Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published by De Gruyter Mouton November 30, 2019

A developmental view on incrementation in language change

  • Ailís Cournane EMAIL logo
From the journal Theoretical Linguistics


Acquisition is an intuitive place to look for explanation in language change. Each child must learn their individual grammar(s) via the indirect process of analyzing the output of others’ grammars, and the process necessarily involves social transmission over several years. On the basis of child language learning behaviors, I ask whether it is reasonable to expect the incrementation (advancement) of new variants to be kicked off by and sustained by the acquisition process. I discuss literature on how children respond to input variation, and a series of new studies experimentally testing incrementation, and argue that at least for some phenomena, young children overgeneralize innovative variants beyond their input. I sketch a model of incrementation based on initial overgeneralization, and offer further thoughts on next steps. Much collaborative work remains to precisely link analogous dynamic phenomena in learning and change.


Andersen, H. 1973. Abductive and deductive change. Language 49. 765–793.10.2307/412063Search in Google Scholar

Berko, J. 1958. The child’s learning of English morphology. Word 14(2–3). 150–177.10.1080/00437956.1958.11659661Search in Google Scholar

Boberg, C. 2011. Reshaping the vowel system: An index of phonetic innovation in Canadian English. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 17(2). 4.Search in Google Scholar

Booth, A. E. & S. R. Waxman. 2002. Word learning is ‘smart’: Evidence that conceptual information affects preschoolers’ extension of novel words. Cognition 84(1). B11–B22.10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00015-XSearch in Google Scholar

Brennan, V. 1993. Root and epistemic modal auxiliary verbs. University of Massachusetts PhD.Search in Google Scholar

Cedergren, H. 1988. The spread of language change: Verifying inferences of linguistic diffusion. In P. H. Lowenberg (ed.), Language spread and language policy: Issues, implications, and case studies, 45–60. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Chambers, J. 2003. Sociolinguistic theory. Oxford: Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

Chevrot, J.-P., A. Nardy & S. Barbu. 2011. Developmental dynamics of SES-related differences in children’s production of obligatory and variable phonological alternations. Language Sciences 33(1). 180–191.10.1016/j.langsci.2010.08.007Search in Google Scholar

Chomsky, N. 1986. Knowledge of language: Its nature, origin, and use. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group.Search in Google Scholar

Cinque, G. 1999. Adverbs and functional heads: A cross-linguistic perspective. Oxford: OUP.Search in Google Scholar

Clark, E. V. 1993. The lexicon in acquisition. Cambridge: CUP.10.1017/CBO9780511554377Search in Google Scholar

Condoravdi, C. 2002. Temporal interpretation of modals. The Construction of Meaning, 59–88.Search in Google Scholar

Cournane, A. 2014. In search of L1 evidence for diachronic reanalysis: Mapping modal verbs. Language Acquisition 21(1). 103–117.10.1080/10489223.2013.855218Search in Google Scholar

Cournane, A. 2015. Modal development: input-divergent L1 acquisition in the direction of diachronic reanalysis. University of Toronto (Canada) PhD thesis.Search in Google Scholar

Cournane, A. 2017. In defense of the child innovator. In E. Mathieu & R. Truswell (eds.), Micro-change and Macro-change in Diachronic Syntax, 10–23. Oxford: OUP.Search in Google Scholar

Cournane, A. & L. Mackenzie. in prep. SocialEyes: Testing age-stratification in child perception.Search in Google Scholar

Cournane, A. & A. T. Pérez-Leroux. under revision. Leaving obligations behind: epistemic incrementation in preschool English.Search in Google Scholar

Crisma, P. & G. Longobardi. 2009. Change, relatedness and inertia in historical syntax. In P. Crisma & G. Longobardi (eds.), Historical syntax and linguistic theory, 1–13. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199560547.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

Díaz-Campos, M. 2005. The emergence of adult-like command of sociolinguistic variables: a study of consonant weakening in Spanish-speaking children. Selected proceedings of the 6th conference on the acquisition of Spanish and Portuguese as first and second Languages, 56–65.Search in Google Scholar

Diessel, H. 2011. Grammaticalization and language acquisition. In H. Narrog & B. Heine (eds.), Handbook of grammaticalization, 130–141. Oxford: OUP.10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199586783.013.0011Search in Google Scholar

Dudley, R. E. 2017. The role of input in discovering presuppositions triggers: Figuring out what everybody already knew. College Park: University of Maryland PhD thesis.Search in Google Scholar

Fischer, O. 2003. The development of the modals in English: Radical versus gradual changes. In D. Hart (ed.), English Modality in Context, 17–32. Bern: Peter Lang.Search in Google Scholar

Gleitman, L. R. 1990. The structural sources of verb meanings. Language Acquisition 1(1). 3–55.10.1093/oso/9780199828098.003.0009Search in Google Scholar

Guy, G. R. & S. Boyd. 1990. The development of a morphological class. Language Variation and Change 2(1). 1–18.10.1017/S0954394500000235Search in Google Scholar

Hacquard, V. 2006. Aspects of modality. Cambridge, MA: M.I.T. PhD thesis.Search in Google Scholar

Hacquard, V. 2013. The grammatical category of modality. Proceedings of the 19th Amsterdam Colloquium, 19–26.Search in Google Scholar

Hale, M. 1998. Diachronic syntax. Syntax 1(1). 1–18.10.1111/1467-9612.00001Search in Google Scholar

Hall, E. & R. Maddeaux. 2018. /u/-fronting and /æ/-raising in Toronto Families. Talk Presented at New Ways of Analyzing Variation (NWAV) 47. New York University.Search in Google Scholar

Halle, M. 1964. Phonology in generative grammar. In J. Fodor & J. Katz (eds.), The structure of language, 334–352. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Search in Google Scholar

Hendriks, P. & C. Koster. 2010. Production/comprehension asymmetries in language acquisition. Lingua 120(8). 1887–1897.10.1016/j.lingua.2010.02.002Search in Google Scholar

Heycock, C. & J. Wallenberg. 2013. How variational acquisition drives syntactic change. The Journal of Comparative Germanic Linguistics 16(2–3). 127–157.10.1007/s10828-013-9056-0Search in Google Scholar

Hockett, C. F. 1950. Age-grading and linguistic continuity. Language 26(4). 449–457.10.2307/410396Search in Google Scholar

Holmes-Elliott, S. 2016. Ladies first? Adolescent peaks in a male-led change. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 22(2). 81–90.Search in Google Scholar

Holmes-Elliott, S. 2018. Future Leaders: real time incrementation of sound change between childhood and adolescence. Talk presented at the Department of Linguistics and English Language, University of Manchester. December 11, 2019.Search in Google Scholar

Hopper, P. J. & E. C. Traugott. 2003. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: CUP.10.1017/CBO9781139165525Search in Google Scholar

Hudson Kam, C. L. & E. L. Newport. 2005. Regularizing unpredictable variation: The roles of adult and child learners in language formation and change. Language Learning and Development 1(2). 151–195.10.1080/15475441.2005.9684215Search in Google Scholar

Hudson Kam, C. L. & E. L. Newport. 2009. Getting it right by getting it wrong: When learners change languages. Cognitive Psychology 59(1). 30–66.10.1016/j.cogpsych.2009.01.001Search in Google Scholar

Kerswill, P. 1996. Children, adolescents, and language change. Language Variation and Change 8(2). 177–202.10.1017/S0954394500001137Search in Google Scholar

Kerswill, P. & A. Williams. 2000. Creating a new town koine: Children and language change in Milton Keynes. Language in Society 29(1). 65–115.10.1017/S0047404500001020Search in Google Scholar

Klecha, P. 2016. Modality and embedded temporal operators. Semantics and Pragmatics 9. 9–1.10.3765/sp.9.9Search in Google Scholar

Koops, C., E. Gentry & A. Pantos. 2008. The effect of perceived speaker age on the perception of PIN and PEN vowels in Houston, Texas. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 14(2). 93–101.Search in Google Scholar

Kratzer, A. 1981. The notional category of modality. In: H.-J. Eikmeyer & H. Rieser (eds.), Words, Worlds, and Contexts, 38–74. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Search in Google Scholar

Kroch, A. S. 1989. Reflexes of grammar in patterns of language change. Language Variation and Change 1(3). 199–244.10.1017/S0954394500000168Search in Google Scholar

Labov, W. 1970. The logic of nonstandard English. In F. Williams (ed.), Language and poverty, 153–189. Amsterdam: Elsevier.10.1016/B978-0-12-754850-0.50014-3Search in Google Scholar

Labov, W. 1989. The child as linguistic historian. Language Variation and Change 1(1). 85–97.10.1017/S0954394500000120Search in Google Scholar

Labov, W. 2001. Principles of linguistic change, Volume 2: Social factors. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.10.1002/9781444327496Search in Google Scholar

Labov, W. 2007. Transmission and diffusion. Language 83(2). 344–387.10.1353/lan.2007.0082Search in Google Scholar

Lightfoot, D. 1979. Principles of diachronic syntax. Cambridge: CUP.Search in Google Scholar

Lightfoot, D. 1999. The development of language: Acquisition, change, and evolution. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Search in Google Scholar

MacWhinney, B. & C. Snow. 1985. The child language data exchange system. Journal of Child Language 12(2). 271–295.10.1017/S0305000900006449Search in Google Scholar

Marcus, G. F., S. Pinker, M. Ullman, M. Hollander, T. J. Rosen, F. Xu & H. Clahsen. 1992. Overregularization in language acquisition. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development 57. i–178.10.2307/1166115Search in Google Scholar

Marcus, G. F., S. Vijayan, S. B. Rao & P. M. Vishton. 1999. Rule learning by seven-month-old infants. Science 283(5398). 77–80.10.1126/science.283.5398.77Search in Google Scholar

Meillet, A. 1912. L’évolution des formes grammaticales. In A. Meillet (ed.), Linguistique Historique et Linguistique Générale, 130–158. Paris: Champion.Search in Google Scholar

Papafragou, A. 1998. The acquisition of modality: Implications for theories of semantic representation. Mind & Language 13(3). 370–399.10.1111/1468-0017.00082Search in Google Scholar

Pearson, B. Z., S. Fernández & D. K. Oller. 1995. Cross-language synonyms in the lexicons of bilingual infants: One language or two? Journal of Child Language 22(2). 345–368.10.1017/S030500090000982XSearch in Google Scholar

Pérez-Leroux, A. T., A. Munn, C. Schmitt & M. DeIrish. 2004. Learning definite determiners: Genericity and definiteness in English and Spanish. BUCLD 28 Proceedings Supplement.Search in Google Scholar

Pinker, S. 1984. Language learnability and language learning. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Roberts, I. & A. Roussou. 1999. A formal approach to “grammaticalization.”. Linguistics 37(6). 1011–1041.10.1515/ling.37.6.1011Search in Google Scholar

Roberts, I. G. 1985. Agreement parameters and the development of English modal auxiliaries. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 3. 21–58.10.4324/9781315310572-1Search in Google Scholar

Roberts, J. & W. Labov. 1995. Learning to talk Philadelphian: Acquisition of short a by preschool children. Language Variation and Change 7(1). 101–112.10.1017/S0954394500000910Search in Google Scholar

Roberts, J. L. 1994. Acquisition of variable rules: (-t, d) deletion and (ing) production in preschool children. University of Pennsylvania PhD thesis.Search in Google Scholar

Robinson, M. 2019. Child L1 Acquisition of Comparatives and Superlatives: Evidence for *ABA? New York University Ms.Search in Google Scholar

Roeper, T. 1999. Universal bilingualism. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 2(3). 169–186.10.1017/S1366728999000310Search in Google Scholar

Saffran, J. R., R. N. Aslin & E. L. Newport. 1996. Statistical learning by 8-month-old infants. Science 274(5294). 1926–1928.10.1126/science.274.5294.1926Search in Google Scholar

Schuler, K. D., C. Yang & E. L. Newport. 2016. Testing the Tolerance Principle: Children form productive rules when it is more computationally efficient to do so. CogSci.10.31234/ in Google Scholar

Senghas, A. & M. Coppola. 2001. Children creating language: How Nicaraguan sign language acquired a spatial grammar. Psychological Science 12(4). 323–328.10.1111/1467-9280.00359Search in Google Scholar

Singleton, J. L. & E. L. Newport. 2004. When learners surpass their models: The acquisition of American Sign Language from inconsistent input. Cognitive Psychology 49(4). 370–407.10.1016/j.cogpsych.2004.05.001Search in Google Scholar

Smith, J., M. Durham & L. Fortune. 2007. “Mam, my trousers is fa’in doon!”: Community, caregiver, and child in the acquisition of variation in a Scottish dialect. Language Variation and Change 19(1). 63–99.10.1017/S0954394507070044Search in Google Scholar

Smith, J., M. Durham & H. Richards. 2013. The social and linguistic in the acquisition of sociolinguistic norms: Caregivers, children, and variation. Linguistics 51(2). 285–324.10.1515/ling-2013-0012Search in Google Scholar

Snyder, W. 2007. Child language: The parametric approach. Oxford: OUP.Search in Google Scholar

Tagliamonte, S. 2011. Variationist sociolinguistics: Change, observation, interpretation, vol. 40. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.Search in Google Scholar

Tagliamonte, S. A. & A. D’Arcy. 2007. The modals of obligation/necessity in Canadian perspective. English World-Wide 28(1). 47–87.10.1075/eww.28.1.04tagSearch in Google Scholar

Tagliamonte, S. A. & A. D’Arcy. 2009. Peaks beyond phonology: Adolescence, incrementation, and language change. Language 85(1). 58–108.10.1353/lan.0.0084Search in Google Scholar

Traugott, E. C. 1989. On the rise of epistemic meanings in English: An example of subjectification in semantic change. Language 65(1). 31–55.10.2307/414841Search in Google Scholar

Traugott, E. C. 2011. Modality from a historical perspective. Language and Linguistics Compass 5(6). 381–396.10.1111/j.1749-818X.2011.00280.xSearch in Google Scholar

van Dooren, A., A. Dieuleveut, A. Cournane & V. Hacquard. 2017. Learning what must and can must and can mean. Proceedings of the 21st Amsterdam Colloquium.Search in Google Scholar

van Gelderen, E. 2004. Grammaticalization as economy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.71Search in Google Scholar

van Gelderen, E. (ed). 2009. Cyclical change. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/la.146Search in Google Scholar

Walkden, G. 2012. Against inertia. Lingua 122(8). 891–901.10.1016/j.lingua.2012.03.001Search in Google Scholar

Walkden, G. 2017. The actuation problem. In A. Ledgeway & I. Roberts (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of historical syntax. Cambridge: CUP.10.1017/9781107279070.020Search in Google Scholar

Wallenberg, J. C. 2013. A unified theory of stable variation, syntactic optionality, and syntactic change. Talk delivered at the 15th Diachronic Generative Syntax (DiGS) Conference, University of Ottawa.Search in Google Scholar

Weinreich, U., W. Labov & M. Herzog. 1968. Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.Search in Google Scholar

Werker, J. F. & K. Byers-Heinlein. 2008. Bilingualism in infancy: First steps in perception and comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 12(4). 144–151.10.1016/j.tics.2008.01.008Search in Google Scholar

Xu, F. & S. Pinker. 1995. Weird past tense forms. Journal of Child Language 22(3). 531–556.10.1017/S0305000900009946Search in Google Scholar

Yang, C. D. 2000. Internal and external forces in language change. Language Variation and Change 12(03). 231–250.10.1017/S0954394500123014Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2019-11-30
Published in Print: 2019-12-18

© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Downloaded on 2.3.2024 from
Scroll to top button