Publikation: Against mechanisms : Towards a minimal theory of change
Dateien
Datum
Autor:innen
Herausgeber:innen
ISSN der Zeitschrift
Electronic ISSN
ISBN
Bibliografische Daten
Verlag
Schriftenreihe
Auflagebezeichnung
URI (zitierfähiger Link)
DOI (zitierfähiger Link)
Internationale Patentnummer
Link zur Lizenz
Angaben zur Forschungsförderung
Projekt
Open Access-Veröffentlichung
Sammlungen
Core Facility der Universität Konstanz
Titel in einer weiteren Sprache
Publikationstyp
Publikationsstatus
Erschienen in
Zusammenfassung
A widespread view in the literature on language change is that there exist a finite number of mechanisms of change to which attested instances of change can be assigned. In this paper I argue against reifying ‘mechanisms’ as primitives of the theory of language change, on multiple grounds. The mechanisms in question, such as reanalysis and analogy, are commonly invoked in multiply ambiguous ways: cause, process, event, result, and more. This is related to the fact that the ontological status of mechanisms is extremely suspect: where do they reside, and/or what are they properties of? I defend the position that a theory of change should be entirely derivative of i) a theory of language in the individual (cognition, acquisition, and use) and ii) a theory of (human) populations, with at least the latter containing no principles or stipulations specific to language. From this it follows that mechanisms, insofar as they have a role in our diachronic narratives, are epiphenomenal. If so, debates around the status of notions such as reanalysis and grammaticalization may both turn out to hinge on less contentful issues than previously thought.
Zusammenfassung in einer weiteren Sprache
Fachgebiet (DDC)
Schlagwörter
Konferenz
Rezension
Zitieren
ISO 690
WALKDEN, George, 2021. Against mechanisms : Towards a minimal theory of change. In: Journal of Historical Syntax. University of Konstanz. 2021, 5(32-39), 33. eISSN 2163-6001. Available under: doi: 10.18148/hs/2021.v5i32-39.141BibTex
@article{Walkden2021Again-55703,
year={2021},
doi={10.18148/hs/2021.v5i32-39.141},
title={Against mechanisms : Towards a minimal theory of change},
number={32-39},
volume={5},
journal={Journal of Historical Syntax},
author={Walkden, George},
note={Article Number: 33}
}RDF
<rdf:RDF
xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#"
xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#"
xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" >
<rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/55703">
<dcterms:hasPart rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/55703/1/Walkden_2-d8cjhjj1cqp99.pdf"/>
<dc:language>eng</dc:language>
<void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
<bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/55703"/>
<dcterms:title>Against mechanisms : Towards a minimal theory of change</dcterms:title>
<dc:contributor>Walkden, George</dc:contributor>
<dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">A widespread view in the literature on language change is that there exist a finite number of mechanisms of change to which attested instances of change can be assigned. In this paper I argue against reifying ‘mechanisms’ as primitives of the theory of language change, on multiple grounds. The mechanisms in question, such as reanalysis and analogy, are commonly invoked in multiply ambiguous ways: cause, process, event, result, and more. This is related to the fact that the ontological status of mechanisms is extremely suspect: where do they reside, and/or what are they properties of? I defend the position that a theory of change should be entirely derivative of i) a theory of language in the individual (cognition, acquisition, and use) and ii) a theory of (human) populations, with at least the latter containing no principles or stipulations specific to language. From this it follows that mechanisms, insofar as they have a role in our diachronic narratives, are epiphenomenal. If so, debates around the status of notions such as reanalysis and grammaticalization may both turn out to hinge on less contentful issues than previously thought.</dcterms:abstract>
<dc:rights>terms-of-use</dc:rights>
<dcterms:issued>2021</dcterms:issued>
<dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/45"/>
<dcterms:rights rdf:resource="https://rightsstatements.org/page/InC/1.0/"/>
<dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2021-11-29T15:57:10Z</dc:date>
<dc:creator>Walkden, George</dc:creator>
<dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2021-11-29T15:57:10Z</dcterms:available>
<foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
<dspace:hasBitstream rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/bitstream/123456789/55703/1/Walkden_2-d8cjhjj1cqp99.pdf"/>
<dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/45"/>
</rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>
