Language change theories Flashcards
Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis
This states that the certain thoughts of an individual in one language cannot be understood by those who live in another language. The way people think is strongly effected by their native languages. This also known as linguistic relativity and linguistic determinism
the idea went out of favor with scientists when Noam Chomsky’s theories of language gained popularity in the 1960s and ’70s. Dr. Chomsky proposed that there is a universal grammar for all human languages—essentially, that languages don’t really differ from one another in significant ways.
One big problem with the original Sapir-Whorf hypothesis stems from the idea that if a person’s language has no word for a particular concept, then that person would not be able to understand that concept, which is untrue. Language doesn’t necessarily control humans’ ability to reason or have an emotional response to something or some idea. For example, take the German word sturmfrei, which essentially is the feeling when you have the whole house to yourself because your parents or roommates are away. Just because English doesn’t have a single word for the idea doesn’t mean that Americans can’t understand the concept.
There’s also the “chicken and egg” problem with the theory. “Languages, of course, are human creations, tools we invent and hone to suit our needs,” Boroditsky continued. “Simply showing that speakers of different languages think differently doesn’t tell us whether it’s language that shapes thought or the other way around.”.
Substratum Theory
The way that different forms of languages come into contact with English. These create imperfections that is then passed down generationally, in turn, altering language forms.
Aitchinson’s Damp Spoon Metaphor
Language forms that are lazy stick, like a damp spoon in a sugar bowl. Bad English sticks with people who are lazy and passive.
prescriptive
Aitchinson’s Crumbling Castle Metaphor
The beauty of English is crumbling away and decaying like a castle that is worn away over time. Aitchison suggests that the “crumbling castle”, “damp spoon” and “infectious disease” approaches are exhibited by many prescriptivist thinkers.
The “Crumbling Castle” myth likens the English language to a castle
It suggests that although English was once a great castle, over time it has decayed and crumbled
She states this is false because the description of English as a ‘once fine language ‘ is a particularly inaccurate one, as language is constantly changing and evolving. “No year,” she said, “can be found when language achieved some peak of perfection.”
Aitchinson’s Infectious Disease Metaphor
The “Infectious Disease” myth suggests that ‘bad English’ is like a horrible disease that spreads from person to person.
It is suggested that there is no vaccine - meaning that there is no way to stop it.
Aitchison suggests that the idea that changes are ‘caught’ and ‘spread’ is technically correct, but it is no disease. People pick up changes in language because they want to.
David Crystal’s linguistic economy view
The way we communicate online is similar to how we communicate in real life. He believes we are now living in a linguistic economy in which now language is more practical than formal, we shorten words for practicality, this has derived from things like text speech.
Sharon Goodman on informalisation
She explores two aspects of language change: Firstly, she states that that we are living in a time where language has become informalisation, this the idea that language which was used in close personal relationships is now being used in wider sociological context.
She also talks about supercharged typographic icon- Letters in the English language act as symbols in modern society with meanings behind them. e.g. x meaning incorrect.
“Is the English language becoming increasingly informal? The argument put forward by some linguists (such as Fairclough) is that the boundaries between language forms traditionally reserved for intimate relationships and those reserved for more formal situations are becoming blurred. . . . In many contexts, . . . the public and professional sphere is said to becoming infused with ‘private’ discourse. . . .
“If the processes of informalization and marketization are indeed becoming increasingly widespread, then this implies that there is a requirement for English speakers generally not only to deal with, and respond to, this increasingly marketized and informal English, but also to become involved in the process. For example, people may feel that they need to use English in new ways to ‘sell themselves’ in order to gain employment. Or they may need to learn new linguistic strategies to keep the jobs they already have–to talk to ‘the public,’ for instance. In other words, they have to become producers of promotional texts. This can have consequences for the ways in which people see themselves.”
Donald Mackinnon’s categories of perceptions on language
Categorises the attitudes people may have to language use:
- As incorrect or correct;
- As pleasant or ugly;
- Socially acceptable or socially unacceptable;
- Morally acceptable or morally unacceptable;
- Appropriate in context or inappropriate in context; 6. Useful or useless.
Hockett’s Random Fluctuation Theory
Charles Hockett, 1958, proposed that random mistakes and events lead to language change. For example, the misspelling of ‘owned’ as ‘pwned’ has become a common term in the online gaming community meaning a rival has been humiliated. Random events, such as the Coronavirus pandemic, may also affect our language.
Halliday’s Functional Theory
Halliday proposed that language changes and adapts according to the needs of its users. Words disappear over time (becoming archaisms) as things change – for example, advances in technology means ‘cassette’ has been replaced with ‘CD’ which may also fall out of usage and be replaced with ‘streaming’. This theory suggests that there’s a certain logic to language change: changes reflect the sociocultural climate we’re living in.
David Crystal’s Tide Metaphor
He suggests that language is like a tide – constantly changing.
David Crystal’s view on Texting
Texting requires a more knowledgeable understanding of language so is not suggesting that young people are becoming less intelligent. It is an evolutionary strand of linguistics and reinforces language evolving over time.
