criticisms of grammaticalization

[Joan Bybee]

Dear Martin,

Point 1 is only a problem if you assume that language change takes place in 
language acquisition. If you assume that grammaticization is driven by 
processes that occur as language is used, by everyone all the time, then 
unidirectionality is what you would expect.

Point 2: of course it's an epiphenomenon! All of grammar is epiphenomenal.

Joan

--On Saturday, February 25, 2006 6:11 PM +0000 hilpert at rice.edu wrote:

> Dear Funknetters,
>
> I'd like to find out whether anyone has addressed the following two
> theoretical criticisms against grammaticalization theory:
>
> 1. Unidirectionality, if it exists, is an even greater problem for
> functionalism than if it turns out to be false. Developments that span
> centuries would have to be explained independently of speakers, who only
> have access to three generations of other speakers. (I attribute this one
> to  Janda 2001.)
>
> 2. Grammaticalization should really be decomposed into its independently
> existing component processes. There's no point in granting explanatory
> power  to an epiphenomenon. (Newmeyer 1998, Joseph 2001, amongst others)
>
> Any references - or spontaneous reactions - will be greatly appreciated.
>
>
> Thanks, --Martin
>
>
> ------------------------------
> Martin Hilpert
> Rice University
> Department of Linguistics MS 23
> 6100 Main Street
> 77005-1892 Houston TX
> Tel (001) 713 3482822
> Fax (001) 713 3484718
> http://www.ruf.rice.edu/~hilpert
>
>