Cover not available
Part of
Exploring Future Paths for Historical Sociolinguistics
Edited by Tanja Säily, Arja Nurmi, Minna Palander-Collin and Anita Auer
[Advances in Historical Sociolinguistics 7] 2017
► pp. 275–302

“Vernacular universals” in nineteenth-century grammar writing

This article investigates nineteenth-century prescriptive grammar writing for comments on four purported “vernacular universals”: multiple negation, adverbs without -ly, you was, and existential there is/there was with plural subjects. These features were already going out of (written) language use, but were actively stigmatized as faulty, uneducated or socially undesirable by prescriptive grammar writers. However, there are national and individual differences in salience and the degree of stigmatization that still affect the status of these non-standard features today.
Keywords: prescriptivism, grammar writing, nineteenth-century English, non-standard English, stigmatization, morphosyntax, multiple negation, zero adverbs, singular was , existentials
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The Collection of Nineteenth-Century Grammars (CNG)
  • 3.Case studies
    • 3.1Multiple negation
    • 3.2Adverbs without -ly
    • 3.3 You was vs. you were
    • 3.4 There is/there was with plural subjects
    • 3.5Epithets
  • 4.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
  • Appendix
Published online: 19 December 2017
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ahs.7.11and
References (68)
References
Allen, William. 1824. An English grammar; with exercises, notes, and questions, 3rd edn., revised and improved. London: G. and W. B. Whittaker.Google Scholar
Anderwald, Lieselotte. 2001. Was/were-variation in non-standard British English today. English World-Wide 22. 1–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2002. Negation in non-standard British English: Gaps, regularizations and asymmetries (Studies in Germanic linguistics 8). London & New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2005. Negative concord in British English dialects. In Yoko Iyeiri (ed.), Aspects of English negation, 113–137. Amsterdam: John Benjamins; and Tokyo: Yushodo Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2012. Negation in varieties of English. In Raymond Hickey (ed.), Areal features of the anglophone world, 299–328. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2014. “Pained the eye and stunned the ear”: Language ideology and the progressive passive in the nineteenth century. In Simone Pfenninger, Olga Timofeeva, Anne-Christine Gardner, Alpo Honkapohja, Marianne Hundt & Daniel Schreier (eds.), Contact, variation, and change in the history of English, 113–136. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015. The 19th-century perspective on 18th-century grammar writing. In Jana Gohrisch & Rainer Emig (eds.), Anglistentag 2014 Hannover, 35–47. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag.Google Scholar
. 2016. Language between description and prescription: Verb categories in nineteenth-century grammars of English. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Andrew, James. 1817. Institutes of grammar, as applicable to the English language, or as introductory to the study of other languages, systematically arranged, and briefly explained. To which are added some chronological tables. London: Black, Parbury, and Allen.Google Scholar
Anonymous. 1885. Summary of English grammar; compiled for the use of the Notting Hill high school. London: Rivingtons.Google Scholar
Bailey, Rufus William. 1855. English grammar: A simple, concise, and comprehensive manual of the English language. Designed for the use of schools, academies, and as a book for general reference in the language. In four parts, 10th edn. Philadelphia: Lippincott, Grambo & Co.Google Scholar
Balch, William S. 1841. A grammar of the English language; explained according to the principles of truth and common sense, and adapted to the capacities of all who think. Designed for the use of schools, academies, and private learners, 4th edn. Boston: B. B. Mussey.Google Scholar
Bernini, Giuliano & Paolo Ramat. 1996. Negative sentences in the languages of Europe: A typological approach. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, Goold. 1851. The grammar of English grammars, with an introduction historical and critical; the whole methodically arranged and amply illustrated; with forms of correcting and of parsing, improprieties for correction, examples for parsing, questions for examination, exercises for writing, observations for the advanced student, decisions and proofs for the settlement of disputed points, occasional strictures and defences, an exhibition of the several methods of analysis, and a key to the oral exercises: To which are added four appendixes, pertaining separately to the four parts of grammar. New York: Samuel S. & William Wood.Google Scholar
. 1857. The institutes of English grammar, methodically arranged; with forms of parsing and correcting, examples for parsing, questions for examination, false syntax for correction, exercises for writing, observations for the advanced student, five methods of analysis, and a key to the oral exercises: To which are added four appendixes. Designed for the use of schools, academies, and private learners, New stereotype edn., carefully revised by the author. New York: Samuel S. & William Wood.Google Scholar
Bullen, Henry St. John & Charles Heycock. 1853. Linguae anglicanae clavis; or rudiments of English grammar, so arranged for the use of schools, as to form a new and easy introduction to Latin and other classical grammars. London: Arthur Hall, Virtue & Co.; and Leicester: T. Chapman Browne, Bible & Crown.Google Scholar
Burnet, A. 1838. An English school grammar. Edinburgh: Adam and Charles Black; and Bell and Bradfute.Google Scholar
Burtt, Andrew. 1869. A practical grammar of the English language, synthetic and analytic. Adapted to the wants of public schools, academies, and private learners. Pittsburgh: A. H. English & Co.Google Scholar
Cardell, William S. 1827. Philosophic grammar of the English language, in connection with the laws of matter and of thought; and conformed to the best modern usage: With definitions and practical exemplifications of the words which, not being before explained, have caused much of the perplexity in attempted expositions of speech. Designed for private students, foreigners, and the higher classes in schools. Philadelphia: Uriah Hunt.Google Scholar
Chambers, J. K. 1995. Sociolinguistic theory: Linguistic variation and its social significance. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
. 2003. Sociolinguistic theory: Linguistic variation and its social significance, 2nd edn. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
. 2004. Dynamic typology and vernacular universals. In Bernd Kortmann (ed.), Dialectology meets typology, 127–145. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Chandler, Z. M. 1862. A class book in English grammar and analysis, Stereotype edn. Zanesville, OH: Beer & Hurd.Google Scholar
Cobbin, Ingram. 1864. Elements of English grammar: Expressly designed for the juvenile student, either at home or in preparatory schools. Illustrated, 33rd edn. London: William Tegg.Google Scholar
Colegrove, William. 1879. A complete scientific grammar of the English language, with an appendix containing a treatise on composition, specimens of English and American literature, a defense of phonetics, &c., &c., for the use of colleges, schools, and private learners. New York: The Authors’ Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Comly, John. 1834. English grammar, made easy to the teacher and pupil. Originally compiled for the use of West-Town boarding school, Pennsylvania, 15th edn., corrected and much improved. Philadelphia: Kimber and Sharpless.Google Scholar
Conklin, Benjamin Y. 1889. A complete graded course in English grammar and composition. New York, Boston & Chicago: D. Appleton and Company.Google Scholar
Crombie, Alexander. 1809. A treatise on the etymology and syntax of the English language, 2nd edn. London: J. Johnson.Google Scholar
Davidson, John Best. 1839. The difficulties of English grammar and punctuation removed. For beginners and unsuccessful learners. London: Simpkin, Marshall & Co.; and Hamilton, Adams, & Co.Google Scholar
Felton, Oliver C. 1843. The analytic and practical grammar. A concise manual of English grammar, arranged on the principle of analysis: Containing the first principles and rules, fully illustrated by examples; directions for constructing, analyzing and transposing sentences; a system of parsing, in some respects new and attractive; alternate exercises in correct and false syntax, arranged under most of the rules of syntax; and a series of parsing lessons in regular gradation from the simplest to the most abstruse. Designed for the use of common schools. Salem: W. & S. B. Ives; and Boston: B. B. Muzzey.Google Scholar
Filppula, Markku, Juhani Klemola & Heli Paulasto (eds.). 2009. Vernacular universals and language contact: Evidence from varieties of English and beyond. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Frazee, Bradford. 1845. An improved grammar of the English language, on the inductive system; with which elementary and progressive lessons in composition are combined. For the use of schools and academies, and private learners, Stereotype edn. Philadelphia: Sorin and Ball; and Boston: B. B. Mussey.Google Scholar
Goldthwait, William C. 1850. A treatise upon some topics of English grammar; with selections for analysis, recitation, & reading; designed for schools, 2nd edn. Springfield, MA: H. S. Taylor.Google Scholar
Görlach, Manfred. 2001. Eighteenth-century English. Heidelberg: C. Winter.Google Scholar
Graham, George F. 1862. English grammar practice; or, exercises on the etymology, syntax, and prosody of the English language. Adapted to every form of tuition. London: Longman, Green, Longman, and Roberts.Google Scholar
Greene, Roscoe G. 1830. A practical grammar of the English language, in which the principles established by Lindley Murray, are inculcated, and his theory of the moods clearly illustrated by diagrams, representing the number of tenses in each mood – their signs – and the manner in which they are formed, 2nd edn., improved. Portland: Shirley and Hyde.Google Scholar
Hilton, Katherine. 2016. Nonstandard agreement in standard English: The social perception of agreement variation under existential there . University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 22. 61–70.Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1917. Negation in English and other languages. Kobenhavn: Det Kgl. Danske Videnskabernes Selskab. Historisk-filologiske Meddelelser.Google Scholar
Kortmann, Bernd. 2012. Regional profile: The British Isles. In Bernd Kortmann & Kerstin Lunkenheimer (eds.), The Mouton world atlas of variation in English, 678–702. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kortmann, Bernd & Edgar W. Schneider (eds.). 2004. A handbook of varieties of English, 2 vols. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kortmann, Bernd & Benedikt Szmrecsanyi. 2004. Global synopsis: Morphological and syntactic variation in English. In Bernd Kortmann & Edgar W. Schneider (eds.), A handbook of varieties of English, vol. 2: Morphology and syntax, 1142–1202. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2011. Parameters of morphosyntactic variation in world Englishes: Prospects and limitations of searching for universals. In Peter Siemund (ed.), Linguistic universals and language variation, 264–290. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Labov, William. 1972. Negative attraction and negative concord in English grammar. Language 48. 773–818. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laitinen, Mikko. 2009. Singular you was/were variation and English normative grammars in the eighteenth century. In Arja Nurmi, Minna Nevala & Minna Palander-Collin (eds.), The language of daily life in England (1400–1800), 199–217. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mugglestone, Lynda. 2003. Talking proper: The rise of accent as social symbol, 2nd edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
. 2006. English in the nineteenth century. In Lynda Mugglestone (ed.), The Oxford history of English, 274–304. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Murray, Lindley. 1795. English grammar, adapted to the different classes of learners. With an appendix, containing rules and observations for promoting perspicuity in speaking and writing. York: Wilson, Spence, and Mawman.Google Scholar
. 1797. English grammar, adapted to the different classes of learners. With an appendix, containing rules and observations, for assisting the more advanced students to write with perspicuity and accuracy, 3rd edn., improved. London: Wilson, Spence, and Mawman.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu. 1994. Aspects of adverbial change in Early Modern English. In Dieter Kastovsky (ed.), Studies in Early Modern English, 245–259. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1998. Social mobility and the decline of multiple negation in Early Modern English. In Marcin Krygier & Jacek Fisiak (eds.), Advances in English historical linguistics (1996) (Trends in linguistics), 263–291. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006a. Negative concord as an English ‘vernacular universal’: Social history and linguistic typology. Journal of English Linguistics 34. 257–278. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2006b. Vernacular universals? The case of plural was in Early Modern English. In Terttu Nevalainen, Juhani Klemola & Mikko Laitinen (eds.), Types of variation: Diachronic, dialectal and typological interfaces, 351–369. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2008. Social variation in intensifier use: Constraint on -ly adverbialization in the past? English Language and Linguistics 12. 289–315. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. Number agreement in existential constructions: A sociolinguistic study of eighteenth-century English. In Markku Filppula, Juhani Klemola & Heli Paulasto (eds.), Vernacular universals and language contact: Evidence from varieties of English and beyond, 80–102. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu & Helena Raumolin-Brunberg. 2017. Historical sociolinguistics: Language change in Tudor and Stuart England, 2nd edn. London & New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
OED. 2011–. Oxford English dictionary online. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pietsch, Lukas. 2012. Verbal concord. In Raymond Hickey (ed.), Areal features of the anglophone world, 355–378. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pounder, Amanda. 2001. Adverb-marking in German and English: System and standardization. Diachronica 18. 301–358. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ramat, Paolo & Giuliano Bernini. 1990. Area influence versus typological drift in western Europe: The case of negation. In Johannes Bechert, Giuliano Bernini & Claude Buridant (eds.), Towards a typology of European languages, 25–46. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siemund, Peter (ed.). 2011. Linguistic universals and language variation. Berlin & New York: De Gruyter Mouton. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stein, Dieter. 1994. Sorting out the variants: Standardization and social factors in the English language 1600–1800. In Dieter Stein & Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade (eds.), Towards a standard English 1600–1800, 1–17. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Sundby, Bertil, Anne K. Bjørge & Kari E. Haugland. 1991. A dictionary of English normative grammar, 1700–1800. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tieken-Boon van Ostade, Ingrid. 1982. Double negation and eighteenth-century English grammars. Neophilologus 66. 278–285. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1999. The origin and development of the ‘neg…neither’ construction: A case of grammaticalisation. In Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade, Gunnel Tottie & Wim van der Wurff (eds.), Negation in the history of English, 207–231. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2002. You was and eighteenth-century normative grammar. In Katja Lenz & Ruth Möhlig (eds.), Of dyuersitie & chaunge of langage: Essays presented to Manfred Görlach on the occasion of his 65th birthday, 88–102. Heidelberg: C. Winter.Google Scholar
. 2008. The codifiers and the history of multiple negation in English, or why were the 18th-century grammarians so obsessed with double negation? In Joan C. Beal, Carmela Nocera & Massimo Sturiale (eds.), Perspectives on prescriptivism, 197–214. Bern: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Trudgill, Peter. 2013. Review of Areal features of the anglophone world, edited by Raymond Hickey. Berlin & Boston: De Gruyter Mouton, 2012. Journal of Linguistic Geography 1. 86–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ukaji, Masatomo. 1993. ‘I not say’: Bridge phenomenon in syntactic change. In Matti Rissanen, Ossi Ihalainen, Terttu Nevalainen & Irma Taavitsainen (eds.), History of Englishes: New methods and interpretations in historical linguistics, 453–462. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar