Regularity in Semantic Change¶
Traugott, E. C., & Dasher, R. B. (2001). Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge University Press.
Cited by¶
5 citations across 5 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Emergent Formalization (Language)
- Traugott and Dasher (2002) show how the same semantic pathways repeat across unrelated languages.
This sourceShows semantic-change types follow predictable, largely unidirectional pathways recurring across unrelated languages — supports the 'same semantic pathways repeat across languages' claim (and is reused for the emoji/formalization example).
Supported in partVerified against the publisher's abstract
The book's own abstract supports regularity in semantic change (metonymy- and usage-driven) documented from English and Japanese corpora, but it does not state that the same semantic pathways repeat across unrelated languages.
“Drawing on extensive corpus data from over a thousand years of English and Japanese textual history, Traugott and Dasher show that most changes in meaning originate in and are motivated by the associative flow of speech and conceptual metonymy.”
- Traugott and Dasher (2002) show how the same semantic pathways repeat across unrelated languages.
Domain-specific¶
- Semantic Narrowing and Widening
- Traugott and Dasher's
Supported in partVerified against the publisher's abstract
The publisher abstract backs a systematic, corpus-based account of semantic change, but grounds it in metonymy, not in widening or subjectification.
“Drawing on extensive corpus data from over a thousand years of English and Japanese textual history, Traugott and Dasher show that most changes in meaning originate in and are motivated by the associative flow of speech and conceptual metonymy.”
- Traugott and Dasher's
- Semantic Shift
- Modern systematic regularity theory (Traugott-Dasher 2002)
Supported in partVerified against the publisher's abstract
The abstract confirms the book treats regularity/systematicity in semantic change, but does not state the unidirectional tendencies the sentence attributes to it.
“Drawing on extensive corpus data from over a thousand years of English and Japanese textual history, Traugott and Dasher show that most changes in meaning originate in and are motivated by the associative flow of speech and conceptual metonymy.”
- Modern systematic regularity theory (Traugott-Dasher 2002)
Mechanisms¶
- Sense-Boundary Comparison Table
- Its failure mode is false precision through reification — the grid's tidy cells imply that senses are discrete and stable when living usage is fluid and overlapping, so a term captured mid-drift can be frozen into categories that erase the very continuity that matters.
This sourceTreats semantic change as gradual and use-driven, with older and newer related senses capable of coexisting during change.
- Its failure mode is false precision through reification — the grid's tidy cells imply that senses are discrete and stable when living usage is fluid and overlapping, so a term captured mid-drift can be frozen into categories that erase the very continuity that matters.
- Symbol Drift Revision Log
- The underlying phenomenon it fights is semantic drift: the gradual, unnoticed migration of a sign's meaning through repeated reuse, which a dated record with intent is designed to catch.
This sourceDescribes semantic change as new meanings arising through language use and becoming conventionalized through repeated interaction.
- The underlying phenomenon it fights is semantic drift: the gradual, unnoticed migration of a sign's meaning through repeated reuse, which a dated record with intent is designed to catch.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 3 of 5 citations: 3 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:54838d5883e8 · see in the full table