From iyanovic at andrew.cmu.edu Fri Sep 4 20:15:32 2015 From: iyanovic at andrew.cmu.edu (Igor Yanovich) Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 20:15:32 -0400 Subject: [Puzzles in Language Change] reading for Sep 9: Tagliamonte & D'Arcy (2009) Message-ID: <085e397af23a373ab0ba4237c9531478.squirrel@webmail.andrew.cmu.edu> Dear everyone, We will start with a discussion of Tagliamonte & D'Arcy (2009), see the attachment. It is a long and rich paper. The features which made me choose it as our first reading are: - it introduces a number of concepts, beliefs and techniques that are common in sociolinguistics, but not among linguists in general (the paper is published in Language, which concentrates on papers of significance to a broad linguistic audience); - it offers a wealth of empirical data, and references some more; - the data illustrate two recurring patterns found in language change: the "S-curve" and the "adolescent peak"; - the authors use the data in order to test a specific explicit model, and adjust it as the result. Since the paper is 50 pages long, it's probable that you will only skim it. I'd suggest reading Section 1-2 in whole; taking at least a quick look at Section 5, which presents the ongoing linguistic changes from which the main data come; and looking into Section 6, especially into the diagrams. The rest, I think, can be safely discussed at our session next Wednesday, but becoming acquainted in advance with the mentioned parts will likely pay off. In case you have specific questions as you read, you may write either to me, or to this whole list. Or you can write them down so that we can discuss them at the session. I will also send in a separate email a chapter from a state-of-the-art sociolinguistics textbook that introduces many different types and patterns of change. It can be skimmed for fun, used as a reference, etc. All the best, Igor -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Tagliamonte D\'Arcy 2009.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 489790 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://lists.andrew.cmu.edu/mailman/private/puzzles-in-language-change/attachments/20150904/f23b618c/attachment-0001.pdf From iyanovic at andrew.cmu.edu Fri Sep 4 20:21:21 2015 From: iyanovic at andrew.cmu.edu (Igor Yanovich) Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 20:21:21 -0400 Subject: [Puzzles in Language Change] for use as reference: Ch 02 of Tagliamonte (2012) Message-ID: The attached file discusses a number of patterns of linguistic change observed by sociolinguists. For instance, if you wonder what "age grading" is, the chapter has a section on it. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Tagliamonte 2012 Ch02.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 10414643 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://lists.andrew.cmu.edu/mailman/private/puzzles-in-language-change/attachments/20150904/5084a15a/attachment-0001.pdf From iyanovic at andrew.cmu.edu Fri Sep 4 20:29:48 2015 From: iyanovic at andrew.cmu.edu (Igor Yanovich) Date: Fri, 4 Sep 2015 20:29:48 -0400 Subject: [Puzzles in Language Change] plans for the next few weeks Message-ID: <68887a474e7fe5c0a684d4914d0e02a6.squirrel@webmail.andrew.cmu.edu> Dear everyone, Just to give you an idea of what to expect: we'll see how the discussion on Sep 9 goes, but my default plan is to use Sep 16 to finish the discussion of Tagliamonte & D'Arcy (2009), if need be, and then discuss two short chapters from a book by Amy Devitt (1989) on several Anglicization changes in Scots English in the 16-17th centuries. It will provide us with more examples for actual trajectories of change, so we can see for ourselves how much they resemble "S-curves", and how they correspond to the phenomena Tagliamonte & D'Arcy discuss. After that, in Week 3, we'll discuss a very different paper, Reali & Griffiths (2010), which is completely theoretical. Among other things it claims to have derived the S-curve for linguistic changes from quite simple assumptions, different from those of Tagliamonte & D'Arcy. After that, we will turn to Kroch, which will feature more S-curves, the Constant Rate Hypothesis, and the idea of competing grammars. Best, Igor From iyanovic at andrew.cmu.edu Mon Sep 14 13:10:48 2015 From: iyanovic at andrew.cmu.edu (Igor Yanovich) Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 13:10:48 -0400 Subject: [Puzzles in Language Change] reading for Sep 16: Reali & Griffiths (2010) Message-ID: <9428b3ecd01d1404d56792468a735d88.squirrel@webmail.andrew.cmu.edu> Dear everyone, The reading for this week is Reali & Griffiths (2010), attached. I apologize for sending it so late - I didn't feel well over the weekend. Also attached is a supplemental reading Bentley et al. (2010), which is a published reply to Reali and Griffiths, providing a bit more perspective to their paper. Reali & Griffiths (2010) is only 7 pages long, but it is mathematically and conceptually dense. Please try to read all of it in one quick pass, without dwelling on the parts you do not understand, and specifically on the math - if you are not already familiar with such stuff, it may be faster for you to understand what is going on during the reading group than on your own. As you skim through, please concentrate on Sections 3a, 4a and 5 (the conclusion). Together, they are just 1.5 pages of text. There is a broad and a narrow reasons why I selected this paper. The broad reason is that it introduces several lines of formal thinking about language evolution and language change which form quite a literature on their own, but are not well-known among linguists (and often, in turn, are themselves not very well-informed about what's going on in linguistics). The main research sequence this type of approach is that we make particular modeling assumptions, then study the behavior of our model, and then decide whether it's a useful model for how language change works. Of course, we may often build the model in the first place because we want to model a particular linguistic phenomenon. Then we will have a hunch about what our model should and should not capture. But the general focus is on understanding how the model works, and testing the model often does not involve any _specific_ linguistic dataset. In particular, Reali & Griffiths's contribution in this paper is building a connection between TWO possible ways to model language change and language maintenance. One approach is to try to import machinery from population genetics, and from studies of evolution in general, into linguistics. On the linguistic side, Croft (2000) builds an abstract framework along those lines, and he has some subsequent papers with collaborators where they actually do modeling - we will look at one of those papers in a few weeks. On the "formal", non-linguistic side, there have been several people trying to apply mathematical methods from evolution studies to language. One example is the book Niyogi (2006). Another research tradition may be called the Iterated Learning paradigm. The basic idea there is to model language transmission through a chain of agents (=speakers) who infer a grammar from the observed data, and then generate a new sample of data which is used by the next generation learner. In other words, this paradigm formalizes the kind of assumptions linguists usually make when thinking about transmitting language through language acquisition. On the bright side, the formal model allows us to see what predictions we can derive. On the less bright side, the actual models that people built and tested are all quite simplistic, not getting near the complexity of real languages. However, studying such simplistic models is a necessary step if we want to eventually figure out the dynamics of learning for more complex grammars. An important reference if you want to understand Iterated Learning better is Griffiths & Kalish (2007), available online at https://cocosci.berkeley.edu/tom/papers/iteratedcogsci.pdf What Reali & Griffiths (2010) do, is to show that the behavior induced by iterated learning actually amounts to the behavior induced by a very simple and common population-genetics model. In this way, they connect two traditions, which allows for transfer of results between them. Also, importantly, they provide one possible basis why population-genetics techniques might be applicable to language: if population-genetics-style behavior arises as the result of iterated learning, this provides us with a kind of basis for evolutionary analyses that knowledge about DNA and mutations gives us for biological evolution. The narrow reason I wanted to discuss Reali & Griffiths is in their section 4a. There, they try to show that their techniques lead to the emergence of S-curves of change. But there is actually a problem with their argument, as we will discuss. I think that identifying this problem may be, among other things, a good example of how to approach modeling papers if one has linguistic interests. Also at the meeting, we will do a quick follow-up on Labov's model for the adolescent peak and the S-curve. It turns out that his particular model, which was also assumed by Tagliamonte & D'Arcy, actually does not work as intended. (There is no big substantial problem - the data are still the data. But the model cannot be as Labov defines it.) See (some of) you on Wednesday! -Igor -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Reali Griffiths 2010 Words as alleles- connecting language evolution with Bayesian learners to models of genetic drift.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 317087 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.andrew.cmu.edu/pipermail/puzzles-in-language-change/attachments/20150914/3d9b627e/attachment-0002.pdf -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Bentley et al 2011 Comment on Reali Griffiths.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 178680 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.andrew.cmu.edu/pipermail/puzzles-in-language-change/attachments/20150914/3d9b627e/attachment-0003.pdf From iyanovic at andrew.cmu.edu Wed Sep 16 13:39:27 2015 From: iyanovic at andrew.cmu.edu (Igor Yanovich) Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2015 13:39:27 -0400 Subject: Why Labov's model does not work (as intended) Message-ID: <6e6c3f57eb669bc58efd6cb850a58743.squirrel@webmail.andrew.cmu.edu> Dear everyone, I'm attaching a short note illustrating the problem with Labov's incrementation story. I'll bring copies to the group's meeting today, so this is for the benefit of those who won't be able to make it to the meeting. All the best, Igor -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Why Labov\'s model doesn\'t work.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 588247 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.andrew.cmu.edu/pipermail/puzzles-in-language-change/attachments/20150916/8289c0ac/attachment-0001.pdf From iyanovic at andrew.cmu.edu Fri Sep 18 12:40:34 2015 From: iyanovic at andrew.cmu.edu (Igor Yanovich) Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 12:40:34 -0400 Subject: [Puzzles in language change] NO MEETING on Sep 23 Message-ID: <3e69c6b96556ebd9dc02c396bb395556.squirrel@webmail.andrew.cmu.edu> Dear everyone, As the next Wednesday is Yom Kippur, quite a few people won't be able to come, and therefore it's wise to cancel that particular meeting. At the same time, the week after that I'll be away in NYC on Wednesday (because I need to apply for a visa), so the usual time will not work. Later I will send around a doodle poll to find out whether we can do a make-up session - for example, on Friday Sep 25 or Monday Sep 28. At that session, we will continue discussing population genetics models and Reali & Griffiths, and will also look a bit at some further empirical examples of "S-curves" from the work of Amy Devitt, to be sent later in a separate email. Have a good weekend! All the best, Igor From iyanovic at andrew.cmu.edu Fri Sep 18 15:09:47 2015 From: iyanovic at andrew.cmu.edu (Igor Yanovich) Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 15:09:47 -0400 Subject: [Puzzles in language change] next reading: Ch.2-3 of Devitt (1989) Message-ID: Dear everyone, Attached is Devitt (1989) "Standardizing written English. Diffusion in the case of Scotland 1520-1659". We will look at Chapters 2 and 3 of the book, mostly using them as rich sources of data about how language change proceeds on the scale of centuries, as opposed to decades that we looked at in Tagliamonte & D'Arcy's paper. I expect we will start the discussion of Devitt on the week of Sep 28-Oct 2, but will probably finish it only on Oct 7. In this text, take a look at the definition of the variables, and then at some graphs. We will mostly discuss those graphs and how they relate to each other and to what we read earlier. All the best, Igor From iyanovic at andrew.cmu.edu Fri Sep 18 15:10:44 2015 From: iyanovic at andrew.cmu.edu (Igor Yanovich) Date: Fri, 18 Sep 2015 15:10:44 -0400 Subject: [Puzzles in language change] next reading: Ch.2-3 of Devitt (1989) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <2f265dd2cf83128967e029ba7fc30db2.squirrel@webmail.andrew.cmu.edu> I apologize - here is the actual file. -Igor > Dear everyone, > > Attached is Devitt (1989) "Standardizing written English. Diffusion in the > case of Scotland 1520-1659". > We will look at Chapters 2 and 3 of the book, mostly using them as rich > sources of data about how language change proceeds on the scale of > centuries, as opposed to decades that we looked at in Tagliamonte & > D'Arcy's paper. > > I expect we will start the discussion of Devitt on the week of Sep 28-Oct > 2, but will probably finish it only on Oct 7. > > In this text, take a look at the definition of the variables, and then at > some graphs. We will mostly discuss those graphs and how they relate to > each other and to what we read earlier. > > > All the best, > Igor > > _______________________________________________ > Puzzles-in-language-change mailing list > Puzzles-in-language-change at lists.andrew.cmu.edu > https://lists.andrew.cmu.edu/mailman/listinfo/puzzles-in-language-change > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Devitt 1989.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 6818254 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://lists.andrew.cmu.edu/pipermail/puzzles-in-language-change/attachments/20150918/1e2ecb8a/attachment-0001.pdf