Language change

A text uses 'thou dost', the spelling 'publick' and 'shew', and long, subordinated sentences with capitalised Nouns. Roughly when is it from, and how do you know?

1. 01Grammar

   'thou dost' uses the second-person singular pronoun 'thou' and the '-st'/'-th' verb inflections that were dying out through the seventeenth century, pointing to Early Modern English.

2. 02Orthography

   The spellings 'publick' (later 'public') and 'shew' (later 'show') and the capitalisation of common nouns are characteristic of the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, before spelling was fully standardised by Johnson and later dictionaries.

3. 03Syntax and graphology

   Long, heavily subordinated sentences and the capitalisation of nouns are typical of formal Early Modern and early Late Modern prose.

4. 04Conclude

   Together these features date the text to roughly the seventeenth or very early eighteenth century - Early Modern English shading into Late Modern, before the standardisation of spelling.

Result: The 'thou'/'-st' morphology, the pre-standard spellings 'publick' and 'shew', the noun capitalisation and the dense subordination together date the text to roughly the seventeenth or early eighteenth century, before spelling standardisation - a dating built from grammar, orthography and graphology together.

Classify the formation of 'podcast', 'app', 'to unfriend' and 'selfie', and explain what drove them.

1. 01'podcast'

   A blend of 'iPod' and 'broadcast' - two words fused - coined to name a new form of downloadable audio, filling a lexical gap created by the technology.

2. 02'app'

   A clipping of 'application', shortened for the frequent, casual reference the smartphone era demanded - efficiency driving the change.

3. 03'to unfriend'

   Affixation (prefix 'un-') plus conversion of the noun 'friend' to a verb - coined to name a social action specific to social-media platforms.

4. 04'selfie'

   Affixation/suffixation of an informal '-ie' to 'self', naming a new photographic practice enabled by front-facing phone cameras - again a technological need.

Result: 'podcast' (blend), 'app' (clipping), 'unfriend' (affixation + conversion) and 'selfie' (suffixation) are each formed by a nameable process and each fills a lexical gap opened by new digital technology - a clear case of lexis adapting responsively to social and technological need.

The word 'awful' once meant 'inspiring awe/reverence' and now typically means 'very bad' or, weakened, merely 'very'. Analyse the change.

1. 01State the original meaning

   'Awful' derives from 'awe' + '-ful' and once meant 'full of awe', 'awe-inspiring' - a positive or at least powerful sense (as 'the awful majesty of God').

2. 02Identify pejoration

   The evaluation shifted downward to 'very bad' or 'unpleasant' - a clear case of pejoration, the meaning becoming less favourable.

3. 03Identify weakening

   In casual use 'awful' has also weakened into a mere intensifier ('awfully kind', 'awful lot'), losing much of its semantic force - the weakening process.

4. 04Explain and evaluate

   Both shifts are ordinary operations of semantic change; the modern meaning is not a 'misuse' but the outcome of processes that produced the earlier meaning too - change as adaptation, not decay.

Result: 'Awful' shows pejoration (awe-inspiring -> very bad) and weakening (into a bare intensifier); the modern senses are the normal product of semantic-change processes, illustrating that meaning shift is systematic adaptation rather than corruption.

A commentator objects to a split infinitive ('to boldly go'). Evaluate the objection using the history of standardisation.

1. 01State the 'rule'

   The prescriptive rule forbids placing a word between 'to' and the verb ('to boldly go' rather than 'to go boldly').

2. 02Trace its origin

   The rule was promoted by eighteenth- and nineteenth-century prescriptivists partly on the model of Latin, where the infinitive is a single word that cannot be split - a rule imported from another language, not derived from English usage.

3. 03Test it against usage

   English has split infinitives throughout its history, and doing so is often clearer; the 'rule' describes a codifier's preference, not a structural fact of English.

4. 04Reach a judgement

   The objection reflects a codified prescriptive convention with a questionable Latinate basis, not a genuine error; evaluated historically, the split infinitive is standard English usage, and the complaint is an attitude, not a linguistic fact.

Result: The split-infinitive 'rule' is a prescriptive convention imported from Latin by eighteenth-century codifiers, not a fact about English structure or history; evaluated against actual usage and the story of standardisation, the objection is an attitude rather than a real error.

A new slang term spreads from a city youth subculture, is adopted slowly, then rapidly nationwide via social media, then reaches near-universal use. Which theories explain this, and how?

1. 01Functional theory

   The term filled a lexical/expressive gap - it named something speakers wanted to express - which explains why it caught on at all (need).

2. 02Social spread and prestige

   Its origin in a youth subculture and its spread by imitation reflect covert prestige and social networks: adopting it signals belonging, and social media provides dense bridging connections.

3. 03S-curve diffusion

   The slow-then-rapid-then-slow adoption fits the S-curve model: innovators first, then a tipping point into rapid majority uptake, then the final laggards.

4. 04Evaluate

   No single theory suffices: need explains why, prestige and networks explain the social route, and the S-curve describes the shape of diffusion - the causes interact.

Result: The spread is best explained by combining theories: functional need explains its coining, covert prestige and social networks explain its social route, and the S-curve describes its slow-fast-slow diffusion - showing that change is patterned and multi-causal, not simply random.

A newspaper column complains that 'text-speak and slang are destroying the English language through sheer laziness'. Evaluate the attitude using Aitchison and Crystal.

1. 01Identify the metaphors

   The complaint uses the 'damp spoon' image (laziness) and the 'crumbling castle' image (English being 'destroyed', implying a once-perfect edifice).

2. 02Apply Aitchison's rebuttals

   Aitchison answers that change is not laziness - creating and using new forms requires linguistic skill and effort - and that there was never a perfect, fixed English to be destroyed; the language has always changed.

3. 03Add Crystal's point

   Crystal notes that abbreviation in texting requires knowing the full forms and is not new, so it evidences competence, not illiteracy - the panic is a recurrent, unfounded moral panic about language.

4. 04Evaluate what it encodes

   Concede that a shared standard has value, but note that the complaint targets the language of the young and the informal, encoding a generational and social judgement about the SPEAKERS as much as the language - an attitude, not a fact.

Result: The column relies on Aitchison's damp-spoon and crumbling-castle metaphors, both answerable; Crystal shows the text-speak panic is unfounded and recurrent. Evaluated critically, the complaint encodes generational prejudice as linguistic standards - a descriptivist judgement that concedes the value of a shared standard but rejects 'change as decline'.