Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Dynamic resonance and social reciprocity in lan...


Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Dynamic resonance and social reciprocity in language change: The case of Good morrow

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal article

E-pub ahead of print
<mark>Journal publication date</mark>5/10/2017
<mark>Journal</mark>Language Sciences
<mark>State</mark>E-pub ahead of print
Early online date5/10/17
<mark>Original language</mark>English


Entrenchment (i.e. Langacker, 1987) does not necessarily lead to predictable behaviour. This study aims at complementing the usage-based model of language change by oper- ationalising the role of dialogic creativity as a mechanism that can be in competition with conventionalization and grammaticalization. We provide a distinctive collexeme analysis (i.e. Hilpert, 2006) focussing on the constructionalization of the dialogic pair [A: good morrow B e B: (good) morrow (A)] from the 15th up to the 18th century. After reaching the highest degree of entrenchment and automatisation, the dialogic pair will show an increasing tendency to be creatively re-modelled with ad-hoc meanings during online exchanges by means of dynamic resonance (Du Bois, 2014) and non-reciprocal behaviour. We define this creative process of large-scale alteration as entrenchment inhibition. From our data it will emerge that entrenchment inhibition is triggered by spontaneous attempts of producing a creative ‘surplus’ over the expected social reciprocity (Gouldner, 1960) of conventionalized exchanges. This tendency will be shown to be driven by marked attempts of polite and impolite behaviour.

Bibliographic note

This is the author’s version of a work that was accepted for publication in Language Sciences. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Language Sciences, ??, ?, 2018 DOI: 10.1016/j.langsci.2017.09.004