34.688, Review: Historical Linguistics, Sociolinguistics, English: Timofeeva (2022)
The LINGUIST List
linguist at listserv.linguistlist.org
Mon Feb 27 16:46:44 UTC 2023
LINGUIST List: Vol-34-688. Mon Feb 27 2023. ISSN: 1069 - 4875.
Subject: 34.688, Review: Historical Linguistics, Sociolinguistics, English: Timofeeva (2022)
Moderator: Malgorzata E. Cavar, Francis Tyers (linguist at linguistlist.org)
Managing Editor: Lauren Perkins
Team: Helen Aristar-Dry, Steven Franks, Everett Green, Sarah Robinson,
Joshua Sims, Jeremy Coburn, Daniel Swanson, Matthew Fort,
Maria Lucero Guillen Puon, Billy Dickson
Jobs: jobs at linguistlist.org | Conferences: callconf at linguistlist.org | Pubs: pubs at linguistlist.org
Homepage: http://linguistlist.org
Hosted by Indiana University
Please support the LL editors and operation with a donation at:
https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/
Editor for this issue: Maria Lucero Guillen Puon <luceroguillen at linguistlist.org>
================================================================
Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2023 16:46:30
From: Bev Thurber [bat23 at cornell.edu]
Subject: Sociolinguistic Variation in Old English
Discuss this message:
http://linguistlist.org/pubs/reviews/get-review.cfm?subid=36871357
Book announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/33/33-2712.html
AUTHOR: Olga Timofeeva
TITLE: Sociolinguistic Variation in Old English
SUBTITLE: Records of communities and people
SERIES TITLE: Advances in Historical Sociolinguistics 13
PUBLISHER: John Benjamins
YEAR: 2022
REVIEWER: Bev Thurber
SUMMARY
Sociolinguistics has a great deal to offer to studies Old English, and this
book demonstrates ways that sociolinguistic methods can be used to understand
the society that produced the surviving texts. Timofeeva describes
sociolinguistic techniques and applies them to groups of texts in small-scale
case studies. The book consists of an introduction, six main chapters, and a
brief epilogue.
The introductory chapter begins by summarizing previous applications of
sociolinguistic methods to Old English and how this book fits into them. In
particular, Timofeeva quotes the Helsinki Corpus of English Texts’ explanation
of why no sociolinguistic tags have been applied to texts dating before 1150:
“this information is too occasional to offer a basis for sociohistorical
generalizations” (3). This, Timofeeva argues, is true for the corpus as a
whole, but when smaller pieces of the corpus are considered, discoveries can
be made using sociolinguistic methods (4).
Several key concepts are introduced in the context of previous research.
Social networks, when considered generally, as sets of connections between
authors, prove useful in the first main chapter (labeled Chapter Two). Taking
a step further allows discourse communities, as defined by Swales (1987), to
be built. These communities transcend space and time as writings continue to
be part of them after their authors die. Finally, the concept of a community
of practice (CoP), which is “characterised by mutual engagement, joint
enterprise, and shared repertoire” (24), including language, can be used to
model individual monasteries on a small scale or the monastic community of
Anglo-Saxon England on a larger one. These three concepts form the core of the
book, whose stated aim is to demonstrate how they “can be harmonised to
achieve a better understanding of sociolinguistic practices in the Old English
period” (26). Each successive chapter connects to one or more of these
concepts in one or more case studies.
Chapter Two, “Social networks at the court of King Alfred,” examines Alfred’s
connections across the English-speaking world, then focuses on two words,
“Angelcynn” and “here.” Alfred’s connections are summarized with a network
diagram showing how he connects to a range of monastic communities by means of
his named correspondents. The section on “Angelcynn” shows how the word
evolved from one that referred specifically to Anglians in Bede, who was its
most prolific user, to a more general term for the English that eventually
included even those of Danish heritage (44). Finally, the discussion of “here”
shows how Alfredian texts “sought to appropriate the term … and to construe
the outgroup associated with it as criminal” (47). It was often, especially in
earlier texts, used for Scandinavian forces. It contrasted with “fyrd”, which
referred to defensive armies. Alfredian texts seem to have maintained this
distinction most clearly; other texts exhibit a degree of ambiguity.
Chapter Three, “Legal Old English and its communities,” is essentially a
trailer for what can be done with legal documents. The first half focuses on
the potential of the database behind “Prosopography of Anglo-Saxon England”
(PASE) as a source of names (including those of women) and occupational terms.
These hint at the underlying social networks. The second half focuses on the
various types of charters. Although charters are included in PASE, Timofeeva
describes the need for supplementary sources, such as the Anglo-Saxon Charters
project, the Electronic Sawyer, and the Dictionary of Old English Web Corpus,
to build the bigger picture. This chapter provides a bridge to chapters four,
five, and six, which delve into different types of legal documents to explore
the formation of discourse communities.
Chapter Four is centered on diplomas and includes case studies on witness
lists and dispositive verbs. The study of witness lists “shows that users of
legal Old English took part in dynamic, multi-level communities that were
responsive to political changes of the period” (80). The analysis of
dispositive verbs shows strong regional variations, which provides a useful
clue even when the verbs are in Latin, not Old English. Timofeeva concludes
that there were permanent local communities of practice that connected with
large-scale temporary ones formed during the annual (or semi-annual) meetings
of the royal assembly, which increasingly allowed regional practices to spread
(85).
Chapter Five focuses on writs and how their format developed and spread
through the community of practice described in Chapter Four. After a general
overview of their history and function, Chapter Five dives into a case study
of the salutation-notification template. Every writ begins with the formula
“Sender greets Recipient in an appropriate manner, and I…”, which switches
from third to first person. Timofeeva examines the different words used for
the greeting and its manner (freondlice (friendly) or eadmodlice (humbly)),
which signal the relative social status of the sender and recipient (94), as
well as the switch to first person. These varied over time and with the
relative social standings of the sender and the recipient, yet the template
remained stable for centuries. It even survives in today’s US presidential
commissions.
Chapter Six examines 58 wills. Although this corpus is small, it provides an
opportunity to explore gender-based variation in language because nearly a
third of the wills are associated with women, all of whom are either widows or
married women writing a joint will with their husbands. The two case studies
focus on variations across time and space and by gender. Timofeeva finds
substantial differences in the language of the wills that are consistent with
the idea that “the social vulnerability of widowed women, or the anticipation
thereof, might have dictated the choice of linguistic strategies that seek to
counteract the imbalance of power” (134). The chapter ends with two wills that
vary from the norms, those of Leofgifu (a female landowner) and Mantat (a
hermit). Leofgifu’s will addresses a queen (probably Emma) and includes some
features of writs (135); Mantat’s also resembles a writ as it communicates his
“self-esteem and symbolic power” (136).
In the final main chapter, Timofeeva pulls together the different themes of
the previous chapters and applies them to William I’s chancery, based on 60
documents selected from Bates (1998). These legal documents are primarily in
Latin, but the majority contain at least a little English or French (143). The
two case studies focus on the English and French terms in these documents. The
chapter ends with an appendix cataloging these terms.
The book concludes with a brief epilogue followed by 18 pages of references
and an index.
EVALUATION
Timofeeva shows that although sociolinguistic methods have not been used
extensively in studies of Old English texts in the past, they do have the
potential to be extremely helpful. The three main concepts initially
introduced—social networks, discourse communities, and communities of
practice—fade in and out throughout the book, with social networks dominating
at first and communities of practice becoming the focus by the end. Chapters 4
through 6, which focus on different document types, cohere well in that they
all contribute to a picture of the community of practice that professional
scribes belonged to. Additionally, they connect people outside that community
of practice, such as the witnesses to wills, in a discourse community.
The use of case studies highlights Timofeeva’s statement, in the introduction,
that sociolinguistic methods are most useful for detailed analyses of small
portions of the Old English corpus. Each case study shows how tiny details,
like the choice of a single word in a greeting, can be mined for information
about a social network or community of practice. The studies are presented
clearly, and the results are articulated in a way that highlights their
significance. Timofeeva has successfully glued these small tiles together to
create a mosaic that will inspire researchers in linguistics and history.
Every case study opens up a new avenue of research. Though each case stands
alone, it is not only a route to a new insight but also an example of how a
sociolinguistic method can be applied. This will inspire future researchers
to find parallel applications as well as following Timofeeva’s lead directly.
Overall, Timofeeva has demonstrated what she set out to: that applying
sociolinguistic methods to Old English texts on a small scale can provide
insight into the society that produced them.
REFERENCES
Bates, David. 1998. Regesta Regum Anglo-Normannorum: The Acta of William I,
1066–1087.
Helsinki Corpus TEI XML Edition. 2011. First edition. Designed by Alpo
Honkapohja, Samuli Kaislaniemi, Henri Kauhanen, Matti Kilpiö, Ville Marttila,
Terttu Nevalainen, Arja Nurmi, Matti Rissanen and Jukka Tyrkkö. Implemented by
Henri Kauhanen and Ville Marttila. Based on The Helsinki Corpus of English
Texts (1991). Helsinki: The Research Unit for Variation, Contacts and Change
in English (VARIENG), University of Helsinki.
https://helsinkicorpus.arts.gla.ac.uk (February 2, 2023).
Prosopography of Anglo-Saxon England. 2010. http://pase.ac.uk (February 2,
2023).
Swales, John. 1987. Approaching the concept of discourse community. Annual
Meeting of the Conference on College Composition and Communication (CCCC)
(38th, Atlanta, GA, March 19–21, 1987).
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED286184.pdf (January 29, 2023).
ABOUT THE REVIEWER
Bev Thurber is an independent scholar whose interest include historical
linguistics and the history of ice skating.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*************************** LINGUIST List Support ***************************
The 2019 Fund Drive is under way! Please visit https://funddrive.linguistlist.org
to find out how to donate and check how your university, country or discipline
ranks in the fund drive challenges. Or go directly to the donation site:
https://iufoundation.fundly.com/the-linguist-list-2019
Let's make this a short fund drive!
Please feel free to share the link to our campaign:
https://funddrive.linguistlist.org/donate/
----------------------------------------------------------
LINGUIST List: Vol-34-688
----------------------------------------------------------
More information about the LINGUIST
mailing list