Synchronic variation

A linguistic change begins with a synchronic variation, that is, along with the existing language units (words, forms, affixes, pronunciation, spelling, and syntactic constructions) here appear new units. They may be similar in meaning but slightly different in form, stylistic connotations, social values, etc. In the same way new meanings may arise in the existing words or forms in addition to their main meanings. Both kinds of variations, formal (in form) and semantic (in meaning), supply the so-called raw material for impending changes.

Synchronic variation is to be found in every language at every stage of its history. It is caused by two main factors: functional differentiation of language and tendencies of historical development.

As is known, language functions in various forms as a group of mutually intelligible overlapping speech varieties. The range of synchronic variation largely depends on the distinction of the main functional varieties and also on the variable use of language in different conditions of communication, in various social groups and in individual forms of speech. Synchronic differences between the varieties of language may consist of specific items not to be found in other varieties, or in the different use of the same items, which may seem slightly unusual and yet quite intelligible to the speakers of other varieties.

Synchronic variation reveals the tendencies of historical development and is produced by those tendencies. New features, which appear as instances of synchronic variation, represent dynamics in synchrony and arise in conformity with productive historical trends.

Variation supplies material for linguistic change and also provides conditions for its realization. At every period of history, language offers a wide choice of expressive means to the speaker. From this stock the speaker selects forms of expression suitable in the given situation; in making this choice he observes the speech habits of his social group or employs forms of expression current in other varieties of the language; sometimes he creates new expressive means – forms, words, phrases – in accordance with the productive historical tendencies. Old and new forms begin to be used indiscriminately, in free variation, which may lead to a change in their relative frequencies and finally to the substitution of one for another. This synchronic variation ensures a gradual imperceptible realization of the change. If the co-existing competing units lose all differences, one rival will die out and the other will occupy its place (for only in rare cases genuine free variation exists for long, that is, co-existence of absolute equivalents). If the differences between parallel means of expression persist and are accentuated, both rivals will survive as distinct units.

Causes of language evolution

The causes or moving factors in language history is one of the most controversial issues of historical linguistics. Various explanations and theories have been suggested expressing different views upon language evolution.

For example, in the early 19^th century representatives of the so-called romantic trend (including J. Grimm) interpreted the history of the Indo-European languages, and especially that of Germanic languages, as decline and degradation, for most of these languages have lost their richness of grammatical forms, declensions, conjugations and inflections since the so-called ‘Golden Age’ of the parent-language.

Linguists of the natural trend (A. Schleicher) conceived language as a living organism. Hence it’s birth, youth, maturity, old age and death.

In the later 19^th century the psychological theories of language (W. Wundt, H. Paul) attributed linguistic changes to individual psychology and accidental individual fluctuations.

The study of factual history undertaken by the Neo-Grammarians led them to believe that there are no superior or inferior stages in language history and that all languages are equal; and changes are brought about by phonetic laws which are universal, that is, admit of no exceptions (seeming exceptions are due to analogy or are a result of a further development of language).

Sociolinguists maintained that linguistic changes are caused by social conditions and events in external history, whereas others hold that external factors are no concern of linguistic history. In accordance with this view the main internal cause which produces linguistic change is the pressure of the language system. Whenever the balance of the system or its symmetrical structural arrangement is disrupted, it tends to be restored again under the pressure of symmetry inherent in the system.

The Prague school of linguists was the first to recognize the functional stratification of language and its diversity dependent on external conditions. In present-day theories, especially in sociolinguistics, great importance is attached to the variability of speech in social groups as the primary factor of linguistic change.

As is seen, there are different interpretations of language evolution. But still, it should be understood that, broadly speaking, linguistic changes include such factors as external (extra linguistic) and internal (intralinguistic). The term external or extralinguistic embraces a number of aspects of human life: events in the history of people, including the structure of the society, expansion over new geographical areas, migrations, mixtures and separation of tribes, political and economic unity or disunity, contacts with other peoples, the progress of culture and literature. These aspects of external history determine the linguistic situation and affect the evolution of the language.

As for internal factors of language evolution, they arise from the language system. They are normally subdivided into general factors or general regularities, which operate in all languages as inherent properties of any language system, and specific factors operating in one language or in a group of related languages at a certain period of time.

The most general causes of language evolution are to be found in the tendencies to improve the language technique or its formal apparatus. These tendencies are displayed in numerous assimilative and dissimilative phonetic changes in different languages, including English. By assimilation is meant a process by which one sound is made similar in its place or manner of articulation to a neighbouring sound. For example, the word ‘cupboard’ was presumably once pronounced as the spelling indicates (and as most 1^st –year students unaware of its correct pronunciation pronounce!) with the consonant cluster pb in the middle. The [p] was assimilated to [b] in manner of articulation (voicing was maintained throughout the cluster), and subsequently the resultant double [bb] was simplified. With a single [b] in the middle and an unstressed second syllable, the word cupboard, as it is pronounced nowadays, is no longer so evidently a compound of cup and board, as the spelling still shows it.

Dissimilation refers to the process by which one sound becomes different from a neighbouring sound. For example, the word pilgrim (French pelerin) derives from Latin peregrinus; the sound [l] results from dissimilation of the first [r] under the influence of the second [r]. Both assimilation and dissimilation are commonly explained by ‘ease of articulation’ and are realized in a particular context. Simplification is another phenomenon responsible for phonetic changes. For example, the consonant cluster [kn] in know, knee, etc. was simplified to [n], or [t] was dropped in listen and often (though, these days the tendency to pronounce t in often has been resumed).

On the other hand, there are tendencies which resist linguistic change aiming to preserve it as a means fit for communication. These tendencies account for the historical stability of many elements and features (statics in diachrony). For instance, English has retained many words and formal markers expressing the most important notions and distinctions (most personal pronouns, names of some important everyday things; the suffix-d to form the Past tense, etc.). When nouns lost their case endings, to compensate for the loss prepositional phrases were used more widely.

There is another important factor which should be mentioned in this context. It is interdependence of changes within the sub-systems of the language and interaction of changes at different linguistic levels.

For example, in the course of history English nouns lost 2 of their original four cases. As a result, simplification of noun morphology involved changes at different levels; phonetic weakening of final syllables, analogical leveling of forms at the morphological level, and stabilization of word order at the level of syntax.

Some factors and causes of language evolution are confined to a certain group of languages or to one language only and may operate over a limited span of time. These specific factors are trends of evolution characteristic of separate languages or linguistic groups, which distinguish them from other languages.

On the one hand, English as a member of the Germanic group of languages, shares many Germanic trends of development, but, on the other hand, it has transformed some of them and developed its own trends caused by specifically English internal and external factors. For example, like other Germanic languages, it displayed a tendency towards a more analytical grammatical structure, but it has gone further along this way of development than most other languages, probably owing to the peculiar combination of internal and external conditions and to the interaction of changes at different linguistic levels.

2. Using the material of lectures 1, 2 and self-study 1 answer the following questions.

1. What aspects of language do changes take place in?

2. Why are they slow and gradual?

3. Which change is the quickest/slowest? Why?

4. Why is modern English spelling conventional?

5. What is the name of the discipline which outlines general principles of linguistics?

6. What are the most general causes of language evolution?