Functional and Cognitive Linguistics (grammar and typology).

Understanding how, when, and why do the functions and forms of grammar change the way they do, in order to gain insight in human cognition and evolution. The fundamental questions that continue to guide this research are: 1. To what extent is language change dependent on linguistic variation between individuals? For a long time studies on language change treated language as an abstract object cut loose from its users. But obviously language cannot exist without them. While sociolinguists have paid attention to variation between speakers based on social variables (such as age, gender, class), the individual matter less to them, as it is bound to align itself to its peers. Such a view is problematic in view of recent theories that consider language to function as a complex adaptive system, not only at the aggregate level (being an emergent property of the interaction of multiple agents), but also at the level of the individuals themselves. Since language is learnt based on input, which is unique to every individual, different individuals are expected to make different (linguistic) abstractions and generalizations. Cognitive learning styles appear not to be identical either. People do not always share linguistic generalizations even if belonging to the same community. One objective is to shed light on how this cognitive variation feeds into language at the community level. 2. To which degree do individuals change their syntactic behavior across their lifespans? This second question relates to the role of cognitive aging in syntactic change. Two conflicting views have dominated this debate. Research embedded in the generative tradition takes syntactic structures to crystallize into a stable state in early childhood. Proponents of this view typically consider children as the primary instigators of change. Conversely, usage-based/constructionist approaches attribute a central role to language use in both the acquisition process and in language change. Linguistic change is considered to originate in speaker interaction. Speakers may adopt novel constructions both in childhood and later in life, where the second option is the most likely for constructions with complex pragmatic features (such as the grammaticalization of epistemic meaning). From earlier research it appeared that both qualitative and quantitative grammatical change in adult life is attested, but at the same time limited by entrenched use as well as social inhibition. A full understanding of change will have to involve both generational incrementation and lifespan change. 3. To what degree do changes in different constructions affect each other, also at the individual level? During much of its history English has drifted towards a stricter SOV word order, and much more so than other Germanic languages. One effect of this is that the subject slot expanded to host a greater variety of subject types, including for instance a higher rate of inanimate subjects (rather than prototypical agent-subjects). My ERC project investigated the evidence that individuals are perceptive of large-scale shifts like this, and whether their grammars show lifespan developments that feed into them. For example, it appears that there has been an increase of inanimate subjects in progressive constructions. Do individuals, then, who participate in this increase, also partici¬pate in the increase of inanimate subjects in other constructions? Or are individuals unaware of these large-scale emergent properties? Turns out individuals do associate closely related constructions in their minds. However, it has so far been impossible to find conclusive evidence for the idea that such constructions also coevolve across the lifespan. While lack of data is partly to blame, there are indicat¬ions that this type of longer-term coevolution is out of the purview of individual language users and is rather an emergent effect, as is common in complex adaptive systems. The issue will be further investigated.

Keywords:FUNCTIONAL LINGUISTICS, HISTORICAL LINGUISTICS, COGNITION, LINGUISTICS

Disciplines:Corpus linguistics, Diachronic linguistics, Syntax, Theoretical linguistics