorical meaning is no longer recogmzed but has become P . ) th .e
• h · · I denotation - en a semantic
word (either replacing or supplementmg t e ongma · h . h"ft d .
· and metap onca 1 s i s un erhe
change has taken place. Metaphors are pervasive, .
· ·
much of the meamng m language. The ea me a d d t phors involving parts of the human
.
body hint at the extent of metaphorical meaning originally present: mou of a nv~r,th
lip ofa glass, legs ofa table, head ofa nail, hands of a clock,_shoulder of the road, nbs
of a ship, eye of a storm, tongue of land, and guts of a machine. . _
A shift from concrete to abstract meaning, often from physical to mental, occurs
frequently in metaphor. Many Latinate words undergo such a shift: translate meant 'to
carry across', report 'to carry back', deduce 'to lead away', abstract 'to draw away
from', compose 'to put together', affirm 'to make firm', conceive 'to catch', and explain
'to make flat'. Native vocabulary can be used in the same way: grasp a point, get the
joke, catch one's meaning, search one's soul, wrestle with an idea, a shallow notion,
and a deep thought. The opposite direction of change, from abstract to concrete, does
occur, but much less commonly. For example, an essay was originally an 'attempt or a
trial' but is now used to name the concrete results of writing. Another common meta-
phorical shift is from spatial to temporal meaning, as in the days to come, days gone by,
long ago, a short time, shortly, the days ahead, a brief encounter, and next week.
Three figurative shifts similar to metaphor, known by rather fancy classical names,
are synecdoche, metonymy, and synesthesia. In synecdoche, the name of a part is used
for the whole, as in the expressions new blood ('a person'), an old face ('a person'), a
 THREE I Causes and Mechanisms of Language Change 6'0 87

rhyme ('a ~oem'?, a roof ('a house'), the paper ('the newspaper'), and bread ('food').
A _Pro:erbial saymg containing synecdoche is Many hands make light work. Often, a
thing IS named by the substance which composes it: a glass, a fur, an iron, or woolens.
In metonymy, something is named by an object associated with it, for example the bar
('the leg~] p~ofe~sion'); the throne, the scepter, or the crown ('the king/queen etc.');
the pen is mightier than the sword ('writing is more powerful than fighting'); blood,
sweat, and tears ('hard work, self-sacrifice'); the White House ('the president of the
US and the president's advisors'); Ottawa ('officials in the Canadian government');
runners ('shoes used for running'); room and board (in which board is the 'table at
which one eats'); and the block ('people who live on the block' ). In synesthesia, a
word referring to one sense is transferred to another or to a non-sensual domain, as in
a flat note, a quiet color, a bitter reproach, a bright idea, a broad style, a cool recep-
tion, hot news, and a coarse person.
In a final kind of figurative shift, a word naming an internal psychological state
is used to refer to an external object evoking that state, or vice versa. An example of
such a shift is dreadful in the phrase a dreadful occasion; dreadful formerly referred
to the subjective experience of a person who was 'full of dread' but came to refer to
an objective situation 'causing dread or fear'. Similarly, complexion, originally mean-
ing 'physical constitution', now means the external 'natural appearance of the skin'.
An example of this shift in reverse, from objective to subjective, is happy in a happy
person; happy formerly described a lucky occurrence but came to refer to a person's
state evoked by such good fortune. Similarly, nauseous in the expression a nauseous
feeling changes the objective meaning 'inducing nausea' to the subjective meaning
'suffering from nausea'.

Invited Inferences
Semantic change may also come about by a process of what has been called pragmatic
strengthening. Here, meanings which arise in context 'on the fly' and must be inferred
by hearers become part of the conventional, denotational meaning of the word. These
meanings are known as 'conversational implicatures', or 'invited inferences'. The
word since originally had a temporal meaning, as in Since dinner, I have been reading
a novel. However, in certain contexts, one might infer a causal meaning, as in Since
he left, I have been unhappy. Here, since may be interpreted as 'after' or 'because'.
In this context, the new causal meaning is said to be defeasible or revocable, because
one could deny it by adding but it is not because he left that I have been unhappy.
Elsewhere, the causal meaning seems to have become part of the denotation of the
word, as in Since you are rich, why don't you buy a new house? Here, since must mean
'because', not 'after' . A semantic change has occurred. Similarly while, originally
meaning 'during', may invite the interpretation 'although', as in While he is away, we
are staying at his house. In a sentence such as While I don't agree with you, you may
do as you wish, it is clear that the new meaning has become part of the denotation of
while and is the only interpretation possible.
 t0
88 <Ni The English Language: A LinguiS t ic HiS ry

Cultural Change . , but because of technological

' . I epresentatton ' . .
The word picture has long meant a viSua r . • Cinematic movies, X -rays, a
advances can now refer to much more than a pamttng.t d graphic are JUSt · & f h
a iew O t e
' puter-genera e 1.
television image, a photograph, and a com h es such as these may resu t m
• Cultural c .ang f
things that may now be called a picture. the referent usua11Yremams ·
h the function o . .
changes to a word's referents, even thoug . or less the same. A satellite is
the same and the denotation of the word remams more . ludes those that are man-made
· 1 bOd ' but now me
still an 'entity that orbits a celestta Y . of ground warfare , , artillery
.
h ' hys1cal means ,
as well as those that are natural. T e P nd howitzers. Oil once referred
has changed from catapults and cross bOws to mortars. a safflower oil, palm 011, .
canola
· · · b · ludes sunflower 01 1' .
exclusively to ohve 011 ut now me . often involve generalization
. . . th th' t e of change w111
011, rape seed 011, etc. Notice at is YP (< a yrus, 'a reed'), the word has
of the meaning of a word. In the case of paper : p as paper ceased to be made
undergone a synecdochal change ~nd then cultural cti:::hen sheets and tablecloths
from reeds. The t~rm bed/table lmen dates from a w made from a variety of fabrics
were made from lmen (synecdoche), but they ~e no, . , shows the same t
· · &emng to a tm can
(cultural change). The expression a tm, rei, ., 1 f ti·n wo
types of semantic changes because cans are no 1onge r made entire y o •

Social Change
. factors also· motivate
Social . semantic . change. u,vve see these influences at work when
prestige or technical words enter the general vocabulary, as people imitate the usage
of the upper classes or of authorities such as psychologists or psychoa~alySts. These
days, an outgoing person is an extrovert, a shy person is inhibited, an mterested per-
son is obsessed, a confused person is neurotic, a careful person is compulsive. All of
these specialized terms have undergone generalization in the process of being popular-
ized. The language of sociology has also been generalized: our friends are our peer
group, our way of living is our lifestyle, the person we admire is our role model. Most
recently, computer language has begun to be used pervasively: we interface or network
with one another and we input or access information.
People may also imitate the usage of the lower classes by adopting slang. Slang
is the specialized language of any cohesive group (such as a class, an age group, a
professional group, etc.), serving to mark group solidarity and exclude outsiders. It
more often involves the attribution of a new meaning to an existing word than the
creation of a new word. Clipping off part of the word is common in slang. While
slang is quite ephemeral, it sometimes enters the general vocabulary; examples are
bigot, jau, job, mob, proposition (in the sense of 'request sexual favors'), and leak
('disclose information').
. ~ phenomenon rec~ntly reco~nized by scholars is linguistic reappropriation.
This 1s a process by which a previously derogatory or offensive term for a group is
're~l~med'. by _me~bers of that group and used as a marker of in-group identity or
pos1t1ve soltdanty; m some cases, the term is bleached of its negative connotations so
 THREE I Causes and Mechanisms of Language Change 6'©
89 •
that it can be used more widely as a general term for the group. This sort of change
may be a means of calling attention to social discrimination, but it is also a way for
members of the previously disparaged group to empower themselves by choosing
their own name. Examples of reappropriated terms include girl and lady, which can
be freely used by women as self-descriptors but may be considered demeaning if
used by men. The term gay has undergone a similar reclamation process, although
it is probably more acceptable than either previous example for out-group usage. A
more complex example of a reappropriated term is the word queer. Long used as a
derogatory term for 'homosexual', queer began in the 1980s to be reappropriated as a
term of self-identification. Currently, it might still be considered offensive if used by
the out-group, except in expressions such as queer theory or queer politics, or in the
initialism LGBTQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer) and its variants. Another
such example is the term half-breed, which is used to describe a person descended
from parents of differing ethnic origins. While this term is still listed in most dictionar-
ies as 'offensive' or 'derogatory', it has been reappropriated by some. For example,
Canadian author Maria Campbell introduces her 1973 book Halfbreed by saying that
she writes 'to tell you what it is like to be a Half-breed woman in our country'. By
writing her history, she recaptures her strength and pride as a woman of Metis (mixed
Aboriginal and European) heritage.

Exercise 3.3 Mechanisms of Semantic Change

When unsure of particular meanings, use the OED or another etymological

dictionary.

1. The following words are listed with their former meanings. Name the
semantic change each has undergone to reach its present meaning.
a. shroud 'garment, clothing' _____ ____
b. allergic 'having an adverse reaction to certain substances'

c. aisle 'passage between pews of a church' _____ ____

d. brook 'to enjoy, make use of' (now 'to tolerate') _ _ _ _ _ _ __
e. fame 'rumor, report' _____ ____
f. business 'state of being busy' _____ ____
g. go 'walk' _____ ____

continued
 . . A Linguistic History
90 <NJ The English Language.

. g expressions.
•fied by the followin
h es exemplI
Name the figurative c ang
2. ·d -
four sheets to the wm
a.
b. turn over a new leaf
c. a sour note------
d. elect a new board isms are formed.
. he following euphem
3. Give the means by which t /
STD 'sexually transm1·tted disease
a.
b. jesum crow 'Jesus Christ'
c. enjoys his drink 'is a drunkard' . 'ldb'rth'
d. confinement 'the lying-in a °
. f woman in chi I

e. SAD 'seasonal affective disorder' - - - - - - - ~

f. bowel movement 'defecation'--------

h result of imitating higher or
4. Indicate whether the following terms are t e
lower social class usage.

a. leak 'disclosure'--------
b. paranoid 'exhibiting extreme f e a r ' - - - - - - - -
c. icon 'representative symbol' - - - - - - - -
d. loonie 'Canadian dollar coin depicting a loon' - - - - - - - - -
e. beef'complaint' _ _ _ _ _ _ __

Some Generalizations about Semantic Change

The first generalization to be made about semantic change is that it occurs very
quickly-so quickly, in fact, that dictionaries cannot entirely keep up with it. An
example is the word desultory in a sentence such as He walked along in a desul-
tory manner. Many speakers of contemporary English would say that the word means
something like 'slowly, aimlessly, despondently'. There are numerous citations over
the last 25 years attesting to such a meaning. However, even dictionaries published
fairly recently stick to the word's older senses; for example, The American Heritage
Dictionary (2011) lists the first definition of desultory as 'moving or jumping from
one thing to another' (see Justice 1987 for a fuller discussion of the treatment of this
 THREE I Causes and Mechanisms of Language Change G'-0

word in old~r dictionaries). Similarly, the word peruse is now commonly used in the
91
I
sense 'to skim or read casually', fast superseding the standard dictionary definition 'to
read thoroughly or carefully'. When dictionary editors do notice semantic changes,
they often track them for several years before including the emerging definition, so
even the newest books can be behind the times.
Apart from this generalization, it seems difficult to determine absolutes about
semantic change because it so often entails contradictory or opposing trends. Joseph
Williams (1975) was able to identify the following directions of change: that abstract
words tend to develop out of concrete ones (e.g. understand), that neutral words tend to
become polarized (esteem), that words with strong emotional content tend to weaken
(awful), that words of insult come from the names of animals or low-class people (rat,
villain), and that metaphorical uses of words are drawn from everyday experience
(mouth of a river).
Recently, scholars have argued that semantic change is more regular than once
thought. For example , Traugott and Dasher (2002:3- 4) point out that the great-
est degree of regularity exists in grammaticalization, but that verbal, adjectival, and
adverbial forms may also change according to consistent patterns. They also argue that
irregular meaning changes seem to occur primarily with nouns, which are 'particularly
susceptible to extralinguistic factors'.
The passage below (adapted from Algeo and Butcher 2013:229) serves as a review
of semantic change. Its humor depends on the discrepancy between the current and
former meanings of the italicized words.

He was a happy and sad girl who lived in a town forty miles from the
closest neighbor. His unmarried sister, a wife who was a vegetarian tee-
totaler, ate meat and drank liquor three times a day. She was so fond of
oatmeal bread made from the corn her brother grew that she starved
from overeati ng. He fed nuts to the deer that lived in the branches of an
apple tree which bore pears. A silly and wise boor everyone liked, he was
a lewd man whom the general censure held to be a model of chastity.

Below are the former meaning s of the words which allow for a coherent reading of
the passage:

sad - 'sober' starved - 'died'

girl - 'youth' deer - 'animal'
town - 'small enclosur e' apple - 'fruit'
wife - 'woman ' silly - 'blessed'
meat - 'food' boor - 'farmer'
liquor - 'liquid' lewd- 'lay'
corn - 'grain' censure - 'opinion '
 92 (N) The English Language: A Linguistic History

The changes undergone by the words are various:

• .
specialization: girl, wife, l' uor corn deer, apPie, starved
meat, iq ' ' ')
• weakening: starve (in the sense of 'be hungry
• pejoration: silly, boor, lewd, censure . t d with sobriety), censure (as
. d
• metonymy: sad (smce sa ness may be. assoc1
.
ae
f 'nions)
criticism may be associated with the givmg O opi
• cultural change: town

Pragmatic Change .
. b en
Traditionally, the history of the Enghsh languag~ has e studie s
d m respect to changes
discu ssed in Chapter 1,
.
m phonology, morphology, syntax, and semantics· But as wa gmat ics-i
s recognized
in the study of language a further component of language~pra text that
is with ho;
Pragmatics is concerned with the function of langu~ge ::eco; os~s it
se~es. While
speakers use language to achieve the many commumcat p rph. tory
the study of
studies of pragmatics in contemporary language have a long is .
'.
pragmatics in an historical context-what has come to be known as .hzstonca1pragmat-
· • h only • . .
ics-h as begun to flouns m the last twenty years or so · Histoncal pragm . atics
mame · s the methods of histon
· ·ca11·mgms· t1cs
· (the study of language change) with those
of pragmatics (the study of language use). As defined in a recent textbook
on the topic,
historical pragmatics is the study of 'language use in its social, ~ultu
r~ and above all
historical context. It investigates patterns of language use in earlier peno
ds and exam-
ines how such patterns changed over time' (Jucker and Taavitsainen 2013
:xi).
What has been seen as a major impediment to the historical study of
pragmatics
is the lack of authentic oral records from earlier periods of the langu
age (prior to the
rise of sound recordings at the end of the nineteenth century). That is,
we do not have
a good sense of how people really talked (in casual conversation) in
earlier stages of
the language. All we have are written documents, which are the result
of planning and
polishing. The lack of records of conversational language from earlie
r periods has
come to be known as the 'bad data' problem. It is, in fact, a problem
for the study of
all language change, as we now believe that language change begin
s in speech. Yet
the lack of records of historical oral discourse is a particular probl
em for historical
pragmatics because pragmatics concerns the use of language by speak
ers (and not
necessarily writers) to achieve communicative ends. However, as
trial records, wit-
ness depositions, and personal letters from the past become more
readily available,
especially in electronic form (as discussed in the section on historical
sociolinguistics
above), we are beginning to overcome the 'bad data' problem. (See
the example of
the trial record from the Old Bailey above, on page 72, and the depo
sition from the
Salem witch trials in Chapter 10, on pages 365-6.) Also, written
texts have come
to be recognized as 'communicative acts' and legitimate objects
of study in their
own right.
 THREE I Causes and Mechanisms of Language Change G'9 93

Studi_es withi_n the field of historical pragmatics fall into two major categories:
synchromc and dia~hronic. Synchronic studies focus on the pragmatic and discourse
features of one particular period in the past. In this category would fall a study of the
use of address terms in Chaucer or Shakespeare (how they are used for social and
emotive effect), a study of politeness conventions in Early Modem English (the forms
that are use~ and the differing conventions of politeness at work), or a study of insults
in Old Enghsh (how they work or how common they are). Diachronic studies, by con-
trast, focus on changes in pragmatic forms and conventions over time. In this category
would fall a study of compliments or apologies from Old English to the present, a
study of the changing forms of interjections in the different periods of English, or a
study of discourse markers over time (how they arise and are used, and how they fall
out of use and are replaced).
Thomas Kohnen has undertaken a study of the speech act of 'directives' (i.e. com-
mands) in Old English and over the history of English. What he found is that Old
English speakers seem to have used a greater number of direct commands than is
common in Modern English. That is, they tended to use 'ask' and 'order' verbs, while
we use more 'suggest' verbs and indirect commands. Instead of directly ordering our
companion to close the window (Close the window!), we would likely take the less
threatening route of suggesting that we were cold or wondering aloud if our companion
might be willing or able to close the window. Kohnen attributes this difference to the
more hierarchical nature of Anglo-Saxon society, where interlocutors often differed in
rank and status, and to its oral culture. In contrast, in modern society, interlocutors tend
to be relatively equal in status. Even so, Kohnen shows that Old English speakers did
not use as many second-person imperatives as one might expect, preferring first- and
third-person modals, often expressing common ground, as well as the more inclusive
uton we 'let's' + infinitive construction. Furthermore, Old English has a number of
more impersonal constructions, such as (neod)]Jearf is 'it is necessary', which likewise
lessened the threatening nature of the commands. (See Kohnen 2000, 2008.)
Andreas Jucker has studied changing politeness in the history of English, focusing
on what researchers in the field call 'positive face' (the desire to be approved of) and
'negative face' (the desire not to be imposed upon). For example, cases of positive
politeness might involve giving compliments, expressing thanks, usi~g close terms
of address (dear, honey), or offering reciprocal kindness, whereas cases of negative
politeness might involve expressing deference, apologizing, or using indirect requests.
Jucker argues that in Anglo-Saxon England the concept of 'face' played little part since
social relations were based on kin loyalty and mutual obligations. In later medieval
England, 'deference politeness' was dominant, likely borrowed from French chivalric
practices. By the time of Early Modern English, a system of face-based politeness
had emerged, but positive politeness was more common than negative politeness. In
contrast, he argues, present-day society has a negative-politeness culture. He cites a
number of pieces of linguistic evidence for this move to negative politeness. First is
the change from thou (typically a signal of intimacy, i.e. positive politeness) to you
 A L' guistic History d ·
94 The English Language: '" h
CNl
the use of t ou an you 1n
. e ative politeness) (on he olite formula pray/
(typically a signal of deference, i.e. n g d is the change fro_m t 01..r ~ Shrew, Petruchio
English see further Chapter 10).· Secon 's The Taming t e b t
' Shakespea re . rithee, e no angry,
prithee to please. For examp1e, m. ife• O Kate, content thee, P.. the h earer
· es upon ·
makes the following request of his w · and hence 1mpos
which expresses the speaker's wish(/ pray you) lordship drink a cup of sack?,
Compare this to a servant's offer: Will't p_lease dydourssee's will (if you please). Third
t n the.a re ( hich ask forth e hearer' s f or-
which makes the acceptance contmgen °/forgive
·
meh w er) to sorry (wh.ich is · pure1Y
is the change from excuse me/pand on meJ'
. . .tion on the ear
giveness, and thus constitute an 1mpos1
deferential). (See Jucker 2011.) t·ve area of research in historical
. k ' h s been an acllI like actually, y'know, I mean,
The study of 'discourse mar ers a
pragmatics. Discourse markers are forms such as we ' on 'the use of discourse mark-
. Ch t r 12 for more h have little or no semantic
or I think in Modern English. (See ap e . 1
ers in Modern English.) They are frequent m ora speehc 'e reasons, they have in the
·1 d fi d
content, and are not eas1 y e ne or
translated · For. t es h for purposes of planning
past been thought of as 'meaningless fillers,' used m speec ter Extensive research
· try for purposes of rhyme or me ·
and holding the.fl oor, and m poe . ver that although they do not
.
on these forms m Present-Day English has shown, howe ' h h
· b) and althoug t ey come m a
constitute a formal grammatical class (hke noun or ver ,
· of 1orms from sm · gle words to phrases .. to clauses), these markers
w1·de vanety s: ( •
rangmg
·
· fact serve important ·
fu nctions · d.1scourse and composition: they structure texts
m
m
and bind elements within the text, they denote a range of speaker attitudes, and they
signal interpersonal relations (i.e. they have 'pragmatic' meaning) . While w~ mig~t
not expect to find discourse markers in the purely written texts of the past, a nch vem
of research has uncovered numerous elements in historical stages of English which
for many years puzzled scholars but which we now understan d as functioni ng as prag-
matic markers. For example, the form hwret 'what' which begins Beowulf and other
Old English poems and has been unsatisfactorily glossed as 'lo, oh, alas, indeed', may
in fact be a marker of common ground, not dissimilar to you know in Modem English.
The ubiquitous use of pa 'then' to begin sentences in Old English narrative s-often
seen as a sign of the 'primitive ' paratactic style of Old English prose-i s now under-
stood as a means of marking the narrative structure, with pa being particula rly frequent
in the 'peak' or climax of the narrative. The apparently empty form gan 'began', found
widely in Middle English, has been shown to serve the purpose of episode marking
in Middle English. Parenthetical forms such as / guess or I think, which express the
s~eaker's lack of certainty, have a long history, dating back to Middle English. The
discourse marker we_ll, currently used as a 'disprefer red response ' signal (as in Can
you help me move this weekend? Well, my parents are visiting.), can be seen already to
have its modem function in this seventeen th-centur y example:

Tom: Yes, you must keep a Maid, but it is not fit she should k now o.-r h
er
· · · 1
M asters pnvzczes. 1 say you must do these things your self
 THREE I Causes and Mechanisms of Language Change <N> 95

lone: Well if it must be so, it must. (Samuel Pepys, Penny Merriments c. 1680;
taken from Jucker 1997:102)

Scholars have also looked at which linguistic elements provide the source con-
structions for pragmatic markers and how these markers develop over time. For
example, forms such as look (as in Look, I don't want any trouble) or say (as in Say,
isn't that your friend over there?) are likely to have developed from full imperative
clauses which have been reduced to discourse markers, the forms having lost their
original perceptual and communicative meanings. It has been argued that pragmatic
markers develop through grammaticalization (see above) or a more specialized pro-
cess of 'pragmaticalization'. The history of goodbye provides an interesting case. The
term began in Early Modern English as a blessing, God be with you. It underwent
contraction, becoming an unanalyzable single word: god be wy you > god-b'w'y >
godbwye > god buy'ye. By analogy with forms such as Good day, we find the change
good-b 'wy > goodby > good-bye, and we see its development into a simple discourse
closure. This shift represents an increase in politeness because a courteous closing
emerges, the sole purpose of which is to acknowledge the hearer. 4

4 For more on pragmatic changes, see Arnovick (1999) and Brinton (1996, 2008). The Journal of Hi storical
Pragmatics, begun in 2000, publishes many articles in the field, the majority on English.

S Recommend ed Resources
For a list of recommended readings, websites, and videos, go to our compamon
website at www.oupcanada.com/BrintonAmovick3e.