‘The vsuall speach of the Court’? Investigating language change in the Tudor family network (1544–1556)

Abstract

This paper considers how micro-level analysis can enrich our understanding of macro-level processes of language change, using a case study of the Tudors. It explores how language use in the Tudor family network relates to the role of the Court in the supralocalisation of innovative forms during the sixteenth century. Using an original corpus of correspondence and other autograph writings, I conduct a comparative analysis of the language of Elizabeth Tudor with her siblings, parents and caregivers. The findings suggest that Elizabeth's siblings, Mary I and Edward VI, were progressive in changes localised at the Court, but that Elizabeth's caregivers and peripheral kin may have influenced Elizabeth's uptake of non-Court-based changes. Using Network Strength Scores to represent the social experiences of Elizabeth and her nearest kin, it appears that Elizabeth's changing position within the Court network, from a peripheral to more central member, may have played a part in the Court's catalyst effect for the supralocalisation of innovative forms, and the emergence of an overtly prestigious "norm" in Early Modern English.

Supralocalisation Processes in Early Modern English Urban Vernaculars

“…Moreover, the development of the field of historical sociolinguistics and the application of the corpus linguistics approach have led to the study of new data, e.g. ego-documents, letters, drama dialogues, that in turn have shed new light on standardisation processes (Culpeper & Kytö, 2010;Evans, 2015;Nevalainen, 2000Nevalainen, , 2003Nevalainen & Raumolin-Brunberg, 2003). After all, this type of data, which can be relatively informal and closer to the oral register, may be seen as complementary to more formal data which has traditionally been studied.…”

“…Within this context, the main objective of the current paper is to investigate linguistic variables that displayed much variation and eventually changed during the period 1400 and 1700, namely the third person indicative present tense inflections; in particular the replacement of the suffix -(V)th by -(V)s in the singular (cf. Auer, 2018;Cole, 2014;Evans, 2015;Gries & Hilpert, 2010;Holmqvist, 1922;Kytö, 1993;Moore, 2002;Nevalainen, 2018;Nevalainen & Raumolin-Brunberg, 2003;Stein, 1987;Wright, 2002) and the emergence of -∅ over -(V)s, -(V)th and -(V)n in the plural (cf. Bailey & Ross, 1988;Cole, 2014;McIntosh, 1983;Schendl, 1994;Wright, 2002).…”