Article published In: Journal of Historical Pragmatics
Vol. 19:1 (2018) ► pp.1–27
Semantic change through change in non-linguistic practice
Betting with lay and the laying down of stakes
Published online: 10 August 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.00011.pon
https://doi.org/10.1075/jhp.00011.pon
Abstract
This paper is concerned with the relation between semantics and non-linguistic practice and with change in that relation. The
particular case involves two classes of clausal constructions that have lay as their verb and are used in
initiating bets. One class involves lay a wager and the other involves
lay
stake. Associated with the use of these constructions are a number of practices that have to
do with what is done with the stakes of the bet. The crucial distinction among these practices in terms of the semantics of
lay is whether or not stakes are physically laid down. If they are, then lay is
interpretable as naming the physical action. Otherwise, some other interpretation must be sought for lay. I show
that, over three centuries, there is a decline in the practice of laying stakes down when
lay
stake is used. With lay a wager there is no significant change. The
result of the changing use of lay
stake is that lay is increasingly interpreted
as having a metaphoric or abstract meaning. Where the new meaning is metaphoric, this is due not to a deliberate expressive choice
on the part of the speaker – as is usually assumed for metaphoric use – but to change in non-linguistic practice.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Composites of linguistic and non-linguistic action
- 3.Data
- 4.Betting
- 5.Semantics of lay
- 6.Semantics of wager
- 7.Semantics of lay a wager and lay stake
- 8.Change in staking practice
- 9.Metaphor through change in practice
- Acknowledgments
- Notes
References
References (22)
2003. “Pointing and Placing”. In Sotaro Kita (ed.), Pointing: Where Language, Culture and Cognition Meet, 243–68. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Claudi, Ulrike and Bernd Heine. 1986. “On the Metaphorical Base of Grammar”. Studies in Language 10 (2): 297–335.
Enfield, Nick J. 2009. The Anatomy of Meaning: Speech, Gesture and Composite Utterances. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2012. “A ‘Composite Utterances’ Approach to Meaning”. In Cornelia Müller, Ellen Fricke, Silva H. Ladewig, Alan Cienki, David McNeill and Sedinha Teßendorf (eds), Handbook Body – Language – Communication. Volume 11, 689–706. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Fischer, Olga and Anette Rosenbach. 2000. “Introduction”. In Olga Fischer, Anette Rosenbach and Dieter Stein (eds), Pathways of Change: Grammaticalization in English, 1–37. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Fotion, Nicholas. 1981. “I’ll bet you $10 that betting is not a speech act”. In Herman Parret, Marina Sbisà and Jef Verschueren (eds), Possibilities and Limitations of Pragmatics. Proceedings of the Conference on Pragmatics, Urbino, 8–14 July 1979, 211–23. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Goodwin, Charles. 2000. “Action and Embodiment within Situated Human Interaction”. Journal of Pragmatics 321: 1489–522.
Goossens, Louis. 1990. “Metaphtonymy: The Interaction of Metaphor and Metonymy in Expressions for Linguistic Action”. Cognitive Linguistics 1 (3): 323–40.
Heine, Bernd, Ulrike Claudi and Friederike Hünnemeyer. 1991a. “From Cognition to Grammar: Evidence from African Languages”. In Elizabeth Closs Traugott and Bernd Heine (eds), Approaches to Grammaticalization, 149–87. (Volume 11.) Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about the Mind. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, George and Michael Johnson. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2004. “Deixis”. In Laurence R. Horn and Gregory Ward (eds), The Handbook of Pragmatics, 97–121. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Lüdtke, Helmut. 1999. “Diachronic Semantics: Towards a Unified Theory of Language Change?” In Andreas Blank and Peter Koch (eds), Historical Semantics and Cognition, 49–60. Berlin and New York: Mouton De Gruyter.
Radden, Günter. 2003. “How Metonymic are Metaphors?” In René Dirven and Ralf Pörings (eds), Metaphor and Metonymy in Comparison and Contrast, 407–34. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Stern, Gustaf. 1968 [1931]. Meaning and Change of Meaning. With Special Reference to the English Language. Bloomington and London: Indiana University Press.
Sullivan, Karen. 2007. “Metaphoric Extension and Invited Inferencing”. Cultura, lenguaje y representación 51, 255–71.
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1991. “English Speech Act Verbs: A Historical Perspective”. In Linda R. Waugh and Stephen Rudy (eds), New Vistas in Grammar: Invariance and Variation, 387–406. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
