Article published in:Grammaticalization: Current views and issues
Edited by Katerina Stathi, Elke Gehweiler and Ekkehard König
[Studies in Language Companion Series 119] 2010
► pp. 123–150
Three common controversies
The term ‘degrammaticalization’, originally coined by Lehmann in 1982 for a supposedly non-existent phenomenon, soon came to be applied to a number of often entirely different changes. Since such ‘counterexamples’ pose a potential challenge to the unidirectionality of grammaticalization, they have been the focus of much attention from grammaticalizationists and grammaticalization critics alike. While the former have attempted to dismiss them as insignificant, the latter have tended to over-emphasize their relevance. Much of the debate on degrammaticalization is rooted in different understandings of what degrammaticalization entails, or what it should entail. This paper proposes a descriptive framework which will restrict the number of potential examples of degrammaticalization, while at the same time subdividing them into three clearly distinguishable subtypes.
Published online: 16 September 2010
Cited by 8 other publications
No author info given
Doron, Edit & Irit Meir
Sapp, Christopher & Dorian Roehrs
Wall, Albert & Álvaro S. Octavio de Toledo y Huerta
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 26 february 2021. 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.