INSTRUCTOR'S MANUAL for Historical Linguistics: an Introduction Third Edition Lyle Campbell University of Hawai‘i Mānoa © Lyle Campbell, 2013 All rights reserved. No part of this manual may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval) without permission in writing from the publisher. Not for sale – This manual is available only to instructors who have adopted the accompanying textbook for course use. The manual is not available to students, or to those studying the book by themselves. Instructors may not sell or transfer the manual to others or make any of the solutions publicly accessible, on the Web or otherwise. INSTRUCTOR'S MANUAL Historical Linguistics: an Introduction Table of Contents PREFACE Chapter 1 Introduction, Exercise and solutions 1 Chapter 2 Sound change, Exercise and solutions 10 Chapter 3 Borrowing, Exercise and solutions 26 Chapter 4 Analogical change, Exercise and solutions 55 Chapter 5 Comparative method, Exercise and solutions 58 Chapter 6 Language Classification, Exercise and solutions 90 Chapter 7 Models of Linguistic Change (No exercises) Chapter 8 Internal reconstruction, Exercise and solutions 94 Chapter 9 Semantic and lexical change, Exercise and solutions 119 Chapter 10 Morphological Change (No exercises) Chapter 11 Syntactic change, Exercise and solutions 123 Chapter 12 Language Contact (No exercises) Chapter 13 Explanation (No exercises) Chapter 14 Distant Genetic Relationship, Exercise and solutions 129 Chapter 15 Philology and writing, Exercise and solutions (No exercises) Chapter 16 Linguistics prehistory, Exercise and solutions 141 Chapter 17 Quantitative Approaches to Historical Linguistics (No exercises) PREFACE The primary mission of this manual is to provide sample answers or possible solutions to the exercises in the Historical Linguistics: an Introduction, 3rd edition. For many of the exercises, of course, there is no definitive or unique single solution, and other answers than those given here may often be possible. The purpose here is to provide sample possible answers which indicate how the exercise might be approached and solutions sought. For ease of access, the exercises with their questions are repeated here, followed by possible solutions. The exercise instructions and examples are color-coded in BLACK. Solutions are in BLUE. Notes and incidental comments are in RED EXERCISES FOR CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Exercise 1.1 This exercise is about attitudes towards language change. 1. Try to find letters to newspapers or columns in newspapers or magazines, or on blogs, which express which express opinions on the quality of English in use today and about changes that are taking place. What do you think they reveal about attitudes towards language change? 2. Ask your friends, family and associates what they think about language today; do they think it is changing, and if so, is it getting better or worse? 3. Find books or articles on ‘proper’ English (prescriptive grammar); do they reveal any attitude towards changes that are going on in today’s language? 4. Consider the many things that schoolteachers or school grammar books warn you against as being ‘wrong’ or ‘bad grammar’. Do any of these involve changes in the language? 5. Compare books on etiquette written recently with some written thirty years ago or more; find the sections which deal with appropriate ways of speaking and use of the language. What changes have taken place in the recommendations made then and now? Do these reveal anything about change in the language or in language use? Anything the reader finds involving attitudes towards language change can contribute to answering the questions of this exercise. An internet search for “attitudes towards language change”, “language attitudes”, “proper language”, “improper language”, “correct language”, “language etiquette”, “correct grammar”, “bad grammar”, or “prescriptive grammar”, for example, should provide sources relevant to parts 1., 3., 4., and 5. of this exercise. For part 2., ask friends, family, and associates. Exercise 1.2 Observe the language you hear around you, and think about any changes that are going on now or have taken place in your lifetime. For example, if you are old enough, you might observe that gay has changed its basic meaning: today it mostly means ‘homosexual’ although until recently it did not have this meaning, but rather meant only ‘happy, cheerful’. Slang changes at a rather fast rate; what observations might you make about recent slang versus earlier slang? Can you find examples of ongoing change in other areas of the language besides just vocabulary? Any observations about what may appear to be language change taking place currently are appropriate as answers to this question. Examples of lexical change are the easiest to identify 1 for people not trained in linguistics; slang and obscenities typically offer examples. You might notice such things as the tendency to lose the subjunctive in English, as in I wish Gollum was smarter instead of I wish Gollum were smarter, or the use of is is where standard English would have only a single is, as in The problem is is that his feet are too big, rather than standard The problem is that his feet are too big – perhaps on analogy to sentences such as, What the problem is is that his feet are too big. Some people are able to notice differences in pronunciation of vowels in some regions that seem to reflect ongoing changes. Exercise 1.3 Changes in spelling and occasional misspellings have been used to make inferences about changes in pronunciation. This can, of course, be misleading, since spelling conventions are sometimes used for other purposes than just to represent pronunciation. Try to find examples of recent differences in spelling or of misspellings and then try to imagine what they might mean, say, to future linguists looking back trying to determine what changed and when it changed. For example, you might compare the spelling lite with light, gonna with going to, wannabee with want to be, or alright and alot with all right and a lot respectively. In particular, variations in spellings can be very revealing; see if you can find examples which may suggest something about language change. Any examples of spellings not generally considered standard or examples of frequent misspellings can be possible answers. An internet search of things such as “occasional spelling”, “bad spelling”, “spelling errors”, etc. will turn up numerous examples. Exercise 1.4 Shakespeare A number of examples from Shakespeare’s plays, written in the Early Modern English period, are presented here which illustrate differences from how the same thing would be said today. Think about each example and attempt to state what changes have taken place in the language that would account for the differences you see in the constructions mentioned in the headings, the negatives, auxiliary verbs and so on. For example, in the first one we see: Saw you the weird sisters? The modern English equivalent would be Did you see the weird sisters? Had the heading directed your attention to yes–no questions, you would attempt to state what change had taken place, from former saw you (with inversion from you saw) to the modern version which no longer involves inversion but requires a form of do (did you see) which was not utilized in Shakespeare’s version. Treatment of negatives: 1. Saw you the weird sisters? . . . Came they not by you? (Macbeth IV, i) 2. I love thee not, therefore pursue me not (A Midsummer Night’s Dream II, 1, 188) 3. I know thee not, old man: fall to thy prayers (Henry V V, v) 4. Let not thy mother lose her prayers, Hamlet: I pray thee, stay with us; go not to Wittenberg (Hamlet I, ii) 2 5. But yet you draw not iron (AMidsummer Night’s Dream II, i, 196) 6. Tempt not too much the hatred of my spirit (A Midsummer Night’s Dream II, i, 211) 7. And I am sick when I look not on you (A Midsummer Night’s Dream II, i, 213) 8. I will not budge for no man’s pleasure (Romeo and Juliet III, i) 9. I cannot weep, nor answer have I none (Othello IV, ii) 10. I am not sorry neither (Othello V, ii). Negatives: Auxiliary do is inserted with main verbs (not with forms of to be or modals); not (or its contraction, -n’t) is placed after an auxiliary, modal verb, or a form of the verb to be: 1. Came they not by you? > Didn’t they come by you? (Auxiliary do). 2. I love thee not, therefore pursue me not > I don’t [or do not] love you, therefore don’t [or do not] pursue me. 3. I know thee not ... > I don’t [or do not] know you ... The former use of double negatives is no longer grammatical in Standard English: 8. I will not budge for no man’s pleasure > I will not budge for any man’s pleasure / I will budge for no man’s pleasure. 9. I cannot weep, nor answer have I none > I cannot weep, nor do I have any answer. 10. I am not sorry neither > I am not sorry either. Treatment of auxiliary verbs: 1. Macduff is fled to England (Macbeth IV, i) = ‘has fled’ 2. The king himself is rode to view their battle (Henry V IV, iii) = ‘has ridden’ 3. Thou told’st me they were stolen into this wood (A Midsummer Night’s Dream II, i, 191) = ‘had stolen away/hidden’ Auxiliary verbs: Forms of to be as the auxiliary verb in constructions with main verbs of motion in the Present Perfect or Past Perfect have changed to corresponding forms to the auxiliary have: 1. Macduff is fled to England > Macduff has fled to England. 2. The king himself is rode to view their battle > The king himself has ridden to view their battle. 3. Thou told’st me they were stolen into this wood > You told me they had stolen [hidden] in the woods. Treatment of comparatives and superlatives: 1. She comes more nearer earth than she was wont (Othello 5, 2) 2. This was the most unkindest cut of all (Julius Caesar 3, 2) 3. What worser place can I beg in your love (A Midsummer Night’s Dream II, i, 208) Comparatives and superlatives: The “double” comparatives and superlatives permitted in Shakespeare’s time are no longer permitted, so there are no longer combinations of more ... -er, most ...-est, or worser: 3 1. She comes more nearer earth than she was wont > She comes nearer to earth than she was wont [in the habit of doing]. 2. This was the most unkindest cut of all > This was the unkindest cut of all. 3. What worser place can I beg in your love > What worse place can I beg in your love. Differences in verb agreement inflections (endings on the verbs which agree with the subject): 1. The quality of mercy is not strain’d It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven Upon the place beneath: it is twice blessed; It blesseth him that gives and him that takes (The Merchant of Venice IV, i) 2. The one I’ll slay, the other slayeth me (A Midsummer Night’s Dream II, i, 190) 3. O, it offends me to the soul to Hear a robostious periwig-pated fellow tear A passion to tatters (Hamlet III, i, 9–11) 4. And could of men distinguish, her election Hath seal’d thee for herself: for thou hast been As one, in suffering all, that suffers nothing (Hamlet III, i, 68–71) Differences in verb agreement inflections: The -(e)th of 3rd Person agreement on verbs > -(e)s; and -(e)st of 2nd Person Singular was lost when you replaced thou as the 2nd Person Pronoun, singular and plual. 1. droppeth > drops; blesseth > blesses; 2. slayeth > slays; 4. hath > has; (thou) hast > (you) have. Exercise 1.5 Chaucer The following is a sample text of Middle English, from Chaucer c. 1380. It is presented three lines at a time: the first is from Chaucer’s text; the second is a word-by-word translation, with some of the relevant grammatical morphemes indicated; the third is a modern translation. Compare these lines and report the main changes you observe in morphology, syntax, semantics and lexical items. (Do not concern yourself with the changes in spelling or pronunciation.) The Tale of Melibee, Geoffrey Chaucer (c. 1380) Upon a day bifel that he for his desport is went into the feeldes hym to pleye. on one day befell that he for his pleasure is gone to the fields him to play. ‘One day it happened that for his pleasure he went to the fields to amuse himself.’ [NOTE: is went = Modern English ‘has gone’; with verbs of motion the auxiliary used was a form of the verb ‘to be’, where today it is with ‘to have’] 4 His wif and eek his doghter hath he laft inwith his hous, his wife and also his daughter has he left within his house, ‘His wife and his daughter also he left inside his house,’ [NOTE: wif = ‘wife, woman’] of which the dores wer-en faste y-shette. of which the doors were-Plural fast Past.Participle-shut ‘whose doors were shut fast.’ Thre of his old foos ha-n it espied, and sett-en laddres to the walles of his hous, three of his old foes have-Plural it spied, and set-Plural ladders to the walls of his house, ‘Three of his old enemies saw this, and set ladders to the walls of his house,’ and by wyndowes ben entred, and betten his wyf, and by windows had entered, and beaten his wife, ‘and entered by the windows, and beat his wife,’ [NOTE: ben entred = ‘have entered’, a verb of motion taking ‘to be’ as the auxiliary] and wounded his doghter with fyve mortal woundes in fyve sondry places – and wounded his daughter with five mortal wounds in five sundry places – ‘and wounded his daughter with five mortal wounds in five different places –’ this is to sey-n, in hir feet, in hir handes, in hir erys, in hir nose, and in hir mouth, – this is to say-Infinitive, in her feet, in her hands, in her ears, in her nose, and in her mouth, – ‘that is to say, in her feet, in her hands, in her ears, in her nose, and in her mouth –’ and left-en hir for deed, and went-en awey. and left-Plural her for dead, and went-Plural away. ‘and left her for dead, and went away.’ (Lass 1992: 25–6) Morphological changes: hath > has Replacement of 3rd Person Present agreement marker -th by -s. wer-en > were ha-n > have sett-en > set left-en > left went-en > went -(e)n ‘Plural agreement suffix’ of verbs was lost. y-shette > shut y- ‘Past Participle prefix’ was lost. to sey-n > to say 5 -n ‘Infinitive suffix’ was lost. laft in hath he laft > left Syntactic changes: Upon a day bifel that > Upon a day it befell that = One day it happened that There is not enough evidence in this set of data to see this change properly, but English had a rule that inverted subject and verb when something preceded them in the clause (as in more or less frozen collocations such as Along came Jones, Never had he witnessed such folly, etc.); in cases with auxiliaries or modals in a verb phrase, just the auxiliary or modal was inverted, not the main verb. Thus here, upon a day comes first, and because the clause that he for his desport is went into the feeldes hym to pleye is the subject of bifel, it underwent subject-verb inversion to give Upon a day bifel that he for his desport is went into the feeldes hym to pleye. is went > has/had gone ben entered > have/had entered Forms of to be as the auxiliary verb with main verbs of motion in Present Perfect or Past Perfect changed to corresponding forms to the auxiliary to have. Lexical or Semantic changes: bifel [befell] > happened befall is archaic in Modern English, essentially replaced by happen (lexical change). desport > pleasure desport has been replaced in this context (lexical change). pleye ‘play’ in hym to pleye > to amuse himself (lexical change: play > amuse, semantic change: play in hym to pleye lost the sense of ‘amuse’, ‘to amuse himself’). eek > also (lexical change). sondry ‘sundry’ > various sundry is archaic in Modern English, mostly replaced by various, different (lexical change). Exercise 1.6 Caxton The text in this exercise is a sample of Early Modern English, from William Caxton, Eneydos (c. 1491). As in Exercise 1.5, three lines are presented: the first is from Caxton’s text; the second is a word-by-word translation, with some of the relevant grammatical morphemes indicated; the third is a more colloquial modern translation. Compare these lines and report the main changes you observe in morphology, syntax, semantics and lexical items. (Again, do not concern yourself with the changes in spelling or pronunciation beyond the most obvious ones.) And that commyn englysshe that is spoken in one shyre varyeth from a nother. In so moche and that common English that is spoken in one shire varies from another. In so much ‘And the common English that is spoken in one county varies so much from [that spoken in] another. In so much’ 6 that in my days happened that certayn marchauntes were in a ship in tamyse that in my days happened that certain merchants were in a ship in Thames ‘that in my time it happened that some merchants were in a ship on the Thames’ for to haue sayled ouer the see to zelande/ and for lacke of wynde thei taryed atte forlond; for to have sailed over the sea to Zeeland. And for lack of wind they tarried at.the coast; ‘to sail over the sea to Zeeland. And because there was no wind, they stayed at the coast’ [NOTE: Zeeland = a province in the Netherlands] and wente to land for to refreshe them And one of theym, named sheffelde a mercer and went to land for to refresh them. And one of them, named Sheffield, a mercer, ‘and they went on land to refresh themselves. And one of them, named Sheffield, a fabric- dealer,’ cam in to an hows and axed [aksed] for mete, and specyally he axyd after eggys. came into a house and asked for meat, and especially he asked after eggs. ‘came into a house and asked for food, and specifically he asked for “eggs”.’ And the goode wyf answerede. that she coude no frenshe. and the good woman answered that she could no French. ‘And the good woman answered that she knew no French.’ And the marchaunt was angry. for he also coude speke no frenshe. and the merchant was angry, for he also could speak no French, ‘And the merchant was angry, because he couldn’t speak any French either.’ [NOTE: coude = ‘was able to, knew (how to)’] but wolde haue hadde egges/ and she vnderstode hym not/ but would have had eggs; and she understood him not. ‘but he wanted to have eggs; and she did not understand him.’ [NOTE: wolde = ‘wanted’, the source of Modern English would] And thenne at laste a nother sayd that he wolde haue eyren/ and then at last an other said that he would have eggs. ‘and then finally somebody else said that he wanted to have eggs.’ then the good wyf said that she understod him wel/ then the good woman said that she understood him well. ‘Then the good woman said that she understood him well.’ (Source of Caxton’s text: Fisher and Bornstein 1974: 186–7) Morphological changes: varyeth > varies Replacement of 3rd Person Present agreement marker -th by -s. 7