Skip to main content Accessibility help

Not always variable: Probing the vernacular grammar

  • Alexandra D'Arcy (a1) and Sali A. Tagliamonte (a2)


Written and spoken language are known to differ substantially (Biber, 1988; 1995; Biber, Johansson, Leech, Conrad, & Finegan, 1999). Standard written language is highly uniform and governed by prescription, whereas the vernacular is most revealing of structured heterogeneity (Weinreich, Labov, & Herzog, 1968). We focus on four English morphosyntactic variables that problematize assumptions about the nature of variation in the vernacular: the genitive, the comparative, the dative, and relative pronouns. Each is characterized in casual speech by functional divides that reflect discrete configurations of variant use. After detailing the patterning of these variables in speech, we explore a characteristic arguably shared by each: its historical pathway into the language, where analogy and prestige were powerful motivations for variant choice. We suggest that this combination of systemic and social factors contributed to the nature of these variables in the vernacular grammar. Furthermore, we advocate for greater scrutiny of written and spoken data and the outcomes of change from above and below within each register. The type of innovation and its trajectory may affect the nature of the emergent variable grammar.



Hide All
Aarts, Flor. (1993). Who, whom, that and Ø in two corpora of spoken English. English Today 9:1921.
Allen, Cynthia L. (2006). Case syncretism and word order change. In Kemenade, A. V. & Los, B. (eds.), The handbook of the history of English. Oxford: Blackwell. 201223.
Altenberg, Bengst. (1982). The genitive vs. the of-construction. A study of syntactic variation in 17th Century English. Malmö: CWK Gleerup.
Andersen, Henning. (1973). Abductive and deductive change. Language 49:765793.
Armstrong, Nigel, & Mackenzie, Ian E. (2013). Standardization, ideology and linguistics. Basingstoke: Palgrave-Macmillan.
Ball, Catherine. (1996). A diachronic study of relative markers in spoken and written English. Language Variation and Change 8:227258.
Bauer, Laurie. (1994). Watching English change: An introduction to the study of linguistic change in standard Englishes in the twentieth century. London: Longman.
Beddor, Patrice S. (2009). A coarticulatory path to sound change. Language 85:407428.
Beddor, Patrice S. (2012). Perception, grammars and sound change. In Solé, M.-J. & Recasens, D. (eds.), The intitiation of sound change: Perception, production and social factors. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Biber, Douglas. (1988). Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Biber, Douglas. (1995). Dimensions of regiser variation: A cross-linguistic comparison. Cambridge: Cambrige University Press.
Biber, Douglas, & Finegan, Edward. (1997). Diachronis relations among speech-based and written registers in English. In Rissanen, M., Nevalainen, T., & Kahlas-Tarkka, L. (eds.), To explain the present: Studies in the changing English language in honour of Matti Rissanen. Helsinki: Société néophilologique. 253275.
Biber, Douglas, Johansson, Stig, Leech, Geoffrey, Conrad, Susan, & Finegan, Edward. (1999). Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Harlow: Longman.
Börjars, Kersti, Denison, David, Krajewski, Grzegorz, & Scott, Alan. (2013). Expression of possession in English: The significance of the right edge. In Börjars, K., Denison, D., & Scott, A. (eds.), Morphosyntactic categories and the expression of possessio. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 123148.
Bresnan, Joan, Cueni, Anna, Nikitina, Tatiana, & Baayen, R. Harald. (2007). Predicting the dative alternation. In Boume, G., Krämer, I., & Zwarts, J. (eds.), Cognitive foundations of interpretation. Amsterdam: Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences. 6994.
Bresnan, Joan, & Ford, Marilyn. (2010). Predicting syntax: Processing dative constructions in American and Australian varieties of English. Language 86:168213.
Bresnan, Joan, & Hay, Jennifer. (2008). Gradient grammar: An effect of animacy on the syntax of give in New Zealand and American English. Lingua 118:245259.
Chomsky, Noam. (1975). Questions of form and interpretation. Linguistic Analysis 1:75109.
Cofer, Timothy. (1975). Performance constraints on relative pronoun deletion. Linguistics 157:1332.
Collins, Peter. (1995). The indirect object construction in English: An informational approach. Linguistics 33:3549.
Curme, George O. (1931). A grammar of the English Language, III, Syntax. Boston: D.C. Heath.
D'Arcy, Alexandra. (2014). Functional partitioning and possible limits on variability: A view of adjective comparison from the vernacular. Journal of English Linguistics 42:218244.
D'Arcy, Alexandra, & Tagliamonte, Sali A. (2010). Prestige, accommodation and the legacy of relative who. Language in Society 39:389410.
De Cuypere, Ludovic. (2010). A discourse based account of the Oled English double object alternation. Sprachwissenschaft 35:337368.
Dekeyser, Xavier. (1986). English contact clauses revisited: A diachronic approach. Folia Linguistica Historica 7:107120.
Denison, David. (1998). Syntax. In Romaine, S. (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language, 1776–present day. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 92329.
Düringer, Hermann. (1923). Die Analyse im Formenbau des englischen Nomens. In Horn, W. (ed.), Beiträge zur Erforschung der Sprache und Kultur Englands und Nordamerikas. Giessen: Im Verlag des Englischen Seminars der Universitet Giessen. 132.
Faiss, Klaus. (1977). Aspekte der Englischen Sprachgeschichte. Tübingen: Narr.
Fischer, Olga. (1992). Syntax. In Blake, N. (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language. Vol. 2: 1066–1476. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 207408.
Fischer, Olga, & wan der Wurf, Wim (2006). Syntax. In Hogg, R. & Denison, D. (eds.), A history of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 109198.
Fries, Charles Carpenter, & Pike, K. (1949). Coexistent phonemic systems. Language 25:2950.
Garret, Andrew, & Johnson, Keith. (2013). Phonetic bias in soudn change. In Yu, A. (ed.), Origins of sound change: Approaches to phonologization. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 5197.
Gerwin, Johanna. (2014). Ditransitives in British English dialects. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
González-Díaz, Victorina. (2006). The origin of English periphrastic comparatives. English Studies 87:707739.
Grafmiller, Jason. (2014). Variation in English genitives across modality and genre. English Language and Linguistics 18:471496.
Gries, Stefan Th. (2002). Evidence in linguistics: Three approaches to genitives in English. In Brend, R. M., Sullivan, W. J., & Lommel, A. R. (eds.), LACUS Forum XXVIII: What constitutes evidence in linguistics. Fullerton: LACUS. 1731.
Grimm, Scott, & Bresnan, Joan. (2009). Spatiotemporal variation in the dative alternation: A study of four corpora of British and American English. Paper presented at the Third International Conference Grammar and Corpora, Mannheim, September 22–24.
Guy, Gregory R. (1988). Advanced VARBRUL analysis. In Ferrara, K., Brown, B., Walters, K., & Baugh, J. (eds.), Linguistic change and contact. Austin: Department of Linguistics, University of Texas at Austin. 124136.
Guy, Gregory R., & Bayley, Robert. (1995). On the choice of relative pronouns in English. American Speech 70:148162.
Harris, Alice C., & Campbell, Lyle. (1995). Historical syntax in cross-linguistic perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Heine, Bernd, & Kuteva, Tania. (2005). Language contact and grammatical change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hickey, Raymond. (2010). Language contact: Reconsideration and reassessment. In Hickey, R. (ed.), The handbook of language contact. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell. 128.
Hilpert, Martin. (2008). The comparative: Language structure and language use. English Language and Linguistics 12:395417.
Hinrichs, Lars, & Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt. (2007). Recent changes in the function and frequency of Standard English genitive constructions: A multivariate analysis of tagged corpora. English Language and Linguistics 11:437474.
Hinrichs, Lars, Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt, & Bohmann, Axel. (2014). Which-hunting and the standard English relative clause. International Society for the Linguistics of English 3 [ISLE]. Zurich, August 2427.
Hinrichs, Lars, Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt, & Bohmann, Axel. (forthcoming). Which-hunting and the standard English relative clause. Language 91.
Huddleston, Rodney (1971). The sentence in written English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Huddleston, Rodney, & Pullum, Geoffrey K. (2002). The Cambridge grammar of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ingham, Richard (ed.). (2010). The Anglo-Norman language and its contexts. York: York Medieval Press/Boydell Press.
Jankowski, Bridget. (2012). Cross-register language variation and change in Canadian English. PhD dissertation. University of Toronto.
Jankowski, Bridget, & Tagliamonte, Sali A. (2014). On the genitive's trail: Data and method from a sociolinguistic perspective. English Language and Linguistics 18:305329.
Johanson, Lars. (2002). Contact-induced change in a code-copying framework. In Jones, M. C. & Esch, E. (eds.), Language change: The interplay of internal, external and extra-linguistic factors. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Jones, Charles. (1972). An introduction to Middle English. London: Holt, Rinehard & Winston Inc.
Joseph, Brian D., & Janda, Brian D. (2003). On language, change, and language change—or, of history, linguistics, and historical linguistics. In Joseph, B. D. & Janda, B. D. (eds.), The handbook of historical linguistics. Maldon: Blackwell Publishers. 3180.
Jucker, Andreas H. (1993). The genitive versus the of-construction in newspaper language. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.
Kautzsch, Alexander. (2002). The historical evolution of earlier African American English: An empirical comparison of early sources. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Kirby, James. (2013). The role of probabilistic enhancement in phonologization. In Yu, A. C. L. (ed.), Origin of sound change: Approaches to phonologization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kytö, Merja. (1996a). “The best and most excelletest way”: The rivalling forms of adjective comparison in Late Middle and Early Modern English. In Svartvik, J. (ed.), Words: Proceedings of an international symposium. Stockholm: Kungl. Vitterhets Historie och Antikvitets Akademien. 123144.
Kytö, Merja. (1996b). Manual to the diachronic part of the Helsinki Corpus of English texts: Coding conventions and lists of source texts. Helsinki: Department of English, University of Helsinki.
Kytö, Merja, & Romaine, Suzanne. (1997). Competing forms of adjective comprison in Modern English: What could be more quicker and easier and more effective? In Nevalainen, T. & Kahlas-Tarkka, L. (eds.), To explain the present: Studies in the changing English language in honour of Matti Rssanen. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique. 329352.
Kytö, Merja, & Romaine, Suzanne. (2000). Adjective comparison and standardisation processes in American and British English from 1620 to the present. In Wright, L. (ed.), The development of Standard English, 1300–1800: Theories, descriptions, conflicts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 171194.
Kytö, Merja, & Romaine, Suzanne. (2006). Ajdective comparison in nineteenth-century English. In Kytö, M., Rydén, M., & Smitterbeg, E. (eds.), Nineteenth-century English: Stability and change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 194214.
Labov, William. (1963). The social motivation of a sound change. Word 19:273309.
Labov, William. (1966). The social stratification of English in New York City. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.
Labov, William. (1970). The study of language in its social context. Studium Generale 23:3087.
Labov, William. (1971). Some principles of linguistic methodology. Language in Society 1:97120.
Labov, William. (1984). Field methods of the project on linguistic change and variation. In J., Baugh & J., Sherzer (eds.), Language in use: Readings in sociolinguistics. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall. 2854.
Labov, William. (1994). Principles of linguistic change. Vol. 1: Internal factors. Cambridge: Blackwell Publishers.
Labov, William. (2006). The social stratification of English in New York City. 2nd ed.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Labov, William. (2007). Transmission and diffusion. Language 83:344387.
Labov, William. (2010). Principles of linguistic change. Vol. 3: Cognitive and cultural factors. Malden: Wiley Blackwell.
Lass, Roger. (1987). The shape of English: Structure and history. London: Dent.
Leech, Geoffrey, & Culpeper, Jonathan. (1997). The comparison of adjectives in recent British English. In Kytö, M., Rydén, M., & Smitterberg, E. (eds.), Nineteenth-century English: Stability and change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 194214.
Leech, Geoffrey, Hundt, Marianne, Mair, Christian, & Smith, Nicholas. (2009). Change in contemporary English: A grammatical study. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Levey, Stephen. (2006). Visiting London relatives. English World-Wide 27:4570.
Lindqvist, Hans. (1998). The comparison of English disyllabic adjectives in /-y/ and /-ly/ in Present-day British and American English. In Lindquist, H., Klintborg, S., Levin, M., & Estling, M. (eds.), The major varieties of English: Papers from MAVEN 97. Växjö: Acta Wexionensia. 205212.
Lindqvist, Hans. (2000). ‘Livelier /or/ more lively?’ Syntactic and contextual factors influencing the comparison of disyllabic adjectives. In Kirk, J. M. (ed.), Corpora galore: Analyses and techniques in describing English. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 125132.
Ljung, Magnus. (1997). The s-genitive and the of-construction in different types of English texts. In Fries, U., Müller, V., & Schneider, P. (eds.), From AElfric to the New York Times: Studies in English corpus linguistics. Amsterdam: Rodopi. 2132.
Mair, Christian. (2006a). Inflected genitives are spreading in present-day English but not necessarily to inanimate nouns. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter.
Mair, Christian. (2006b). Twentieth-century English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
McFadden, Thomas. (2002). The rise of the to-dative in Middle English. In Lighfoot, D. W. (ed.), Syntactic effects of morphological change. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 107123.
Meier, Hand Heinrich. (1967). The lag of relative who in the nominative. Neophilologus 51:277286.
Milroy, James. (1992). Linguistic variation and change. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
Milroy, James. (2003). On the role of the speaker in language change. In Hickey, R. (ed.), Motives for language change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 143157.
Milroy, James, & Milroy, Lesley. (1985). Authority in language: Investigating language prescription and standardisation. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Mitchell, Bruce. (1985). Old English syntax. Vols. 1, 2. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Mondorf, Britta. (2003). Support for more-support. In Rohdenburg, G. & Mondorf, B. (eds.), Determinants of grammatical variation in English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 252304.
Mondorf, Britta. (2009). More support for more-support: The role of processing constraints on the choice between syntehtic and anlytic comparative forms. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Morris, S., & Richard, L. L. D. (1872). Historical outlines of English accidence. London: Macmillan and Co.
Mufwene, Salikoko. (2013). Driving forces in English language contact linguistics. In Schreier, D. & Hundt, M. (eds.), English as a contact language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 204221.
Munske, Horst Haider. (1982). Die Rolle des Lateins als Superstratum im Deutschen und in andersen germanischen Sprachen. In Sture, U. (ed.), Die Leistung der Strategforschung in der Kreolistik: Typologische Aspekte der Sprachkontakte. Akten des 5. Symposiums über Sprachkontakt in Europa, Mannheim, 1982. Tübingen: Niemeyer.
Mustanoja, Tauno F. (1960). A Middle English syntax. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.
Nevalainen, Terttu, & Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena. (2002). The rise of relative who in early Modern English. In Poussa, P. (ed.), Relativisation on the North Sea littoral. Munich: Lincom Europa. 109121.
Ohala, John J. (1993). The phonetics of sound change. In Jones, C. (ed.), Historical linguistics: Problems and perspectives. London: Longman. 237278.
Pound, Louise. (1901). The comparison of adjectives in the 15th and 16th centuries. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.
Poutsma, Hendrik. (1926). A grammar of Late Modern English. Groningen: P. Noordhoff.
Quirk, Randolph. (1957). Relative clauses in educated spoken English. English Studies 38:97109.
Quirk, Randolph, Greenbaum, Sidney, Leech, Geoffry, & Svartvik, Jan. (1985). A comprehensive grammar of the English language. New York: Longman.
Rantavaara, Irma. (1962). On the development of the periphrastic dative in Late Middle English prose. Neuephilologische Mitteilungen 63:175203
Rissanen, Matti. (1984). The choice of relative pronouns in 17th century American English. In Fisiak, J. (ed.), Historical syntax. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 417435.
Romaine, Suzanne. (1980). The relative clause marker in Scots English: Diffusion, complexity and style as dimensions of syntactic change. Language in Society 9:221247.
Romaine, Suzanne. (1982a). Socio-historical linguistics: Its status and methodology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Romaine, Suzanne. (ed.). (1982b). Sociolinguistic variation in speech communities. London: Edward Arnold.
Rosenbach, Anette. (2002). Genitive variation in English: Conceptual factors in synchronic and diachronic studies. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Rosenbach, Anette. (2003). Aspects of iconicity and economy in the choice between the s-genitive and the of-genitive in English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Rosenbach, Anette. (2005). Animacy versus weight as determinants of grammatical variation in English. Language 81:613644.
Rosenbach, Anette. (2006). Descriptive genitives in English: A case study on constructional gradience. English Language and Linguistics 10:77118.
Rosenbach, Anette. (2008). Animacy and grammatical variation: Findings from the English genitive variation. Lingua 118:151171.
Rosenbach, Anette, & Vezzosi, Letizia. (2000). Genitive constructions in Early Modern English: New evidence from a corpus analysis. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Rydén, Mats. (1983). The emergence of who as a relativizer. Studia Linguistica 37:126134.
Sankoff, Gillian. (2013). Longitudinal studies. In Bayley, R. (ed.), The Oxford handbook of sociolinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 261279.
Schlüter, Julia. (2001). Why worser is better: The double comparative in 16th- to 17th-century English. Language Variation and Change 13:193208.
Stevens, Mary, & Harrington, Jonathan. (2014). The individual and the actuation of sound change. Loquens 1. doi:10.3989/loquens.2014.003.
Strang, Barbara M. H. (1970). A history of English. London: Methuen & Co.
Swan, Michael. (1995). Practical English usage. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt. (2006). Morphosyntactic persistence in spoken English: A corpus study at the intersection of variationist soicolinguistics, psycholinguistics, and discourse analysis. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt, & Hinrichs, Lars. (2008). Probabilistic determinants of genitive variation in spoken and written English. In Nevalainen, T., Taavitsainen, I., Pahta, P., & Korhonen, M. (eds.), The dynamics of linguistic variation: Corpus evidence on English past and present. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 291309.
Tagliamonte, Sali A. (2003–2006). Linguistic changes in Canada entering the 21st century. Research Grant. Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC). #410-2003-0005.
Tagliamonte, Sali A. (2006). Analysing sociolinguistic variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tagliamonte, Sali A. (2007–2010). Directions of change in Canadian English. Research grant. Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC). #410-070-048.
Tagliamonte, Sali A. (2010–2013). Transmission and diffusion in Canadian English. Research grant. Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. (SSHRCC). #410-101-129.
Tagliamonte, Sali A. (2012). Variationist sociolinguistics: Change, observation, interpretation. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.
Tagliamonte, Sali A. (2014). A comparative sociolinguistic analysis of the dative alternation. In Torres-Cacoullos, R., Dion, N., & Lapierre, A. (eds.), Linguistic variation: Confronting fact and theory. London: Routledge. 297318.
Tagliamonte, Sali A., & Jarmasz, Lidia-Gabriela. (2008). Variation and change in the English genitive: A sociolinguistic perspective. Linguistic Society of America. Chicago, January 4.
Tagliamonte, Sali A., Smith, Jennifer, & Lawrence, Helen. (2005). No taming the vernacular! Insights from the relatives in northern Britain. Language Variation and Change 17:75112.
Theijssen, Daphne, ten Bosch, Louis, Boves, Lou, Cranen, Bert, & van Halteren, Hans. (2013). Choosing alternatives: Using Bayesian Networks and memory-based learning to study the dative. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 9:227262.
Thomas, Russel. (1931). Syntacticial processes involved in the development of the adnominal periphrastic genitive in the English language. PhD dissertation. University of Michigan. Available at: Accessed January 31, 2014.
Thompson, Sandra A. (1995). The iconicity of “dative shift” in English: Considerations from information flow in discourse. In Landsberg, M. E. (ed.), Syntactic iconicity and linguistic freezes. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 155175.
Tottie, Gunnel. (1995). The man ø I love: An analysis of factors favouring zero relatives in written British and American English. In Melchers, G. & Warren, B. (eds.), Studies in Anglistics. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell. 201215.
Tottie, Gunnel. (1997). Relatively speaking: Relative marker usage in the British National Corpus. In Nevalainen, T. & Kahlas-Tarkka, L. (eds.), To explain the present: Studies in the changing English language in honour of Matti Rissanen. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique. 465481.
Tottie, Gunnel, & Harvie, Dawn. (2000). It's all relative: Relativization strategies in early African American English. In Poplack, S. (ed.), The English history of African American English. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. 198230.
Tottie, Gunnel, & Rey, Michel. (1997). Relativization strategies in Earlier African American Vernacular English. Language Variation and Change 9:219247.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. (1972). A history of English syntax: A transformational approach to the history of English sentence structures. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. (1982). From propositional to textual to expressive meanings: Some semantic-pragmatic aspects of grammaticalization. In Lehmann, W. P. & Malkiel, Y. (eds.), Perspectives in historical linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 245271.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. (1992). Syntax. In Hogg, R. M. (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language. Vol. 1: The beginning to 1066. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 168289.
Trips, Carola, & Stein, Achim. (forthcoming). Contact-induced changes in the argument structure of Middle English verbs on the model of Old French. In Grossman, E., Serzants, I., & Witzlack-Makarevich, A. (eds.), Special issue on valency and transitivity in contact, Journal of Language Contact.
Visser, Fredericus T. (1963–1973). An historical syntax of the English language. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Weinreich, Uriel, Labov, William, & Herzog, Marvin. (1968). Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. In Lehmann, W. P. & Malkiel, Y. (eds.), Directions for historical linguistics. Austin: University of Texas Press. 95188.
Wolk, Christoph, Bresnan, Joan, Rosenbach, Anette, & Szmrecsanyi, Benedikt. (2013). Dative and genitive variability in Late Modern English: Exploring cross-constructional variation and change. Diachronica 30:382419.
Wright, Joseph. (1898–1905). The English dialect grammar. Oxford: Clarendon Press.


Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed