Cover not available

Article published In: The locus of linguistic variation
Edited by Constantine Lignos, Laurel MacKenzie and Meredith Tamminga
[Linguistic Variation 16:2] 2016
► pp. 221–246

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Variant-centered variation and the like conspiracy

Published online: 27 January 2017
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/lv.16.2.03din
The conventional methodology of variationist linguistics foregrounds the variable as the object of study: each variant is situated in the envelope of variation against the other variants it competes with. This paper argues that it is necessary to look beyond the context of the alternations a variant participates in in order to get a full picture of the factors affecting variation. The multi-functional variant like is used as a case study to illustrate the value of a variant-centered analysis: the fact that several distinct variables are all simultaneously changing toward the variant like suggests that a variant can be targeted for change across multiple variables, parallelling Campbell-Kibler (2011)’s model of the variant as the carrier of sociolinguistic meaning. It is conjectured that the set of changes toward like can be explained as a top-down discursive change targeting like as an indicator of vague literality, a function it retains in multiple distinct variable contexts.
References (70)
Aaron, Jessi Elana. 2010. Pushing the envelope: Looking beyond the variable context. Language Variation and Change 221. 1–36. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Balistreri, Maggie. 2003. The evasion-English dictionary. New York: Melville House.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blank, Andreas. 2003. Polysemy in the lexicon and in discourse. In Brigitte Nerlich, Zazie Todd, Vimala Herman, & David C. Clarke (eds.), PolysemyPolysemy: Flexible patterns of meaning in mind and language, 267–293. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blondeau, Hélène & Naomi Nagy. 2008. Subordinate clause marking in Montreal Anglophone French and English. In Miriam Meyerhoff & Naomi Nagy (eds.), Social lives in language – sociolinguistics and multilingual speech communities: Celebrating the work of Gillian Sankoff, 273–313. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Boberg, Charles. 2005. The Canadian shift in Montreal. Language Variation and Change 171. 133–154. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brook, Marisa. 2014. Comparative complementizers in Canadian English: Insights from early fiction. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 20(2). 1–10.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Buchstaller, Isabelle. 2009. The quantitative analysis of morphosyntactic variation: Constructing and quantifying the denominator. Language and Linguistics Compass 3(4). 1010–1033. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. Quotatives: New trends and sociolinguistic implications. Malden, MA: Wiley/Blackwell. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Buchstaller, Isabelle & Erez Levon. 2014. Perception, cognition and linguistic structure: The effect of linguistic modularity and cognitive style on sociolinguistic processing. Paper presented at NWAV [New Ways of Analyzing Variation] 431, Chicago.
Campbell-Kibler, Kathryn. 2011. The sociolinguistic variant as a carrier of social meaning. Language Variation and Change 221. 423–441. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chambers, Jack & Peter Trudgill. 1980. Dialectology, 2d edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cheshire, Jenny, Paul Kerswill, & Ann Williams. 2005. On the non-convergence of phonology, grammar, and discourse. In Peter Auer, Frans Hinskens, & Paul Kerswill (eds.), Dialect change: Convergence and divergence in European languages, 135–167. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coupland, Nikolas. 2014. Sociolinguistic change, vernacularization, and British broadcast media. In Jannis Androutsopoulos (ed.), Mediatiazation and sociolinguistic change, 67–96. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Crist, Sean Jacob. 2001. Conspiracy in historical phonology. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dailey-O’Cain, Jennifer. 2000. The sociolinguistic distribution of and attitudes toward focuser like and quotative like. Journal of Sociolinguistics 4(1). 60–80. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
D’Arcy, Alexandra Faith. 2005. Like: Syntax and development. Toronto: University of Toronto dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
D’Arcy, Alexandra. 2006. Lexical replacement and the like(s). American Speech 81(4). 330–357. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2007. Like and language ideology: Disentangling fact from fiction. American Speech 82(4). 386–419. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2008. Canadian English as a window to the rise of like in discourse. Anglistik 19(2). 125–140.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2012. The diachrony of quotation: Evidence from New Zealand English. Language Variation and Change 241. 343–369. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Diertani, Chaya Eliana Ariel. 2011. Morpheme boundaries and structural change: Affixes running amok. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dines, Elizabeth R. 1980. Variation in discourse – “and stuff like that”. Language in Society 91. 13–31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Drager, Katie K. 2011. Sociophonetic variation and the lemma. Journal of Phonetics 391. 694–707. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ferrara, Kathleen & Barbara Bell. 1995. Sociolinguistic variation and discourse function of constructed dialogue introducers: The case of be + like. American Speech 70(3). 265–290. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fuller, Janet M. 2003. Use of the discourse marker like in interviews. Journal of Sociolinguistics 7(3). 365–377. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fruehwald, Josef. 2013. The phonological influence on phonetic change. Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gordon, Matthew J. 2011. Methodological and theoretical issues in the study of chain shifts. Language and Linguistics Compass 5(11). 784–794. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Guy, Gregory R. 1991. Explanation in variable phonology: An exponential model of morphological constraints. Language Variation and Change 31. 1–22. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Herold, Ruth. 1990. Mechanisms of merger: The implementation and distribution of the low back merger in eastern Pennsylvania. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hock, Hans Heinrich. 1991. Principles of historical linguistics. Berlin: Mouton/de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
James, Allan R. 1983. Compromisers in English: A cross-disciplinary approach to their interpersonal significance. Journal of Pragmatics 71. 191–206. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1942. A modern English grammar on historical principles. Part VI: Morphology. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H. & Sara W. Smith. 1998. And people just you know like wow: Discourse markersDiscourse markers as negotiation strategies. In Andreas H. Jucker & Yael Ziv (eds.), Discourse markersDiscourse markers: Description and theory, 171–201. Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kallen, Jeffrey L. 2013. Irish English, Volume 2: The Republic of Ireland. Berlin: de Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kastronic, Laura. 2011. Discourse like in Quebec English. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 17(2). 105–114.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1966. The linguistic variable as a structural unit. Washington Linguistics Review 31. 4–22.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1972. Sociolinguistic patterns. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1993. The unobservability of structure and its linguistic consequences. Paper presented at NWAVE [New Ways of Analyzing Variation in English] 221, Ottawa.
. 2007. Transmission and diffusion. Language 83(2). 344–387. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Labov, William, Sharon Ash, & Charles Boberg. 2006. Atlas of North American English: Phonetics, phonology, and sound change. Berlin: Mouton/de Gruyter.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lavandera, Beatriz R. 1978. Where does the sociolinguistic variable stop? Language in Society 71. 171–182. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
López-Couso, María José & Belén Méndez-Naya. 2012. On the use of as if, as though, and like in Present-Day English complementation structures. Journal of English Linguistics 40(2). 172–195. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2015. Secondary grammaticalization in clause combining: From adverbial subordination to complementation in English. Language Sciences 47B1. 188–198. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Macaulay, Ronald. 2001. You’re like “why not?”: The quotative expressions of Glasgow adolescents”. Journal of Sociolinguistics 5(1). 3–21. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
MacKenzie, Laurel. 2013. Variation in English auxiliary realization: A new take on contraction. Language Variation and Change 251. 17–41. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maddeaux, Ruth & Aaron Dinkin. To appear. Is like like like?: Evaluating the same variant across multiple variables. Linguistics Vanguard.
Maguire, Warren, Lynn Clark, & Kevin Watson. 2013. Introduction: What are mergers and can they be reversed? English Language and Linguistics 17(2). 229–239. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mali, Taylor. 2002. Totally like whatever, you know? In What learning leaves. Newtown, CT: Hanover Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Metcalf, Allan. 2013. What’s not to like? Blog post for Lingua Franca, [URL]. (Viewed 25 November 2014.)
Meyerhoff, Miriam. 2001. Dynamics of differentiation: On social psychology and cases of language variation. In Nikolas Coupland, Srikant Sarangi, & Christopher N. Candlin (eds.), Sociolinguistics and Social Theory, 61–87. London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miller, Jim & Regina Weinert. 1995. The function of LIKE in dialogue. Journal of Pragmatics 251. 365–393. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Panman, Otto. 1982. Homonymy and polysemy. Lingua 581. 105–136. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pichler, Heike. 2010. Methods in discourse variation analysis: Reflections on the way forward. Journal of Sociolinguistics 14(5). 581–608. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Poplack, Shana & Danielle Turpin. 1999. Does the Futur have a future in (Canadian) French? Probus 111. 133–164. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rickford, John R., Arnetha Ball, Renee Blake, Raina Jackson, & Nomi Martin. 1991. Rappin on the copula coffin: Theoretical and methodological issues in the analysis of copular variation in African-American Vernacular English. Language Variation and Change 31. 103–132. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Romaine, Suzanne & Deborah Lange. 1991. The use of like as a marker of reported speech and thought: A case of grammaticalization in progress. American Speech 66(3). 227–279. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ryan, Erin Gloria. 2011. My love affair with “like”. [URL]. (Viewed 2 December 2014.)
Schourup, Lawrence C. 1985. Common discourse particles in English conversation. New York: Garland.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Shepherd, Zabrinah. 2011. “Guest blog: You, like, need to stop using the word “like”. [URL]. (Viewed 25 November 2014.)
Siegel, Muffy. 2002. Like: The discourse particle and semantics. Journal of Semantics 191. 35–71. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tagliamonte, Sali A. & Alexandra D’Arcy. 2007. Frequency and variation in the community grammar: Tracking a new change through the generations. Language Variation and Change 191. 199–217. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tamminga, Meredith. 2014a. Persistence in the production of linguistic variation. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania dissertation.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2014b. Sound change without frequency effects: Ramifications for phonological theory. In Robert E. Santana-LaBarge (ed.), Proceedings of the 31st West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, 457–465. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tracy, Marc. 2013. Linguist says you can use “like” more. He’s, like, wrong. [URL]. (Viewed 25 November 2014.)
Underhill, Robert. 1988. Like is, like, focus. American Speech 63(3). 234–246. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wallenberg, Joel C. 2013. A unified theory of stable variation, syntactic optionality, and syntactic change. Paper presented at DiGS [Diachronic Generative Syntax] 151, Ottawa.
Wasko, Brian. 2011. Why we, like, say “like” all the time. [URL]. (Viewed 26 November 2014.)
Wolfram, Walt. 1991. The linguistic variable: Fact and fantasy. American Speech 66(1). 22–32. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (16)

Cited by 16 other publications

Bürkle, Daniel Matthias
2025. Acoustic analysis of like in North-West England shows context effects, but not function effects. English Language and Linguistics ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Sneller, Betsy, Laurel MacKenzie & Meredith Tamminga
2025. Bill Labov: Looking Back, Looking Forward. Journal of Sociolinguistics 29:4 ► pp. 309 ff. DOI logo
Aijmer, Karin
2022. ‘Did you just basically steal everything?’ – A study of discourse -pragmatic variation and change. Journal of Pragmatics 200 ► pp. 8 ff. DOI logo
Beltrama, Andrea
2020. Social meaning in semantics and pragmatics. Language and Linguistics Compass 14:9 DOI logo
BELTRAMA, ANDREA & EMILY A. HANINK
2019. Marking imprecision, conveying surprise:Likebetween hedging and mirativity. Journal of Linguistics 55:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Brook, Marisa
2018. Taking it up a level: Copy-raising and cascaded tiers of morphosyntactic change. Language Variation and Change 30:2 ► pp. 231 ff. DOI logo
Brook, Marisa
2020.  I feel like and it feels like: Two paths to the emergence of epistemic markers. Linguistics Vanguard 6:1 DOI logo
Brook, Marisa
2023.  As if, as though, and like in Canadian English. English World-Wide. A Journal of Varieties of English 44:3 ► pp. 381 ff. DOI logo
Brook, Marisa
2024. Emma Moore, Socio-syntax: Exploring the social life of grammar. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2024. Pp. 256. ISBN 9781108843973.. English Language and Linguistics ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Brook, Marisa
2024. The origins of pretend like: A syntactic-semantic puzzle in American English and beyond. American Speech: A Quarterly of Linguistic Usage ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Brook, Marisa
2025. 98994 Comparative relativizers in American English: A puzzle from the margins of like . In English Sociosyntax, ► pp. 97 ff. DOI logo
Labov, William
2018. The role of the Avant Garde in linguistic diffusion. Language Variation and Change 30:1 ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Schweinberger, Martin
2018. Alexandra D’Arcy.Discourse-pragmatic variation in context – eight hundred years of LIKE. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 2017. 235 pp. DOI 10.1075/slcs.187. ISBN 978 90 272 5952 3 (HB), ISBN 978 90 272 6531 9 (EBOOK).. ICAME Journal 42:1 ► pp. 219 ff. DOI logo
Weston, John
2018. Alexandra D'Arcy, Discourse-pragmatic variation in context: Eight hundred years of LIKE. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2017. Pp. xx, 235. Hb. $143, €95.. Language in Society 47:4 ► pp. 640 ff. DOI logo
Maddeaux, Ruth & Aaron Dinkin
2017. Is like like like?: Evaluating the same variant across multiple variables. Linguistics Vanguard 3:1 DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2017. Discourse-pragmatic Variation in Context [Studies in Language Companion Series, 187], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 november 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue