This article describes results from a subjective reaction test of Japanese speakers' attitudes toward keigo ‘polite language’. Hypotheses regarding attitudes toward “correct” language were for the most part verified, whereas attitudes toward “incorrect” forms were decidedly mixed. These results provide a first step in ascertaining attitudes toward a set of forms that are said to be in a state of flux in contemporary Japan. Also impinging on interpretation of the data are questions of descriptive terminology and culture. Such issues provide additional insight into the controversy within sociolinguistics over quantitative description and normative explanation.

Since the 15th century, negative infinitives in French have undergone a change from ne V pas to ne pas V. This change takes place at different times, depending on the nature of the verb. Lexical verbs undergo the change between 1550 and 1750, modals (pouvoir, vouloir, devoir) essentially change between 1650 and 1900, and auxiliaries have been changing at a slow pace since 1650. We explore the idea that, for main verbs, the change in word order reflects a change in the position of pas, while the change in the position of modals and auxiliaries results from the fact that these verbs start assuming a position lower in the structure. Our analysis of the historically different evolution of each type of verb is based on their lexical properties and their distinct affinities with abstract Tense.

It has often been claimed that it-cleft complements differ syntactically from restrictive relative clauses. Alleged differences in the distribution and relative frequency of wh-forms in the two clause types are generally offered to support this view, but such claims have not been empirically verified. In this study, we examine synchronic and diachronic data for clefts and relative clauses and show that the major claims are unsupported. The diachronic data further show that cleft complements and restrictive relative clauses have changed together over time and at the same rate. On the constant rate hypothesis, the evidence supports the position that the two clause types are not syntactically distinct.

This article is a quantitative diachronic study of the object markers ba˘ and jiāng in Chinese. Traditionally, it has been claimed (Chao, 1968; Li & Thompson, 1981; Lü, 1955; Wang, 1943–44; among others) that ba˘ and Ji¯ng have undergone the same process of grammaticalization and have acquired the same function over time, so that they have become interchangeable. The present article challenges this view and provides evidence showing that, in the texts where both are used, each has its own distinctive functions. In the early stage of their grammaticalization, the major difference between them is the direction of motion relative to the agent: ba˘ tends to express motion toward the agent, whereas Jiāng tends to express motion away from the agent. Later, when both ba˘ and Jiāng become object markers, ba˘ is more likely to be used in informal texts, whereas Jiāng is more likely to be used in formal texts. I argue that it is this difference that led to the disappearance of Jiāng in written texts of modern times.

Spanish grammarians used to say that the demonstrative adverbs aquí ‘here’ and acá ‘here’ can alternate in some contexts. They attempt to explain the alternation by appealing to one of two hypotheses, which can be identified as the movement-to-a-goal hypothesis and the delimitation hypothesis. The former states that acá is associated with movement directed to a goal, whereas aquí is associated with all other possibilities. The latter states that the place denoted by aquí is less limited and defined than the place denoted by acá The present article evaluates both hypotheses in a corpus of Venezuelan Spanish. The evaluation takes into account the kind of place denoted by aquí and acá (goal of movement, source of movement, place of transit, and location) and also the prepositions and verbs used when the adverbs denote the goal of movement. The results of the quantitative analysis prove the validity of the delimitation hypothesis.