Introduction to Historical Linguistics
Week 1
The Comparative Method and Reconstruction I
Li.7/ LT7
Dr. Paul de Lacy
http://www.cus.cam.ac.uk/~pvd22/li7
1.1 The Aim
(1)
Linguistics is not about languages
Linguistics is about the part of the human mind devoted to language.
Empirical:
What are the mind’s limits?
Theoretical: Why?
(2)
Synchronic vs diachronic linguistics
Two sources of data that can help determine what the human mind’s language
faculty is like.
(3)
Outline of the following lectures
• Week 2 (today): Basics
• Week 3: Reconstruction
• Week 4: Nature of language change
• Week 5: Limits on language change
• Week 6: Causes of change
• Week 7: Morphological change
1.2 The International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA)
• The following charts show a subset of the IPA symbols. These are the ones we will
use in this course.
(4)
Consonants
labial
stop
p
b
affricate
fricative
f
v
nasal
m
trill
flap
approximant
w
liquid
(5)
dental
t5
d5
θ
D
alveolar
t
d
s
z
n
r
R
¨
l
post-alveolar
k
tS
S
dZ
Z
ø
velar
g
x
j
Vowels
Front
unround round
High
Mid
Low
i
y
e
æ
O
Central
Back
unround
µ
«
a
round
u
o
Ä
N
glottal
/
h
Introduction to Historical Linguistics: Michaelmas 2
2
Longs vowel are marked with ù e.g. [iù]
Nasal vowels are marked with ~: e.g. [õ]
(6)
Sample transcriptions
Pete
[piùt]
[Diù]
[bæd] bad
[siz]
cog
[kog]
[Siùt]
[lox]
[/æpl] apple
[hæm]
[θæNk] thank
thee
sieze
sheet
loch (Scottish English)
ham
[¨æm]
[sæN]
[læR«]
[wiùd]
[juù]
ram
sang
ladder (colloquial)
weed
yew
1.1.1 Language Change
(7)
(8)
Languages change
Old English
Modern English
[goùs]
[guùs]
[geùs]
[giùs]
[haus]
[huùs]
[fÃrou]
[furx]
[mais]
[myùs]
[neim]
[nama]
[hriNg]
[¨iN]
Gloss
‘goose’
‘geese’
‘house’
‘furrow’
‘mice’
‘name’
‘finger~ring’
What does it mean for a language to change?
1.3 The Comparative Method
(9)
Proto-language: an ancestor language.
(10)
Polynesian proto-languages (an extract -- Clark 1976)
Proto-Polynesian
Proto-Tongic
Tongan Niuean
(11)
Proto-Samoic
Samoan
Proto-Eastern Polynesian
Hawaiian Tahitian Maori
The Comparative Method
(a) Find COGNATE forms.
= Two forms that derive from a common ancestor form.
(b) Compare the REFLEXES of the cognate form.
= The forms extant in modern/recorded languages.
(c) Use statistical frequency, knowledge of common changes, and other
information to come up with a proto-form.
Introduction to Historical Linguistics: Michaelmas 2
3
(12)
An example
Maori
Rarotongan
Hawaiian
Tahitian
Gloss
tapu
tapu
kapu
tapu
‘sacred’
• Proto-Eastern Polynesian (PEP) form is *tapu1
• Note: English taboo is borrowed from some Polynesian language. OED says
that it’s from Tongan tabu; Tongan actually has [tapu]. Taboo is more likely
to come from Tahitian.
(13)
Proposals underlying *tapu
• PEP had *t, *a, *p, *u.
• PEP *t turns into Hawaiian /k/.
PEP *t → HAW k
• PEP *t turns into Maori, Rarotongan, and Tahitian /t/.
• PEP *a, *p, *u turn into /a/, /p/, /u/ respectively in all four languages.
(14)
More data
Maori
noho
mate
Naa
fare
wawe
kore
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
Rarotongan
no/o
mate
Naa
/are
vave
kore
Hawaiian
noho
make
naa
hale
wawe
/ole
Tahitian
noho
mate
naa
fare
vave
/ore
Gloss
‘sit’
‘die’
plural marker
‘house’
‘quick’
negative
(15)
The *k or */ question:
Rapanui (Easter Island):
kore
Marquesas:
ko/e
• Does this mean there wasn’t a PEP */ ?
(16)
Proto-Eastern Polynesian (PEP) phonemes
*p
*t
*k
*f
*h
*m
*n
*N
*r
*w/v
(17)
Order of change in Hawaiian
PEP *t → HAW k and PEP *k → HAW /
Which change came first?
• If *t → k then *k → /, all Both PEP *t and *k should be HAW /
e.g. PEP *mate should be HAW ma/e
• Therefore, *k → /, then *t → /
• Further evidence: if *t→k first, PEP would be left with a stop inventory of [p
k]. No language has this stop inventory.
(18)
Subgrouping
• Maori is conservative. PEP *X becomes Maori X.
tapu has been reconstructed back to Proto-Polynesian *tapu, and still further to Proto-Oceanic
*tampu.
1
Introduction to Historical Linguistics: Michaelmas 2
4
• Hawaiian is innovative. PEP *X often becomes HAW Y
• Hawaiian and Tahitian have shared innovations: *N→n, *k→/
PEP
Maori Rarotongan
*h→/
*f→/
*w→v
•[*N→n, *k→/]
Hawaiian
*t→k
*r→l
*f→h
Tahitian
*w→v
• Does this diagram miss anything? Can you make it better?
(19)
Limitations of statistics
• What if the same number of languages had α and β? Would the proto-form
be α or β?
• e.g. the N-n in (14c). We have to consider our theory in total.
• e.g. the w-v in (14e). We have to look elsewhere -- i.e. what we know about
other changes.
Resources
The full IPA chart: http://www1.arts.gla.ac.uk/IPA/fullchart.html.
POLLEX: Reconstruction of Polynesian words, back to Proto-Polynesian.
At http://www.cus.cam.ac.uk/~pvd22/li7
Reading (One or more of the following…)
Campbell, Lyle. 1998. Historical Linguistics: An introduction. Edinburgh: Edinburg
university press, chapter 5 ‘Comparative method and reconstruction.’
Crowley, Terry. 1991. ‘An introduction to historical linguistics’ Oxford University
Press. Chapter on reconstruction.
Fox, Anthony. 1995. ‘Linguistic reconstruction: An introduction to theory and
method.’ Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lass, Roger. 1993. ‘How real(ist) are reconstructions?’ In Charles Jones (ed.)
Historical linguistics: Problems and perspectives. London: Longman, pp.
156-189.
Trask, R.L. 1996. Historical linguistics. Arnold. Chapter on reconstruction.