Principles of historical linguistics

1. Principles of historical linguistics

2. Breakthroughs in the development of historical linguistics

3. Historical sources of Germanic languages (General account; Julius Caesar on the Germanic tribes; Cornelius Tacitus on the life and customs of the ancient Germans)

Key-words: comparative method, “genetic hypothesis”, neo-grammarian movement, diachronic and synchronic approach, reconstruction, cognate, etymology, etymological doublets, statics and dynamics, Sanskrit

Questions and tasks:

1. What is the difference between the principle of study at the beginning of the 19^th cent. And neo-grammarian movement?
2. Speak about the contribution of W. Jones, J. Grimm, A. Schleicher, F. Bopp, R. Rask, W. von Humboldt into historical linguistics.
3. Dwell upon the style of life of the ancient Germans.
4. What are the modern views on the mode of language evolution?
5. Find cognate words in different Germanic languages and in Indo-European languages.
6. Explain the difference between diachronic and synchronic approaches to language investigation.

Read the following citations of acknowledged linguists. Make your comments and remember:

1. “The causes of language change are double-layered. On the top layer, there are social triggers. These set off or accelerate deeper causes, hidden tendencies which may be lying dormant within the language. The gun of change has been loaded and cocked at an earlier stage.” (Aitchison J. Language Change: Progress or Decay? CUP. 1998. P.124).
2. J. Aitchison considering the issue of language origin states two possible ways of its evolution – “is it a sudden evolutionary leap?” opposing it to another point of view about language evolution as “very slowly, creeping over millennia”. (Aitchison J. The Seeds of Speech. Language Origin and Evolution. CUP. 1996. P.59).
3. “Language has a remarkable instinct for self-preservation. It contains inbuilt self-regulating devices which restore broken patterns and prevent disintegration“ … they can be called “therapeutic changes”. (Aitchison J. Language Change: Progress or Decay? CUP. 1998. P.138)
4. A very extraordinary point of view on language origin and evolution was proclaimed by R.M.W. Dixon. He proposed the following scenario: “Early humans lived in a state of relative equilibrium, with developing cognitive and communicative ability but no language. Then, by some process of punctuation, language developed. I suggest that it would have developed rather fast…”. (Dixon R.M.W. The Rise and Fall of Languages. CUP. 1997. P.4).
5. Proposed by R.M.W. Dixon “model of punctuated equilibrium” can be described by the following: “…language … since its first emergence.. there have been long periods of equilibrium during which a number of languages have coexisted … without any major changes taking place. From time to time the state of equilibrium is punctuated by some cataclysmic event; this will engender sweeping changes in the linguistic situation and may trigger a multiple ‘split and expansion’. The punctuation may be due to some natural event (floods, drought, volcanic eruption), or to some striking technical innovation, or simply to entry into new … territory. After the events which caused the punctuation have run their course, a new state of equilibrium will come into being) … During a period of punctuation a given language may undergo multiple splits, establishing a language family…. During a period of equilibrium, languages in contact will diffuse features between each other… This similarities will gradually converge…”. (Dixon R.M.W. The Rise and Fall of Languages. CUP. 1997. P.67, 70-71).
6. “There are changes due to the internal dynamics of the language.” As Baudouin de Courtenay said, “the mechanism of language at any given time is the result of all preceding istory and development, and each synchronic state determines in turn its future development. This is clearly seen when two or more languages that are genetically related – but which have not been in contact for some time – each changes in the same way. The phenomenon is not at present fully understood, but it seems that the languages share some common inner dynamic that engenders a certain sort of change”. (cited in Dixon R.M.W. The Rise and Fall of Languages. CUP. 1997. P.14).