In:Handbook of Pragmatics: Manual
Edited by Jef Verschueren and Jan-Ola Östman
[Handbook of Pragmatics M2] 2022
► pp. 744–755
Historical pragmatics
Published online: 3 October 2022
https://doi.org/10.1075/hop.m2.his2
https://doi.org/10.1075/hop.m2.his2
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Origins
- 3.Data problems
- 4.Topics
- 4.1Discourse markers
- 4.2Speech acts
- 4.3Politeness
- 5.New perspectives
References
References (77)
Arnovick, L. K. 1999. Diachronic pragmatics. Seven case studies in English illocutionary development. John Benjamins.
Bertuccelli Papi, M. 2000. Is a diachronic speech act theory possible? Journal of Historical Pragmatics 1.1: 57–66.
Brinton, L. J. 1996. Pragmatic markers in English. Grammaticalization and discourse functions. Mouton de Gruyter.
1998. “The flowers are lovely; only, they have no scent.”: The evolution of a pragmatic marker in English. In R. Borgmeier, H. Grabes & A. H. Jucker (eds.) Anglistentag 1997 Giessen. Proceedings: 9–33. Wissenschaftlicher Verlag.
2001a. Historical discourse analysis. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen & H. E. Hamilton (eds.) The handbook of discourse analysis: 138–160. Blackwell.
2001b. From matrix clause to pragmatic marker. The history of look-forms. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 2(2): 177–199.
2005. Processes underlying the development of pragmatic markers: The case of (I) say
. In J. Skaffari, M. Peikola, R. Carroll, R. Hiltunen & B. Wårvik (eds.) Opening windows on texts and discourses of the past: 279–299. John Benjamins.
Brown, R. & A. Gilman. 1989. Politeness theory and Shakespeare's four major tragedies. Language in Society 18(2): 159–212.
Brown, P. & S. C. Levinson. 1987. Politeness. Some universals in language usage. Cambridge University Press.
Busse, U. 2002. Linguistic variation in the Shakespeare Corpus. Morpho-syntactic variability of second person pronouns. John Benjamins.
2003. The co-occurrence of nominal and pronominal address forms in the Shakespeare Corpus: Who says thou or you to whom? In I. Taavitsainen & A. H. Jucker (eds.) Diachronic perspectives on address term systems: 193–221. John Benjamins.
Collins, D. E. 2001. Reanimated voices. Speech reporting in a historical-pragmatic perspective. John Benjamins.
Culpeper, J. & M. Kytö. 2010. Early Modern English dialogues. Spoken interaction as writing. Cambridge University Press.
Deutschmann, M. 2003. Apologising in British English. Institutionen för moderna språk, Umeå University.
Dossena, M. & I. Tieken-Boon Van Ostade (eds.) 2008. Studies in Late Modern English correspondence. Methodology and data. Peter Lang.
Ehrismann, G. 1901–1904. Duzen und Ihrzen im Mittelalter. Zeitschrift für deutsche Wortforschung 1, 1901, 117–149; 2, 1902, 118–159; 4, 1903, 210–248; 5, 1904, 127–220.
Fitzmaurice, S. M. 2002a. The familiar letter in Early Modern English. A pragmatic approach. John Benjamins.
2002b. “Plethoras of witty verbiage” and “heathen Greek”: Ways of reading meaning in English comic drama. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 3(1): 31–60.
Hickey, R. 2003. The German address system: Binary and scalar at once. In I. Taavitsainen & A. H. Jucker (eds.) Diachronic perspectives on address term systems: 401–425. John Benjamins.
Hope, J. 1993. Second person singular pronouns in records of Early Modern “spoken” English. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 94: 83–100.
1994. The use of thou and you in Early Modern spoken English: Evidence from depositions in the Durham ecclesiastical court records. In D. Kastovsky (ed.) Studies in Early Modern English: 141–152. Mouton de Gruyter.
Jacobs, A. & A. H. Jucker. 1995. The historical perspective in pragmatics. In A. H. Jucker (ed.) Historical Pragmatics. Pragmatic Developments in the History of English: 3–33. John Benjamins.
Jucker, A. H. 2000a. English historical pragmatics: Problems of data and methodology. In G. Di Martino & M. Lima (eds.) English diachronic pragmatics: 17–55. CUEN.
2000b. “Thou” in the history of English: A case for historical semantics or pragmatics? In Ch Dalton-Puffer & N. Ritt (eds.) Words: Structure, meaning, function. A festschrift for Dieter Kastovsky: 153–163. Mouton de Gruyter.
2002. Discourse markers in Early Modern English. In R. Watts & P. Trudgill (eds.) Alternative Histories of English: 210–230. Routledge.
2008. Politeness in the history of English. In R. Dury, M. Gotti & M. Dossena (eds.) English historical linguistics 2006. Volume II: Lexical and semantic change. Selected papers from the Fourteenth International Conference on English Historical Linguistics (ICEHL 14), Bergamo, 21–25 August 2006: 3–29. John Benjamins.
2010. “In curteisie was set ful muchel hir lest”: Politeness in Middle English. In J. Culpeper & D. Z. Kádár (eds.) Historical (im)politeness: 175–200. Peter Lang.
Jucker, A. H., G. Fritz & F. Lebsanft. 1999. Historical dialogue analysis: Roots and traditions in the study of the Romance languages, German and English. In A H. Jucker, G. Fritz & F. Lebsanft (eds.) Historical dialogue analysis: 1–33. John Benjamins.
Jucker, A. H., G. Schneider, I. Taavitsainen & B. Breustedt. 2008. Fishing for compliments: Precision and recall in corpus-linguistic compliment research. In A. H. Jucker & I. Taavitsainen (eds.) Speech acts in the history of English: 273–294. John Benjamins.
Jucker, A. H. & I. Taavitsainen. 2000. Diachronic speech act analysis: Insults from flyting to flaming. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 1(1): 67–95.
. 2003. Diachronic perspectives on address term systems: Introduction. In I. Taavitsainen & A. H. Jucker (eds.) Diachronic perspectives on address term systems: 1–25. John Benjamins.
. 2008. Apologies in the history of English: Routinized and lexicalized expressions of responsibility and regret. In A. H. Jucker & I. Taavitsainen (eds.) Speech acts in the history of English: 229–244. John Benjamins.
Koch, P. 1999. Court records and cartoons: Reflections of spontaneous dialogue in Early Romance texts. In A. H. Jucker, G. Fritz & F. Lebsanft (eds.) Historical dialogue analysis: 399–429. John Benjamins.
Koch, P. & W. Oesterreicher. 1985. Sprache der Nähe–Sprache der Distanz: Mündlichkeit und Schriftlichkeit im Spannungsfeld von Sprachtheorie und Sprachgeschichte. Romanistisches Jahrbuch 36: 15–43.
Kohnen, Th 2000a. Explicit performatives in Old English: A corpus-based study of directives. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 1(2): 301–321.
Kohnen, Th. 2000b. Corpora and speech acts: The study of performatives. In Ch. Mair & M. Hundt (eds.) Corpus linguistics and linguistic theory. Papers from the twentieth international conference on English language research on computerized corpora (ICAME 20) Freiburg im Breisgau 1999: 177–186. Rodopi.
Kohnen, Th 2002. Towards a history of English directives. In A. Fischer, G. Tottie & H. M. Lehmann (eds.) Text types and corpora. Studies in honour of Udo Fries: 165–175. Gunter Narr.
Kohnen, Th. 2008a. Linguistic politeness in Anglo-Saxon England? A study of Old English address terms. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 9(1): 140–158.
2008b. Directives in Old English: Beyond politeness? In A. H. Jucker & I. Taavitsainen (eds.) Speech acts in the history of English: 27–44. John Benjamins.
Kopytko, R. 1993. Polite discourse in Shakespeare’s English. Wydawnictwo Naukowe Uniwersytetu im. Adam Mickiewicza w Poznaniu.
1995. Linguistic politeness strategies in Shakespeare’s plays. In A. H. Jucker (ed.) Historical pragmatics. Pragmatic developments in the history of English: 515–540. John Benjamins.
Kryk-Kastovsky, B. 2006. Historical courtroom discourse: Introduction. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 7(2): 163–179.
Lebsanft, F. 1988. Studien zu einer Linguistik des Grußes. Sprache und Funktion der altfranzösischen Grußformeln. Niemeyer.
Lenker, U. 2000.
Soplice and witodlice. Discourse markers in Old English. In O. Fischer, A. Rosenbach & D. Stein (eds.) Pathways of change. Grammaticalization in English: 229–249. John Benjamins.
Listen, P. 1999. The emergence of German polite. Cognitive and sociolinguistic parameters. Peter Lang.
Lötscher, A. 1981. Zur Sprachgeschichte des Fluchens und Beschimpfens im Schweizer deutschen. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik 48: 145–160.
Mazzon, G. 2003. Pronouns and nominal address in Shakespearean English: A socio-affective marking system in transition. In I. Taavitsainen & A. H. Jucker (eds.) Diachronic perspectives on address term systems: 223–249. John Benjamins.
Nevala, M. 2004. Address in Early English correspondence. Its forms and socio-pragmatic functions. Société Néophilologique.
Nevalainen, T. 2004. Letter writing: Introduction. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 5(2): 181–191.
Nevalainen, T. & H. Raumolin-Brunberg. 1995. Constraints on politeness: The pragmatics of address formulae in Early English correspondence. In A. H. Jucker (ed.) Historical pragmatics. Pragmatic developments in the history of English: 541–601. John Benjamins.
Onodera, N. O. 2004. Japanese discourse markers. Synchronic and diachronic discourse analysis. John Benjamins.
Pakkala-Weckström, M. 2008. “No botmeles bihestes”: Various ways of making binding promises in Middle English. In A. H. Jucker & I. Taavitsainen (eds.) Speech acts in the history of English: 133–162. John Benjamins.
Person, R. R., Jr. 2009. “Oh” in Shakespeare: A conversation analytic approach. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 10(1): 84–107.
Schlieben-Lange, B. 1979. Ai las – Que planhs?. Romanistische Zeitschrift für Literaturgeschichte 3: 1–30.
Schrott, A. 2000. “¿Qu í los podri é contar?” Interrogative acts in the Cantar de mio Cid. Some examples from Old Spanish on asking questions. Journal of Historical Pragmatics 1(2): 263–299.
Schrott, A. & H. Völker. 2005. Historische Pragmatik und historische Varietätenlinguistik. Traditionen, Methoden und Modelle in der Romanistik. In A. Schrott & H. Völker (eds.) Historische Pragmatik und historische Varietätenlinguistik in den romanischen Sprachen: 1–22. Universitätsverlag.
Simon, H. J. 2003. Für eine grammatische Kategorie “Respekt” im Deutschen. Synchronie, Diachronie und Typologie der deutschen Anredepronomina. Niemeyer.
Skewis, M. 2003. Mitigated directness in Honglou meng: Directive speech acts and politeness in eighteenth century Chinese. Journal of Pragmatics 35: 161–189.
Söll, L. 1974. Gesprochenes und geschriebenes Französisch. Erich Schmidt [3rd edition 1985, revised and amplified by F.J. Hausmann].
Somolinos, A. R. 2005. From certainty to doubt: The evolution of the discourse marker voire in French. In J. Skaffari, M. Peikola, R. Carroll, R. Hiltunen & B. Wårvik (eds.) Opening windows on texts and discourses of the past: 301–317. John Benjamins.
Taavitsainen, I. 1995. Interjections in Early Modern English: From imitation of spoken to conventions of written language. In A. H. Jucker (ed.) Historical pragmatics. Pragmatic developments in the history of English: 439–465. Benjamins.
Taavitsainen, I. & S. M. Fitzmaurice. 2007. Historical pragmatics: What it is and how to do it. In S. M. Fitzmaurice & I, Taavitsainen (eds.) Methodological issues in historical pragmatics: 11–36. Mouton de Gruyter.
Taavitsainen, I. & A. H. Jucker (eds.) 2003. Diachronic perspectives on address term systems. John Benjamins.
. 2007. Speech acts and speech act verbs in the history of English. In S. Fitzmaurice & I. Taavitsainen (eds.) Methodological issues in historical pragmatics: 107–138. Mouton de Gruyter.
. 2008a. Speech acts now and then: Towards a pragmatic history of English. In A. H. Jucker & I. Taavitsainen (eds.) Speech acts in the history of English: 1–23. John Benjamins.
. 2008b. “Methinks you seem more beautiful than ever”: Compliments and gender in the history of English. In A. H. Jucker & I. Taavitsainen (eds.) Speech acts in the history of English: 195–228. John Benjamins.
Traugott, E. C. 2004. Historical pragmatics. In L. R. Horn & G. Ward (eds.) The handbook of pragmatics: 538–561. Blackwell.
Valkonen, P. 2008. Showing a little promise: Identifying and retrieving explicit illocutionary acts from a corpus of written prose. In A. H. Jucker & I. Taavitsainen (eds.) Speech acts in the history of English: 247–272. John Benjamins.
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 11 december 2025. 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.
