Linguistic Variation in the Shakespeare Corpus

Morpho-syntactic variability of second person pronouns

Ulrich Busse | Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg

Hardbound – Available

ISBN 9789027253460 (Eur) | EUR 120.00

ISBN 9781588112804 (USA) | USD 180.00

e-Book –

ISBN 9789027296191 | EUR 120.00 | USD 180.00

This study investigates the morpho-syntactic variability of the second person pronouns in the Shakespeare Corpus, seeking to elucidate the factors that underlie their choice. The major part of the work is devoted to analyzing the variation between you and thou, but it also includes chapters that deal with the variation between thy and thine and between ye and you. Methodologically, the study makes use of descriptive statistics, but incorporates both quantitative and qualitative features, drawing in particular on research methods recently developed within the fields of corpus linguistics, socio-historical linguistics and historical pragmatics. By making comparisons to other corpora on Early Modern English the work does not only contribute to Shakespeare studies, but on a broader scale also to language change by providing new and more detailed insights into the mechanisms that have led to a restructuring of the pronoun paradigm in the Early Modern period.

[Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 106] 2002. xiv, 344 pp.

Publishing status: Available
Published online on 21 October 2008

https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.106

Table of Contents

Preface and acknowledgements | p. xi

Abbreviations | p. xiii

1. General introduction | pp. 1–13

2. Previous research on the use of personal pronouns in Early Modern English with special reference to Shakespeare’s plays | pp. 15–36

3. Thou and you: A quantitative analysis | pp. 37–61

4. The distribution of thou and you and their variants in verse and prose | pp. 63–81

5. “A woman’s face with Nature’s own hand painted / Hast thou, the master mistress of my passion”: Address pronouns in Shakespeare’s Sonnets and other Elizabethan poetry | pp. 83–98

6. “You beastly knave, know you no reverence?”: The co-occurrence of second person pronouns and nominal forms of address | pp. 99–186

7. “Prithee no more” vs. “Pray you, chuck, come hither”: Prithee and pray you as discourse markers | pp. 187–212

8. The role of grammar in the selection of thou or you | pp. 213–221

9. “In thine own person answer thy abuse”: The use of thy vs. thine | pp. 223–248

10. “Stand, sir, and throw us that you have about ye”: The syntactic, pragmatic and social implications of the pronoun ye | pp. 249–281

11. Summary and conclusion | pp. 283–292

Appendix: Mitchell’s Corpus of British Drama (1580–1780) | pp. 293–295

Notes | pp. 297–310

Name index | pp. 333–335

Subject index | pp. 337–339

“B's book is a welcome contribution to the study of the history of second person pronouns in English, emphasizing the centrality of the Shakespearean canon in this connection.”

Juhani Rudanko, University of Tampere, in Language, Vol. 82:1 (2006)

“This book contains a wealth of material which should be invaluable to all those interested in Shakespeare.”

N.F. Blake, Sheffield, in Archive für das Studium der neueren Sprachen und Literaturen, Band 241:2 (2004)

“Overall, I think the book is important as it informs our knowledge of Shakespeare's language. Furthermore, since Busse compares his findings in the Shakespeare corpus to other Early Modern English corpora, the study carries import for our understanding of the history of English more generally. Busse's presentation proceeds logically and his claims are well supported by the data he presents. One of the most beneficial aspects of Busse's work is that it provides the reader with a lot of material that could lead to further research or prove useful for in-progress studies among individual researchers. ”

K. Aaron Smith, Illinois State University in Linguist List (April 2003)

Cited by (47)

Cited by 47 other publications

Order by:

Ciambella, Fabio

2024. Whose feathers were borrowed? A corpus stylistic approach to Richard Barnfield’s and William Shakespeare’s poetry. The Explicator ► pp. 1 ff.

Evans, Mel

2023. Interjections and individual style: A study of restoration dramatic language. Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics 32:3 ► pp. 297 ff.

Knooihuizen, Remco

2023. Language Contact. In The Linguistics of the History of English, ► pp. 89 ff.

Lalić, Ana

2023. On the Sources of Spoken (Italian) Language in a Historical Perspective. Društvene i humanističke studije (Online) 8:3(24) ► pp. 135 ff.

Nagy C., Katalin

2022. (Polite) directives in mediaeval Catalan. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 23:1 ► pp. 54 ff.

Pojprasat, Somboon

2022. A pragmatic analysis of Shylock’s use ofthouandyou. Open Linguistics 8:1 ► pp. 496 ff.

Walker, Terry & Merja Kytö

2022. Chapter 5. Survival or death. In Corpus Pragmatic Studies on the History of Medical Discourse [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 330], ► pp. 105 ff.

Culpeper, Jonathan, Andrew Hardie, Jane Demmen, Jennifer Hughes & Matt Timperley

2021. Supporting the corpus-based study of Shakespeare’s language: Enhancing a corpus of the First Folio. ICAME Journal 45:1 ► pp. 37 ff.

Graziano, Alba

2021. Address pronouns revisited: a case of theatre and translation pragmatics. Theatralia :1 ► pp. 119 ff.

Leitner, Magdalena & Andreas H. Jucker

2021. Historical Sociopragmatics. In The Cambridge Handbook of Sociopragmatics, ► pp. 687 ff.

Nakayasu, Minako

2021. Spatio-Temporal Systems in Shakespeare’s Dialogues: A Case from Julius Caesar . Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 56:s1 ► pp. 425 ff.

Archer, Dawn & Alison Findlay

2020. Chapter 3. Keywords that characterise Shakespeare’s (anti)heroes and villains. In Voices Past and Present - Studies of Involved, Speech-related and Spoken Texts [Studies in Corpus Linguistics, 97], ► pp. 32 ff.

Bartali, Valentina

2020. Andreas H. Jucker: Review of “Politeness in the History of English: From the Middle Ages to the Present Day”. Corpus Pragmatics 4:4 ► pp. 485 ff.

Demmen, Jane

2020. Issues and challenges in compiling a corpus of Early Modern English plays for comparison with those of William Shakespeare. ICAME Journal 44:1 ► pp. 37 ff.

Hardie, Andrew & Isolde van Dorst

2020. A survey of grammatical variability in Early Modern English drama. Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics 29:3 ► pp. 275 ff.

Jucker, Andreas

2020. Politeness in the History of English,

Murphy, Sean, Dawn Archer & Jane Demmen

2020. Mapping the links between gender, status and genre in Shakespeare’s plays. Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics 29:3 ► pp. 223 ff.

Wiśniewska-Przymusińska, Malwina

2020. T/V Pronouns and FTAs inthe Works of Sir Thomas Malory: Medieval Politeness and Impoliteness in Directives, Expressives, and Commissives. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 55:1 ► pp. 139 ff.

Hays, Christopher B.

2019. The Origins of Isaiah 24–27,

Sato, Kiriko

2019. The Choice of Relative Pronouns in the First Quarto and First Folio Texts of Shakespeare’s Richard III: Testing the Memorial Reconstruction Hypothesis. Anglica. An International Journal of English Studies :28/2 ► pp. 63 ff.

Sato, Kiriko

2019. The Relative Which with Personal Antecedents in Shakespeare’s History Plays. Neophilologus 103:2 ► pp. 273 ff.

Baicchi, Annalisa, Roberta Facchinetti, Silvia Cacchiani & Antonio Bertacca

2018. Shakespeare’s language revisited in the 21st century. English Text Construction 11:1 ► pp. 1 ff.

Hirt, Raffael

2018. “Is Not Thy Soul Thine Own?”: An Analysis of Second-Person Pronouns in Christopher Marlowe’s Doctor Faustus and The Jew of Malta. English Studies 99:3 ► pp. 243 ff.

Jucker, Andreas H. & Joanna Kopaczyk

2017. Historical (Im)politeness. In The Palgrave Handbook of Linguistic (Im)politeness, ► pp. 433 ff.

Shurma, Svitlana & Wei-lun Lu

2016. A cognitive poetic analysis of LIFE and DEATH in English and Ukrainian: a multiple-parallel-text approach to Hamlet's soliloquy. Theatralia :2 ► pp. 9 ff.

Sivonen, Jari

2016. The Finnish abstract motion constructionmennäV-mA-An[go V-inf-ill] ‘do something unwished’. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 14:2 ► pp. 247 ff.

Brinton, Laurel J.

2015. Historical Discourse Analysis. In The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, ► pp. 222 ff.

Zhan, Hongwei

2015. Review of Hilpert (2013): Constructional change in English: Developments in allomorphy, word formation, and syntax. Review of Cognitive Linguistics 13:1 ► pp. 257 ff.

Nevalainen, Terttu

2013. Sociohistorical Analysis. In Research Methods in Sociolinguistics, ► pp. 93 ff.

Vallejo Zapata, Víctor Julián

2013. MARCO METODOLÓGICO PARA LA INVESTIGACIÓN PRAGMALINGÜÍSTICA DEL TEXTO DRAMÁTICO: ANÁLISIS DE DIATRIBA DE AMOR CONTRA UN HOMBRE SENTADO DE GABRIEL GARCÍA MÁRQUEZ. Lingüística y Literatura ► pp. 191 ff.

Jucker, Andreas H. & Irma Taavitsainen

2012. Pragmatic Variables. In The Handbook of Historical Sociolinguistics, ► pp. 293 ff.

Mele-Marrero, Margarita & Francisco Alonso-Almeida

2011. The Role of the Pronounsheandshein Seventeenth-Century Obstetric Directives*. Studia Neophilologica 83:2 ► pp. 169 ff.

Keller, Stefan D.

2010. Combining Rhetoric and Pragmatics to ReadOthello. English Studies 91:4 ► pp. 398 ff.

WILLIAMS, LAWRENCE & RÉMI A. VAN COMPERNOLLE

2009. Second-person pronoun use in French language discussion fora. Journal of French Language Studies 19:3 ► pp. 363 ff.

Busse, Ulrich

2007. Review of Blake (2002): A Grammar of Shakespeare’s Language & Hope (2003): Shakespeare’s Grammar. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 8:1 ► pp. 127 ff.

Jucker, A.H.

2006. Historical Pragmatics. In Encyclopedia of Language & Linguistics, ► pp. 329 ff.

Aalberse, Suzanne

2005. Irma Taavitsainen u. Andreas H. Jucker (Hg.), Diachronic Perspectives on Address Term Systems. Beiträge zur Geschichte der deutschen Sprache und Literatur (PBB) 127:2 ► pp. 261 ff.

Rudanko, Juhani

2005. On the Form and Function of Epithets in Shakespeare'sCoriolanus. Studia Neophilologica 77:1 ► pp. 11 ff.

Sönmez, Margaret J-M

2005. A study of request markers in english family letters from 1623 to 1660. European Journal of English Studies 9:1 ► pp. 9 ff.

Nevala, Minna

2004. Accessing politeness axes: forms of address and terms of reference in early English correspondence. Journal of Pragmatics 36:12 ► pp. 2125 ff.

Jucker, Andreas H

2003. Contrastive Analysis across Time: Issues in Historical Dialogue Analysis. In Contrastive Analysis in Language, ► pp. 197 ff.

Jucker, Andreas H.

2006. Historical pragmatics. In Handbook of Pragmatics, ► pp. 1 ff.

Jucker, Andreas H.

2008. Historical Pragmatics. Language and Linguistics Compass 2:5 ► pp. 894 ff.

Jucker, Andreas H.

2022. Historical pragmatics. In Handbook of Pragmatics [Handbook of Pragmatics, ], ► pp. 744 ff.

[no author supplied]

2018. Socioeconomic Pragmatic Variation [Pragmatics & Beyond New Series, 291],

[no author supplied]

2021. Nominal and Pronominal Address in Jamaica and Trinidad [Topics in Address Research, 3],

[no author supplied]

2021. Approaches and Methods in Sociopragmatics. In The Cambridge Handbook of Sociopragmatics, ► pp. 567 ff.

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 october 2024. 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.

Subjects