<div dir="ltr">Somewhere I wrote (I don't remember where) that ALL terms ending by -<i>ization</i> refer to a process (<i>democratization </i>is obviously different from <i>democracy</i>). We can accept the difference between 'grammati(ci)zation' as referring to synchrony and 'grammaticalization' as referring to diachrony Though I agree with Nigel in using just <i>grammaticalization</i>). Note however that even the grammaticized construct <i>"I heard [X happen]</i> (Du Bois' example) entails the change of the verb 'hear' in an evidential marker, i.e. it entails a process from "hear 1" to "hear 2". There is always a 'prius' and a 'post' --even in a synchronic approach.<div><br></div><div>Best,</div><div>Paolo</div><div>...............................................</div><div><br clear="all"><div><div dir="ltr" class="m_3753663065071477496gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr">prof. dr. Paolo Ramat<div><div> Università di Pavia (retired)</div><div>Istituto Universitario Studi Superiori (IUSS Pavia) (retired)<br><div>'Academia Europaea'</div><div>'Societas Linguistica Europaea', Honorary Member</div></div></div><div>piazzetta Arduino 11 - I 27100 Pavia</div><div>##39 0382 27027</div><div>347 044 98 44</div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">Il giorno dom 9 giu 2019 alle ore 16:55 Joan Bybee <<a href="mailto:joan.bybee@gmail.com" target="_blank">joan.bybee@gmail.com</a>> ha scritto:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>Taking the two terms to be synonymous, I preferred 'grammaticization' at first and thought others did, too. However, after many years of teaching courses on the subject, my non-native speaker students convinced me to switch to 'grammaticalization' (which had become more prevalent by then) because it is easier for them to pronounce! Purely practical, not theoretical.</div><div><br></div><div>Joan<br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, Jun 9, 2019 at 6:58 AM Nigel Vincent <<a href="mailto:nigel.vincent@manchester.ac.uk" target="_blank">nigel.vincent@manchester.ac.uk</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Tahoma;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-size:10pt">
<div>I think usage here is probably often based on individual choice. I have always avoided the term 'grammaticization' and have preferred 'grammaticalization' in the diachronic sense and I would avoid both in the synchronic sense. By contrast, Joan Bybee
generally uses 'grammaticization' in the diachronic sense (except in her chapter in The Oxford Handbook of Grammaticalization!), and even refers to it as the 'more elegant' term in her book with Perkins and Pagliuca 'The Evolution of Grammar' - see p.4, footnote
2, an aesthetic judgement with which I would personally disagree!</div>
<div>And with apologies for self-promotion, I briefly discuss the interesting and important issue that Bernhard raises about semantic change affecting technical metalanguage in §6 of my article 'Conative' in 'Linguistic Typology 17 (2013) 269-289.</div>
<div>Best</div>
<div>Nigel</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
<div style="font-family:Tahoma;font-size:13px">
<div style="font-family:Tahoma;font-size:13px">
<div style="font-family:Tahoma;font-size:13px">
<div style="font-family:Tahoma;font-size:13px">
<div style="font-family:Tahoma;font-size:13px">
<div style="font-family:Tahoma;font-size:13px">
<div style="font-family:Tahoma;font-size:13px">
<div style="font-family:Tahoma;font-size:13px">
<div style="font-family:Tahoma;font-size:13px">
<div style="font-family:Tahoma;font-size:13px">Professor Nigel Vincent, FBA MAE<br>
Professor Emeritus of General & Romance Linguistics<br>
The University of Manchester</div>
<div style="font-family:Tahoma;font-size:13px">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Linguistics & English Language<br>
School of Arts, Languages and Cultures<br>
</div>
<div><span class="gmail-m_3753663065071477496gmail-m_9194802706904087677gmail-m_-1305815162119928545Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre-wrap"></span>The University of Manchester</div>
<div><span class="gmail-m_3753663065071477496gmail-m_9194802706904087677gmail-m_-1305815162119928545Apple-tab-span" style="white-space:pre-wrap"></span><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div></div>
<a href="https://www.research.manchester.ac.uk/portal/en/researchers/nigel-vincent(f973a991-8ece-453e-abc5-3ca198c869dc).html" target="_blank">https://www.research.manchester.ac.uk/portal/en/researchers/nigel-vincent(f973a991-8ece-453e-abc5-3ca198c869dc).html</a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="font-family:"Times New Roman";color:rgb(0,0,0);font-size:16px">
<hr>
<div id="gmail-m_3753663065071477496gmail-m_9194802706904087677gmail-m_-1305815162119928545divRpF206337" style="direction:ltr"><font size="2" face="Tahoma" color="#000000"><b>From:</b> Lingtyp [<a href="mailto:lingtyp-bounces@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">lingtyp-bounces@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>] on behalf of Bernhard Wälchli [<a href="mailto:bernhard@ling.su.se" target="_blank">bernhard@ling.su.se</a>]<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, June 09, 2019 12:55 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> John Du Bois; Bill Palmer<br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a href="mailto:lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Lingtyp] grammaticalized v grammaticized<br>
</font><br>
</div>
<div></div>
<div>
<div id="gmail-m_3753663065071477496gmail-m_9194802706904087677gmail-m_-1305815162119928545divtagdefaultwrapper" dir="ltr" style="font-size:12pt;color:rgb(0,0,0);font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif">
<p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"></p>
<div>As suggested by Dan, this discussion seems to be a very nice case of Michel Bréal’s Loi de répartition (based on earlier work by Gilliéron): synonyms do not last for a long time, either they acquire different meanings or one of the terms disappears. Similar
points have been made in psycholinguistics and first language acquisition, among other things by Eve Clark.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif,EmojiFont,"Apple Color Emoji","Segoe UI Emoji",NotoColorEmoji,"Segoe UI Symbol","Android Emoji",EmojiSymbols;font-size:16px">
Can we conclude from this that metalanguage for describing language change is subject to language change in the very same way as everything else in language?</div>
</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><span style="font-size:12pt">Bréal, Michel. 1897. Essai de sémantique. Science des significations. Paris: Hachette.</span><br>
</div>
<div><span style="font-size:12pt">
<div style="font-family:Calibri,Helvetica,sans-serif,EmojiFont,"Apple Color Emoji","Segoe UI Emoji",NotoColorEmoji,"Segoe UI Symbol","Android Emoji",EmojiSymbols;font-size:16px">
Clark, Eve V. 1988. On the logic of contrast. Journal of Child Language 15.317–335.</div>
<div><span style="font-size:12pt">Gilliéron, Jules. 1880. Patois de la commune de Vionnaz (Bas-Valais). Paris: F. Vieweg. (= Bibliothèque de l’école des hautes études. Sciences philologique et historiques; Fasc. 40). </span></div>
</span></div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Best,</div>
<div><span style="font-size:12pt">Bernhard Wälchli</span><br>
</div>
<br>
<p></p>
<p></p>
</div>
<hr style="display:inline-block;width:98%">
<div id="gmail-m_3753663065071477496gmail-m_9194802706904087677gmail-m_-1305815162119928545divRplyFwdMsg" dir="ltr"><font style="font-size:11pt" face="Calibri, sans-serif" color="#000000"><b>From:</b> Lingtyp <<a href="mailto:lingtyp-bounces@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">lingtyp-bounces@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>> on behalf of John Du Bois <<a href="mailto:dubois@ucsb.edu" target="_blank">dubois@ucsb.edu</a>><br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, June 9, 2019 1:15:37 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Bill Palmer<br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a href="mailto:lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [Lingtyp] grammaticalized v grammaticized</font>
<div> </div>
</div>
<div>
<div dir="auto">This distinction accords well with how many people use the two terms, I think.
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">The study of grammaticization focuses on functionally motivated patterns that arise in synchronic language use (discourse profiles), defining the environment to which grammars adapt via emergence.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">Grammaticalization focuses on the historical processes that create new grammar, driven by the discourse profiles plus additional principles intrinsic to cultural evolution and historical change.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
</div>
<div dir="auto">The two are closely intertwined, of course. A key task for functional linguistics is to clarify how they interact to provide an explanation for why grammars are as they are.</div>
<div dir="auto"><br>
<div dir="auto">Best,</div>
<div dir="auto">John<br>
<br>
<div dir="auto">==============================<br>
John W. Du Bois<br>
Professor of Linguistics <br>
University of California, Santa Barbara<br>
Santa Barbara, California 93106<br>
USA<br>
<a href="mailto:dubois@ucsb.edu" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">dubois@ucsb.edu</a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, Jun 8, 2019, 9:11 PM Bill Palmer <<a href="mailto:bill.palmer@newcastle.edu.au" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">bill.palmer@newcastle.edu.au</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
Dear all<br>
<br>
Juergen's email prompts me to ask a question I'd be interested to get people's thoughts on.<br>
<br>
What is the relationship between the terms grammaticalized and grammaticized? I use them to refer to different things, but I don’t know to what extent my usage corresponds to others' understandings.<br>
<br>
I use grammaticized to refer to a synchronic situation, and grammaticalized to refer to a diachronic process. For example, I would say that the category of auditory evidentiality ("I heard [X happen]") is grammaticized in language X, meaning that the category
is expressed in the language by a grammatical form; and I would say that the verb 'hear' has grammaticalized as an evidential marker in language X, meaning that a form with a lexical meaning has developed into a grammatical marker of some kind.<br>
<br>
Does this accord with anyone else's understanding of these terms? Apologies if there's some obvious literature on this I have missed.<br>
<br>
Best<br>
Bill Palmer<br>
<br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Lingtyp <<a href="mailto:lingtyp-bounces@listserv.linguistlist.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">lingtyp-bounces@listserv.linguistlist.org</a>> On Behalf Of Bohnemeyer, Juergen<br>
Sent: Saturday, 8 June 2019 12:26 AM<br>
To: David Gil <<a href="mailto:gil@shh.mpg.de" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">gil@shh.mpg.de</a>><br>
Cc: Stephanie Evers <<a href="mailto:saevers@buffalo.edu" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">saevers@buffalo.edu</a>>;
<a href="mailto:lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">
lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
Subject: Re: [Lingtyp] Glossed corpora of languages w/o grammaticalized definiteness marking<br>
<br>
Dear David — Good point! We use ‘definiteness’ to denote a variety of similar language-specific semantic categories that characterize the discourse status of a nominal in terms of its referent being discourse-old, previously mentioned (etc.), and/or otherwise
uniquely identifiable to the interlocutors. Since unique identifiability may be conferred by the speech situation, we require that candidate devices not be restricted to exophoric (spatial) reference in their regular uses.
<br>
<br>
What we mean by ‘grammaticalized’ is that the language has a particle, function word, or inflection that is routinely used by the speakers of the language to express the semantic category in question. For illustration, I would assume (perhaps wrongly so) that
it is possible in any language to use demonstratives to indicate ‘definiteness’, including in Russian - but Russian speakers, so far as I know (and so far as Stephanie Evers, the student working on this project, was able to show in her Qualifying Paper), do
not regularly use demonstratives for this purpose, at least not unless they wish to place contrastive narrow focus on the nominal in question.<br>
<br>
Why the restriction to particles, function words, and inflections? Well, it is hard for me to see how expressions that are for all intents and purposes regular content words could be used to indicate the ‘definiteness’ of another expression. But, the ultimate
goal of the project is to test hypotheses about the conditions under which dedicated definiteness marking emerges vs. does not emerge in a language (family) or area. So if such borderline cases exist, I suppose they would in fact be of great interest to the
project, even if they do not meet the criteria laid out above.<br>
<br>
Best — Juergen<br>
<br>
> On Jun 7, 2019, at 1:32 AM, David Gil <<a href="mailto:gil@shh.mpg.de" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">gil@shh.mpg.de</a>> wrote:<br>
> <br>
> Dear Juergen,<br>
> <br>
> Ian Joo mentioned our Indonesian corpus; a better way of accessing a more complete version is described at
<a href="https://linguistlist.org/issues/28/28-2007.html" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">
https://linguistlist.org/issues/28/28-2007.html</a>.<br>
> <br>
> However, I am puzzled by your criteria, specifically by the notion of "grammaticalized definiteness (marking)", and a bit surprised nobody so far in this thread has picked up on it.<br>
> <br>
> Both terms are problematic, as can be exemplified via Indonesian. "Definiteness": well, Indonesian has a couple of nominal markers, =nya and itu, that are sometimes described as marking definiteness, though I believe that they are more appropriately analyzed
otherwise, namely as marking possession/association and deixis respectively. So does Indonesian fail to meet criterion 1, or does it in fact offer a nice example of "alternative strategies" for marking definiteness? Depends on your analysis.<br>
> <br>
> Then there's the notion of "grammaticalized": what does it mean to say that =nya and itu are grammaticalized? The former marker, =nya, exhibits some properties that suggest that it might be a clitic, but otherwise, these markers would seem to exhibit grammatical
behaviour similar to most other content words in the language. So are they "grammaticalized"? Well it depends on what you mean by "grammaticalized".<br>
> <br>
> I use Indonesian here merely as an illustration; similar issues arise in very many other languages.<br>
> <br>
> Best,<br>
> <br>
> David<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> On 06/06/2019 22:02, Bohnemeyer, Juergen wrote:<br>
>> Dear colleagues — An advisee of mine is looking for glossed texts to investigate the use of strategies alternative to grammaticalized definiteness marking. Basically, she’s trying to identify about half a dozen genealogically and areally unrelated languages
each of which meets all of the following criteria:<br>
>> <br>
>> 1. The language lacks grammaticalized definiteness marking. <br>
>> <br>
>> 2. A text or corpus of texts is available for the language that has Leipzig-standard interlinear glosses and translations in English or Spanish.<br>
>> <br>
>> 3. The text (corpus) comprises at least about 1000 clauses, but ideally twice that or more.<br>
>> <br>
>> 4. The individual texts should be long-ish and their referring expressions shouldn’t be predominately proper names.
<br>
>> <br>
>> If you’re aware of a language so resourced, please let me know!<br>
>> <br>
>> Many thanks! — Juergen<br>
>> <br>
>> <br>
>> Juergen Bohnemeyer, Professor and Director of Graduate Studies <br>
>> Department of Linguistics and Center for Cognitive Science University <br>
>> at Buffalo<br>
>> <br>
>> Office: 642 Baldy Hall, UB North Campus * Mailing address: 609 Baldy <br>
>> Hall, Buffalo, NY 14260<br>
>> Phone: (716) 645 0127<br>
>> Fax: (716) 645 3825 * Email: <br>
>> <a href="mailto:jb77@buffalo.edu" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">jb77@buffalo.edu</a> * Web:
<a href="http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">
http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/</a><br>
>> <br>
>> <br>
>> Office hours M 12:30 – 1:30pm / W 1:00 – 1:50 / F 12:30 – 1:50pm<br>
>> <br>
>> <br>
>> There’s A Crack In Everything - That’s How The Light Gets In (Leonard <br>
>> Cohen)<br>
>> <br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> Lingtyp mailing list<br>
>> <br>
>> <a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">
Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
>> <a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">
http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
> <br>
> --<br>
> David Gil<br>
> <br>
> Department of Linguistic and Cultural Evolution Max Planck Institute <br>
> for the Science of Human History Kahlaische Strasse 10, 07745 Jena, <br>
> Germany<br>
> <br>
> Email: <br>
> <a href="mailto:gil@shh.mpg.de" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">gil@shh.mpg.de</a><br>
> <br>
> Office Phone (Germany): +49-3641686834 Mobile Phone (Indonesia): <br>
> +62-81281162816<br>
> <br>
> <br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Lingtyp mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">
Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">
http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
<br>
Juergen Bohnemeyer, Professor and Director of Graduate Studies Department of Linguistics and Center for Cognitive Science University at Buffalo
<br>
<br>
Office: 642 Baldy Hall, UB North Campus * Mailing address: 609 Baldy Hall, Buffalo, NY 14260<br>
Phone: (716) 645 0127<br>
Fax: (716) 645 3825 * Email: <a href="mailto:jb77@buffalo.edu" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">
jb77@buffalo.edu</a> * Web: <a href="http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">
http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~jb77/</a> <br>
<br>
Office hours M 12:30 – 1:30pm / W 1:00 – 1:50 / F 12:30 – 1:50pm<br>
<br>
<br>
There’s A Crack In Everything - That’s How The Light Gets In (Leonard Cohen)<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Lingtyp mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Lingtyp mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Lingtyp mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Lingtyp mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org" target="_blank">Lingtyp@listserv.linguistlist.org</a><br>
<a href="http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listserv.linguistlist.org/mailman/listinfo/lingtyp</a><br>
</blockquote></div>