Token focuses on English linguistics in a broad sense, taking in both diachronic and synchronic work, grammatical as well as lexical studies. That being said, the journal favors empirical research. All submissions are double-blind peer reviewed. Token is the original medium of publication for all articles that the journal prints. ISSN 2299-5900

Token focuses on English linguistics in a broad sense, taking in both diachronic and synchronic work, grammatical as well as lexical studies. That being said, the journal favors empirical research. All submissions are double-blind peer reviewed. Token is the original medium of publication for all articles that the journal prints. ISSN 2299-5900

Token focuses on English linguistics in a broad sense, taking in both diachronic and synchronic work, grammatical as well as lexical studies. That being said, the journal favors empirical research. All submissions are double-blind peer reviewed. Token is the original medium of publication for all articles that the journal prints.

Token focuses on English linguistics in a broad sense, taking in both diachronic and synchronic work, grammatical as well as lexical studies. That being said, the journal favors empirical research. All submissions are double-blind peer reviewed. Token is the original medium of publication for all articles that the journal prints.

This book comprises a series of studies by a number of scholars working on what might broadly be termed the “medieval” period of the history of English, focusing on Old English, Middle English, and the relatively less well-documented period of transition from the former to the latter. The volume brings together contributions not only from a variety of fields, ranging from semantics and syntax to prosody and phonology, but also from different theoretical standpoints, in order to improve the reader’s understanding of the rapid changes that affect the language at this time. The collection of papers here should be of interest to all scholars and students working on Old or Middle English, as well as to students of historical linguistics in general, given that many of the processes and methodological parameters described here will prove to be directly applicable to the study of other periods and of other languages.

This book looks at how historical linguists accommodate the written records used for evidence. The limitations of the written record restrict our view of the past and the conclusions that we can draw about its language. However, the same limitations force us to be aware of the particularities of language. This collection blends the philological with the linguistic, combining questions of the particular with generalizations about language change.

Eighteenth-century English is often associated with normative grammar. But to what extent did prescriptivism impact ongoing processes of linguistic change? The authors of this volume examine a variety of linguistic changes in a corpus of personal correspondence, including the auxiliary do, verbal -s and the progressive aspect, and they conclude that direct normative influence on them must have been minimal. The studies are contextualized by discussions of the normative tradition and the correspondence corpus, and of eighteenth-century English society and culture. Basing their work on a variationist sociolinguistic approach, the authors introduce the models and methods they have used to trace the progress of linguistic changes in the “long” eighteenth century, 1680–1800. Aggregate findings are balanced by analysing individuals and their varying participation in these processes. The final chapter places these results in a wider context and considers them in relation to past sociolinguistic work. One of the major findings of the studies is that in most cases the overall pace of change was slow. Factors retarding change include speaker evaluation and repurposing outgoing features, in particular, for certain styles and registers.