This paper provides an outline of the changes in linguistics that gave rise to historical pragmatics in the 1990s and that have shaped its development over the twenty years of its existence. These changes have affected virtually all aspects of linguistic analyses: the nature of the data, the research questions, the methods and tools that are being used for the analysis, as well as the nature of the generalizations and findings that result from these investigations. We deal with the changes in terms of shifts in thought styles and discuss seven different turns: the pragmatic turn, the socio-cultural turn, the dispersive turn, the empirical turn, the digital turn, the discursive turn and the diachronic turn. We also deal with some long-standing, recent or emerging interfaces where historical pragmatics interacts with other disciplines and we discuss some future challenges, such as the multimodality and fluidity of communication and the problem of combining big data with pragmatic micro analyses.
2007Syntactic Gradience: The Nature of Grammatical Indeterminacy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Aiden, Erez and Jean-Baptiste Michel
2013Uncharted. Big Data as a Lens on Human Culture. New York: Riverhead Books.
Bar-Hillel, Yehoshua
1971 “Out of the Pragmatic Wastebasket”. Linguistic Inquiry 2 (3): 401–407.
Biber, Douglas and Edward Finegan
1992 “The Linguistic Evolution of Five Written and Speech-based English Genres from the 17th to the 20th Centuries”. In Matti Rissanen, Ossi Ihalainen, Terttu Nevalainen and Irma Taavitsainen (eds), History of Englishes: New Methods and Interpretations in Historical Linguistics, 688–704. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Biber, Douglas, Stig Johansson, Geoffrey Leech, Susan Conrad and Edward Finegan
1999Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.
Blum-Kulka, Shoshana, Juliane House and Gabriele Kasper
(eds)1989Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: Requests and Apologies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Brinton, Laurel J
1996Pragmatic Markers in English: Grammaticalization and Discourse Functions. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Brinton, Laurel J
2012 “Historical Pragmatics and Corpus Linguistics: Problems and Strategies”. In Merja Kytö (ed.), English Corpus Linguistics: Crossing Paths, 101–31. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Brown, Roger and Albert Gilman
1989 “Politeness Theory and Shakespeare’s Four Major Tragedies”. Language in Society 18 (2): 159–212.
Brown, Penelope and Stephen C. Levinson
1987Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brown, Gillian and George Yule
1983Discourse Analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Chomsky, Noam
1980Rules and Representations. Woodbridge Lectures Delivered at Columbia University in November 1978. New York: Columbia University Press.
2002 “Using uh and um in Spontaneous Speaking”. Cognition 841: 73–111.
Conde-Silvestre, J. Camilo and Juan M. Hernández-Campoy
2012 “Introduction”. In Juan M. Hernández-Campoy and J. Camilo Conde-Silvestre (eds), The Handbook of Historical Sociolinguistics, 1–8. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Culpeper, Jonathan and Merja Kytö
2010Early Modern English Dialogues: Spoken Interaction as Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Culpeper, Jonathan
2001Language and Characterisation: People in Plays and Other Texts. London: Longman.
Denison, David
2001 “Gradience and Linguistic Change”. In Laurel J. Brinton (ed.),
Historical Linguistics 1999: Selected Papers from the 14th International Conference on Historical Linguistics. Vancouver, 9–13 August
19991, 119–44. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
De Smet, Hendrik, Hans-Jürgen Diller and Jukka Tyrkkö
The Corpus of Late Modern English Texts,
version 3.0 (CLMET3.0).
Diller Hans-Jürgen, Hendrik de Smet and Jukka Tyrkkö
2010 “A European Database of Descriptors of English Electronic Texts”. The European English Messenger 19 (2): 29–35.
1995 “The Historical Perspective in Pragmatics”. In Andreas H. Jucker (ed.), Historical Pragmatics: Pragmatic Developments in the History of English, 3–33. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
2008 “Historical Pragmatics”. Language and Linguistics Compass 2 (5): 894–906.
Jucker, Andreas H
2012a “Pragmatics in the History of Linguistic Thought”. In Keith Allan and Kasia Jaszczolt (eds), The Cambridge Handbook of Pragmatics, 495–512. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jucker, Andreas H
2012b “ ‘These imputations are too common, sir’: Politeness in Early Modern English Dialogues: The Case of Ben Jonson’s Volpone, or The Fox”. In Gabriella Mazzon and Luisanna Fodde (eds), Historical Perspectives on Forms of English Dialogue, 40–58. Milano: Franco Angeli.
Jucker, Andreas H
2015 “Uh and um as Planners in the Corpus of Historical American English”. In Irma Taavitsainen, Merja Kytö, Claudia Claridge and Jeremy Smith (eds), Developments in English: Expanding Electronic Evidence, 162–77 Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jucker, Andreas H. and Päivi Pahta
2011 “Communicating Manuscripts: Authors, Scribes, Readers, Listeners and Communicating Characters”. In Päivi Pahta and Andreas H. Jucker (eds), Communicating Early English Manuscripts, 3–10. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jucker, Andreas H. and Irma Taavitsainen
2012 “Pragmatic Variables”. In Juan M. Hernández-Campoy and J. Camilo Conde-Silvestre (eds), The Handbook of Historical Sociolinguistics, 293–306. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Jucker, Andreas H. and Irma Taavitsainen
2013English Historical Pragmatics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Jucker, Andreas H., Irma Taavitsainen and Gerold Schneider
2012 “Semantic Corpus Trawling: Expressions of “Courtesy” and “Politeness” in the Helsinki Corpus”. In Carla Suhr and Irma Taavitsainen (eds), Developing Corpus Methodology for Historical Pragmatics. (Studies in Variation, Contacts and Change in English 11.) Available online at: [URL].
Kjellmer, Göran
2008 “Self-repetition in Spoken English Discourse”. In Terttu Nevalainen, Irma Taavitsainen, Päivi Pahta and Minna Korhonen (eds), The Dynamics of Linguistic Variation: Corpus Evidence on English Past and Present, 37–60. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Koch, Peter and Wulf Oesterreicher
1985 “Sprache der Nähe – Sprache der Distanz: Mündlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit im Spannungsfeld von Sprachtheorie und Sprachgeschichte”. Romanistisches Jahrbuch 361: 15–43.
2014 “Philology on the Move: Manuscript Studies at the Dawn of the 21st Century”. Studia Neophilologica 861: 1–8.
Labov, William
1994Principles of Linguistic Change, Volume. 1: Internal Factors. Oxford: Blackwell.
Lass, Roger
1997Historical Linguistics and Language Change. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Leech, Geoffrey N
1983Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.
Levinson, Stephen C
1983Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Locher, Miriam A. and Richard J. Watts
2005 “Politeness Theory and Relational Work”. Journal of Politeness Research 11: 9–33.
Marttila, Ville
2014Creating Digital Editions for Corpus Linguistics: The Case of Potage Dyvers, A Family of Six Middle English Recipe Collections. PhD dissertation, University of Helsinki. [URL]
Meurman-Solin, Anneli
1993Variation and Change in Early Scottish Prose. Studies Based on the Helsinki Corpus of Older Scots. Helsinki: Suomalainen Tiedeakatemia. Available online at: [URL]
Meurman-Solin, Anneli and Jukka Tyrkkö
(eds)2013Principles and Practices for the Digital Editing and Annotation of Diachronic Data. Helsinki: VARIENG, University of Helsinki.
Mey, Jacob
2001Pragmatics. An Introduction. 2nd edn. Oxford: Blackwell.
Mey, Jacob L
2009 “Pragmatics: Overview”. In Jacob Mey (ed.), Concise Encyclopedia of Pragmatics, 786–97. 2nd edn. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Michel, Jean-Baptiste, Yuan Kui Shen, Aviva Presser Aiden, Adrian Veres, Matthew K. Gray, The Google Books Team, Joseph P. Pickett, Dale Hoiberg, Dan Clancy, Peter Norvig, Jon Orwant, Steven Pinker, Martin A. Nowak, Erez Lieberman Aiden
2010 “Quantitative Analysis of Culture Using Millions of Digitized Books”. Science. Available online at: [URL]
Mills, Sara
2011 “Discursive Approaches to Politeness and Impoliteness”. In Linguistic Politeness Research Group (ed.), Discursive Approaches to Politeness, 19–56. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Mulholland, Joan
1967 “ ‘Thou’ and ‘You’ in Shakespeare: A Study in the Second Person Pronouns”. English Studies 481: 34–43.
Nathan, N
1959 “Pronouns of Address in the Canterbury Tales”. Mediaeval Studies xxi1: 193–201.
1982Socio-Historical Linguistics: Its Status and Methodology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Romero-Trillo, Jesús
(ed.)2008Pragmatics and Corpus Linguistics: A Mutualistic Entente. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.
Rühlemann, Christoph and Karin Aijmer
2015 “Corpus Pragmatics: Laying the Foundations”. In Karin Aijmer and Christoph Rühlemann (eds), A Handbook of Corpus Pragmatics: Exploring Speaker and Writer Meaning in Computer Corpora, 1–26. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sacks, Harvey, Emanuel A. Schegloff and Gail Jefferson
1974 “A Simplest Systematics for the Organization of Turn-taking for Conversation”. Language 50 (4): 696–735.
Schegloff, Emanuel A
2010 “Some Other ‘uh(m)’s’”. Discourse Processes 471: 130–74.
Schiffrin, Deborah
1987Discourse Markers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schneider, Klaus P
2012 “Appropriate Behaviour across Varieties of English”. Journal of Pragmatics 44 (9): 1022–37.
1985a “Tellability and Politeness in ‘The Miller’s Tale’: First Steps in Literary Pragmatics”. English Studies: A Journal of English Language and Literature 66 (6): 496–512.
Sell, Roger D
1985b “Politeness in Chaucer: Suggestions Towards a Methodology for Pragmatic Stylistics”. Studia Neophilologica 571: 175–85.
Sell, Roger D
(ed.)1991Literary Pragmatics. London: Routledge.
Smith, Jeremy and Christian Kay
2011 “The Pragmatics of Punctuation in Older Scots”. In Päivi Pahta and Andreas H. Jucker (eds), Communicating Early English Manuscripts, 212–25. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Stidston, Russell O
1917The Use of ye in the Function of thou in Middle English Literature from Ms Auchinleck to Ms Vernon. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Stubbs, Michael
1983Discourse Analysis: The Sociolinguistic Analysis of Natural Language. Oxford: Blackwell.
Suhr, Carla and Irma Taavitsainen
(eds)2012Developing Corpus Methodology for Historical Pragmatics. (Studies in Variation, Contacts and Change in English, Volume 11.) Available online at: [URL]
Taavitsainen, Irma
1993 “Genre / Subgenre Styles in Late Middle English?” In Matti Rissanen, Merja Kytö and Minna Palander-Collin (eds), Early English in the Computer Age, 171–200. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Taavitsainen, Irma
2000 “Science”. In Peter Brown (ed.), A Companion to Chaucer, 378–96. Oxford: Blackwell.
Taavitsainen, Irma
2002 “Historical Discourse Analysis: Scientific Language and Thought-styles”. In Teresa Fanego, Bélén Méndez-Naya and Elena Seoane (eds), Sounds, Words, Texts and Change:
Selected Papers from 11 ICEHL, Santiago de Compostela, 7–11 September 2000
, 201–26. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Taavitsainen, Irma
2009 “The Pragmatics of Knowledge and Meaning: Corpus Linguistic Approaches to Changing Thought-styles in Early Modern Medical Discourse”. In Andreas H. Jucker, Daniel Schreier and Marianne Hundt (eds), Corpora: Pragmatics and Discourse, 37–62. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
Forthcoming. “Genre Dynamics in the History of English”. In Merja Kytö and Päivi Pahta (eds) Cambridge Handbook of Historical Linguistics Cambridge Cambridge University Press
Taavitsainen, Irma and Susan Fitzmaurice
2007 “Historical Pragmatics: What It Is and How to Do It?” In Susan Fitzmaurice and Irma Taavitsainen (eds), Methods in Historical Pragmatics, 11–36. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Taavitsainen, Irma, Merja Kytö, Claudia Claridge and Jeremy Smith
(eds)2015Developments in English: Expanding Electronic Evidence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Todorov, Tzvetan
1990Genres in Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Toolan, Michael
1996Total Speech: An Integrational Linguistic Approach to Language. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Toolan, Michael
2001Narrative: A Critical Linguistic Introduction. 2nd edn. London: Routledge.
2004 “Historical Pragmatics”. In Laurence R. Horn and Gregory Ward (eds), The Handbook of Pragmatics, 538–61. Oxford: Blackwell.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs
2008 “The State of English Language Studies: A Linguistic Perspective”. In Marianne Thormählen (ed.), English Now. Selected Papers from the 20th IAUPE Conference in Lund 2007, 199–225. Lund: Lund Studies in English.
2003Politeness. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wharton, Tim
2010 “Context”. In Louise Cummings (ed.), The Pragmatics Encyclopedia, 74–75. London and New York: Routledge.
Weinreich, Uriel, William. Labov and Marvin Herzog
1968 “Empirical Foundations for a Theory of Language Change”. In Winfred P. Lehman and Yakov Malkiel (eds), Directions for Historical Linguistics: A Symposium, 95–195. Austin: University of Texas Press.
2023. Diszkurzív gyakorlat és férji hatalom összefüggései középmagyar kori
úriszéki periratok forráskiadásában. Társadalmi Nemek Tudománya Interdiszciplináris eFolyóirat 12:2 ► pp. 150 ff.
2020. Construcciones formales y tradiciones discursivas en cuatro textos médicos novatores fundamentales. Revista de Filología Española 100:1 ► pp. 161 ff.
Nagy C., Katalin
2022. „Aki tud megköszönném”. Jelentés és Nyelvhasználat 9:1 ► pp. 15 ff.
Nakayasu, Minako
2017. Spatio-temporal Systems in Paston Letters. Studia Neophilologica 89:sup1 ► pp. 75 ff.
2021. Spatio-Temporal Systems in Shakespeare’s Dialogues: A Case from Julius Caesar
. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 56:s1 ► pp. 425 ff.
Nicolini, Matteo
2022. Legal Geography, Linguistics, and Borders. In Legal Geography [Ius Gentium: Comparative Perspectives on Law and Justice, 105], ► pp. 171 ff.
Ní Mhocháin, Róisín & Anne O’Keeffe
2017. Introduction. Corpus Pragmatics 1:4 ► pp. 293 ff.
Saiz-Sánchez, Marta
2020.
El funcionamiento discursivo de los marcadores de acuerdo y de desacuerdo
sí, sí
+ V-eco y
sí + fazer
en español medieval
. Bulletin of Hispanic Studies 97:2 ► pp. 125 ff.
2017. Preface. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 18:2 ► pp. 157 ff.
[no author supplied]
2021. Fundamentals of Sociopragmatics. In The Cambridge Handbook of Sociopragmatics, ► pp. 13 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 may 2023. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers.
Any errors therein should be reported to them.