<b>Language change:</b> The interplay of internal, external and extra-linguistic factors. Ed. by Mari C. Jones and Edith Esch. (Contributions to the sociology of language 86.) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2002. Pp. ix, 338. ISBN 311017202X. $105.60 (Hb).
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reviewed by: Language change: The interplay of internal, external and extra-linguistic factors ed. by Mari C. Jones, Edith Esch Marc Picard Language change: The interplay of internal, external and extra-linguistic factors. Ed. by Mari C. Jones and Edith Esch. (Contributions to the sociology of language 86.) Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2002. Pp. ix, 338. ISBN 311017202X. $105.60 (Hb). In the ‘Introduction’ by Kimberly Farrar and Mari C. Jones, we are told that ‘[t]he main aim of [End Page 178] this volume is to provide evidence from a number of different languages and language families to counter the apparent tendency that has existed in the past to see the explanation of language change as a choice between “language-internal” (i.e. intra-systemic) and “language-external” factors (i.e. contact)’ (1). This collection comprises fourteen articles, grouped under four major themes, with each article conveniently preceded by an abstract. The first theme is ‘Levelling’, a concept which has been extended from its ‘internal’ sense of complete or partial elimination of alternations within a paradigm to an ‘external’ sense of reduction of attrition of marked variants whereby two dialects of a language may become more alike in the direction of the more prestigious variety, or the salient differences between two dialects of equal status may be reduced in the direction of a lowest common denominator. The articles in this section are ‘Dialect contact and koinéization: The case of northern France’ by David Hornsby, ‘The depicardization of the vernaculars of the Lille conurbation’ by Tim Pooley, ‘Jordanian and Palestinian dialects in contact: Vowel raising in Amman’ by Enam Al-Wer, ‘ “Salience” as an explanatory factor in language change: Evidence from dialect levelling in urban England’ by Paul Kerswill and Ann Williams, and ‘My Dad’s auxiliaries’ by Edith Esch. The next theme is ‘Convergence’, which involves a bidirectional linguistic influence that ‘may be perceived as a more insidious form of contact-induced change as the lexicons of the converging varieties are left mainly intact, while the change occurs primarily at the morpho-syntactic level’ (10–11). This section contains Mari C. Jones’s ‘Mette a haout dauve la grippe des Angllaïs: Convergence on the Island of Guernsey’, David Holton’s ‘Modern Greek: Towards a standard language or a new diglossia?’, Laura Wright’s ‘Standard English and the lexicon: Why so many different spellings?’, Joseph Cremona’s ‘Latin and Arabic evolutionary processes: Some reflections’, and David Britain and Andrea Sudbury’s ‘There’s sheep and there’s penguins: Convergence, “drift” and “slant” in New Zealand and Falkland Island English’. What the editors have termed ‘adaptive mechanisms’ constitutes the subject of the third section. At issue here is primary bilingual language acquisition wherein individual children can be viewed as being in a contact situation in the sense that one language exerts an ‘external’ influence on the other. The two articles that deal with this topic are ‘Convergence in the brain: The leakiness of bilinguals’ sound systems’ by Ian Watson and ‘Language contact in early bilinguals: The special status of function words’ by Margaret Deuchar and Marilyn May Vihman. The last section revolves around the notion of code-copying, which presents itself as an interactive approach to the description of contact-induced language change, one that deals with concepts such as leveling, convergence, and adaptive mechanisms in an integrative way. Dealing with this topic are Lars Johanson’s ‘Contact-induced change in a code-copying framework’ and Éva Ágnes Csatô’s ‘Karaim: A high-copying language’. What is most impressive about this collection of articles is the range of perspectives it offers, not only in terms of the number of languages and dialects that are treated but also with regard to the multi-faceted approaches under which language change, variation, and development are studied and analyzed. From phonetics to pragmatics and even orthography, there is hardly an area of linguistic science that is not touched on, and Jones and Esch are to be...
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.043 | 0.023 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".