Abstract

Currently, the study of linguistic change is understood to examine the process linked to the most general aspects of linguistic variation. It seems inexcusable today to focus on sociolinguistic methodology by adopting a purely sociolinguistic approach to the history of language. Sociolinguistics is the discipline that has best explained the mechanisms of change in language, but the incorporation of this approach into diachronic research is not free from difficulties, one of which is the relative ignorance of how past societies functioned, as well as the limitations of relying exclusively on written texts. Given these circumstances, it is imperative to add a wide range of documental material to traditionally used literary sources, and especially important to include those that are closest to oral speech as well as those representing lower and less common registers. In this process we must remember that, over and above the work carried out by institutions, it has been the progressive rates of literacy in society, promoted by general schooling, that has contributed through written texts to the establishment of the linguistic standard.