Language change and language acquisition

The aim of this paper is to present diachronic changes in terms of the conditions of first language acquisition. Grammars, seen as mental organs, may change between two generations. A change is initiated when (a population of) learners converge on a grammatical system which differs in at least one parameter value from the system internalized by the speakers of the previous generation. Learnability issues then connect to both language acquisition and language change, and understanding language changes depends on understanding how children acquire their native language. Acquisition is a process in which Universal Grammar (UG) interacts with a context-specific set of Primary Linguistic Data (PLD: the linguistic input to the child-learner) and uses these PLD as the source for triggers or cues that map the innate (preexperience) knowledge to a mature grammar. If a certain phenomenon has survived through many generations, it must have been reflected clearly in the PLD. Then, if we note that it has changed, something in the language performance of the previous generation must have changed, and thereby paved the way for a new interpretation. Innovation leading to linguistic variation in the PLD and gradual changes in PLD play a central role in the explanation here: the immediate cause of a grammar change must lie in some alternation in the PLD. We will look at how the language spoken in a certain community (E-language) may gradually become different from the language that originally served as the triggering experience. These changes in the E-language also mean changes in the input available to the child-learners of the next generation and a motivation for a different parameter setting has arisen

Cues and expressions

A number of European languages have undergone a change from object-verb to verb-object order. We focus on the change in English and Icelandic, showing that while the structural change was the same, it took place at different times and different ways in the two languages, triggered by different E-language changes. As seen from the English viewpoint, low-level facts of inflection morphology may express the relevant cue for parameters, and so the loss of inflection may lead to a grammar change. This analysis does not carry over to Icelandic, as the loss of OV there took place despite rich case morphology. We aim to show how this can be explained within a cue-style approach, arguing for a universal set of cues. However, the relevant cue may be expressed differently among languages: While it may have been expressed through morphology in English, it as expressed through information structure in Icelandic. In both cases, external effects led to fewer expressions of the relevant (universal) cue and a grammar change took place

Verb particles in Older Icelandic

Older Icelandic had various word order patterns with verb particles, including both pre- and postverbal particles. The most frequent patterns in the attested corpus show a preverbal particle and a postverbal direct object, or a preverbal particle and a preverbal direct object. In the earliest texts, dating from the fourteenth century, preverbal particles are preferred over postverbal particles, although both pre- and postverbal particles co-exist in the corpus for several centuries. In this paper, we will shown how a small clause analysis of verb particles, together with a remnant VP movement framework (Hróarsdóttir 2000) can account for the attested orders of verb particles in the history of Icelandic