Christian Lehmann’s Ten Lectures on Grammaticalization offers a clear and comprehensive introduction to the author’s substantial contribution to grammaticalization theory. As part of a book series titled Distinguished Lectures in Cognitive Linguistics (Brill), it compiles lectures given by the author in 2023. In a style that is both pedagogical and rigorous, Lehmann defines and illustrates central concepts of grammaticalization theory, and convincingly demonstrates how they are structured in a coherent framework. The book contains ten lectures, an overview of which follows.
The introduction (pp. 1–12) provides definitions of the basic terms and illustrates them with textbook cases of grammaticalization, such as the article system of English and Spanish, the English progressive, and the Romance synthetic future.
The second lecture, titled ‘Basic concepts of grammaticalization theory’ (pp. 13–29), presents what the author considers key concepts necessary to explore this research field. It notably introduces the structure of the language system (i.e. the lexicon–grammar continuum and their various layers of complexity), motivation and arbitrariness (i.e. the interaction of universal communication principles with language-specific constraints), identity (i.e. the heuristics of recognizing that two signs are diachronically identical despite semantic and phonological differences), grammaticalization in synchrony and diachrony (i.e. the observation of grammaticalization either through a single or several stages of a language), and graduality (i.e. the stage-by-stage or abrupt processes of language change).
The third lecture, ‘Types of variation in grammar’ (pp. 30–48), has a somewhat surprising title given its actual content. It presents two types of grammatical changes – analogical change and reanalysis – which Lehmann distinguishes from grammaticalization, and two possible effects of grammaticalization – replacement and renewal – which are relevant for a broad functionalist view of grammar. An example of analogical change is the past tense of some English verbs, which have evolved by copying the past tense of other verbs (e.g. the past tense of wear used to be weared, but is now wore by analogy with a strong verb like bear/bore). Reanalysis is when an internal boundary of a syntagmatic composition is added, deleted or shifted. For example, the word adder comes from nadder, and the elision of its initial n is due to reanalysis: a nadder → an adder. Renewal is when a grammatical function is preserved but its form is replaced, such as the perfect in Romance languages that now uses the auxiliary have while its Latin equivalent was synthetic. Innovation is defined as the emergence of a new construction that fulfils a grammatical function that was nonexistent in the language, such as the introduction of a numeral classifier system in Persian.
The fourth lecture, titled ‘Criteria and parameters of grammaticalization’ (pp. 49–68), summarizes (and somewhat revises) the content of Lehmann’s (Reference Lehmann1995 [1982]) seminal work Thoughts on Grammaticalization. It discusses the defining properties of grammar and their measurement. The specific factors that distinguish grammar from the lexicon are often taken for granted, and their precise description is one of the most notable contributions of Lehmann’s work. The criteria to diagnose grammaticalization are divided into six categories: paradigmaticity, eligibility, integrity, bondedness, positional freedom and scope. For example, a linguistic sign exhibits high paradigmaticity when it appears in a closed and homogeneous paradigm (e.g. personal pronouns). As forms grammaticalize, they also tend to bond to their hosts, and lose their flexibility in terms of syntactic position (e.g. the grammaticalization of the Romance synthetic future from the Latin free construction verb + habere).
The fifth lecture, titled ‘Delimiting grammaticalization’ (pp. 69–81), opposes the tendency to subsume various phenomena of language change under grammaticalization. The author argues that grammaticalization is only relevant to linguistic theorizing if it is clearly delimited. He considers polygrammaticalization, lexicalization, conversion and morphologization to be related to grammaticalization, but ultimately distinct. Polygrammaticalization is the observation of the synchronic presence of numerous grammatical forms that come from the same source. This phenomenon is common, as forms tend to grammaticalize from frequent words with a vague semantic content (e.g. the verb have has grammaticalized into many grammatical forms in Romance, Germanic and also non-Indo-European languages). Although lexicalization and grammaticalization may involve similar mechanisms, conflating the two blurs the distinctiveness of grammatical processes. Conversion is yet another process of word formation, which transforms the part-of-speech of a word without formal modification of its stem (e.g. the butter → to butter). Conversion is different from grammaticalization because it is not an intrinsically oriented process of word formation. Finally, morphologization may be defined as a phonological alternation incidentally triggered by meaning which persists despite the loss of the conditioning factor. For example, the number alternation of foot/feet historically started as a vowel harmony process by which the plural suffix -e fronted the vowel of the stem in Old English. At a later stage, the plural suffix was dropped, so the vowel alternation ended up denoting number. Morphologization involves the semanticization of a phonological unit, while grammaticalization typically involves the desemanticization of a word or a phrase.
The sixth lecture, titled ‘Semantic and pragmatic aspects of grammaticalization’ (pp. 82–101), delves into a notoriously difficult dimension of this theoretical framework. As Lehmann puts it, ‘what it is, if anything, that characterizes grammatical meaning and distinguishes it from lexical meaning has vexed generations of linguists’ (pp. 86–7). The author concludes that what most grammatical signs share is a relational meaning, which should be understood as an inherent syntagmatic relation. He adds that, while this tendency is particularly strong, not all grammatical signs are relational (e.g. first- and second-person pronouns) and several lexical items are (e.g. plurivalent verbs). In the second part of the lecture, the author describes the link between grammaticalization and pragmatics. Lehmann shows how the development of performative particles, such as please and thank you, do not need the concept of either grammaticalization or pragmaticalization for their description. The concept of pragmaticalization might, however, be relevant to describe the development of German modal particles (e.g. doch) because these items have indeed acquired a meaning related to discourse.
The seventh lecture, titled ‘Grammaticalization in some functional domains’ (pp. 102–30), investigates the development of grammatical signs marking thematic structure (clefts, pseudo-clefts), case (locative, instrumental, benefactive, accusative) and aspectuality (progressive, perfective). This chapter provides clear examples of grammaticalization in typologically diverse languages (e.g. Mandarin, Yucatec Maya, Jula), which shows that those diachronic pathways are cross-linguistically widespread. However, this lecture is primarily illustrative and less theoretical than the rest of the book, so the reader has to infer what those examples imply for our general conception of grammaticalization.
The eighth lecture, titled ‘Directionality of grammaticalization’ (pp. 131–45), addresses a long-standing dispute in grammaticalization studies: are the changes described as grammaticalization unidirectional or can they run in the opposite direction? Some cases of degrammaticalization are attested in the world’s languages, but there are in fact really few compared to the several hundred well-documented historical cases of grammaticalization. When examining all the various processes involved in language change, it appears that more systematic research on their directionality is still necessary to reach firm conclusions. However, the author argues that, while the unidirectionality hypothesis is not a universal law, it is highly robust as an overwhelming tendency for grammaticalizing linguistic signs.
The ninth lecture, titled ‘Grammaticalization and linguistic typology’ (pp. 146–68), addresses several questions on the universality of grammaticalization theory and its limits. It notably introduces the cyclic alternations between synthetic and analytic patterns, the relevance of grammaticalization in typologically distinct languages, the different degrees of grammaticalization of a notion in a language and the genesis of grammar. While some of the early claims on the universality of grammaticalization had to be qualified, this lecture shows the depth and cross-linguistic applicability of grammaticalization theory. For example, even Southeast Asian languages like Mandarin, which show little erosion and cohesion of their grammatical morphemes, still possess morphemes that display all the parameters of grammaticalization. There are also striking cross-linguistic similarities in the sources of grammaticalization paths; ultimately, grammaticalization theory is highly relevant to reconstruct the prehistoric origin of the structure of any language and the emergence of grammar in the communicative systems that humanity employed before acquiring the fully fledged languages we know today.
The tenth lecture, titled ‘Cognitive basis of grammaticalization’ (pp. 169–92), presents hypotheses on what may motivate grammaticalization from a cognitive standpoint. The opening section could have been more concise. It introduces the cognitive concept of automation (i.e. ‘the downgrading of a controlled action to an automatic process’, p. 177), and shows how it is likely to be the main motivator for the grammaticalization of lexical items. Lehmann then proposes several methods to operationalize this grammaticalization-as-automation hypothesis. Speech errors, production speed and the memory of speech production are promising avenues to assess whether automaticity is indeed the determining factor that distinguishes grammatical items from lexical items (thus suggesting that automation may cause grammaticalization).
The questions examined in the book are vast in terms of both breadth and depth, since Lehmann addresses the general structure of natural languages beyond their diversity, the interaction of their foundational components and the causes of their development. His analysis explores various linguistic levels, as well as the general principles of human communication and their cognitive underpinnings. Lehmann’s clarity of presentation and pedagogical competence are impressive, as the text remains precise and concise, without any redundant or superfluous explanations. Each lecture stands on its own and provides an overview of key findings in the field. Among the many scholars working on grammaticalization, Lehmann stands out for his rigorous dialectical reasoning and analytical precision. Reading Ten Lectures on Grammaticalization makes it obvious that the author is a meticulous scientist who presents testable hypotheses with a strict coherence between his definitions (always based on necessary and sufficient features) and their illustrations. For example, in his analysis of the properties on grammatical meaning (pp. 91–3), Lehmann spells out five potential interpretations of the relational semantics of grammar, and demonstrates that only one interpretation is valid.
Although the book includes examples from various languages (e.g. Sinitic, Mayan), one might notice a slight Indo-European bias in the author’s choice of cross-linguistic examples. Including other language families for which detailed diachronic data are now available (e.g. Koreanic, Tibetic) would have enriched the author’s demonstrations of language universals. However, it remains a fact that the reconstruction of understudied languages has not reached the same level of reliability as well-investigated languages with an extensive written record. It is thus reasonable for the author to have only used examples that he felt confident with, and did not fall into the trap of relying on secondary sources with speculative data.
I found some of the terms particularly technical and sometimes slightly unintuitive. Although the terminology is consistently defined and justified, the pervasive jargon makes this self-described ‘introduction’ less accessible. I am not entirely convinced that using significans/significatum or paradigmatic variability adds much to the demonstration. More accessible terms such as form/meaning or obligatoriness would have prevented the reader from pausing to make sense of sentences that are both very technical and semantically dense.
The level of abstraction the author reaches is intellectually rewarding. Lehmann proposes an intricate theory of grammar that encompasses morphology, semantics and syntax, which is quite unique and is a highly valued contribution to the field. However, the extent to which these generalizations apply across different linguistic levels is sometimes unclear. Being more explicit about what aspects of the theory are relevant to what levels would have brought greater clarity. The author convincingly shows how paradigmatic variability may apply to specific forms (e.g. the English infinitive marker to) or whole grammatical categories (e.g. the plural). However, I doubt that most criteria of grammaticalization as they are expounded in the book are easily applicable to syntactic phenomena such as the general word order patterns of a language. Adopting such an abstract and arguably circular definition of grammaticalization – ‘the subjection of a linguistic construction or schema or of a linguistic operation to the rule of grammar’ (p. 1) – seems to undermine Lehmann’s effort to delimit the concept, since many phenomena that the author insists on excluding also rely on rules. Finally, although it is unrealistic to expect an introductory book to cite all the major works of a research field that is as broad as grammaticalization, there are on the whole few references, which often gives the impression that the author came up with some concepts which have actually been discussed for several decades or for which recent developments would have been worth citing. Some of the latest debates are scarcely addressed, and a more up-to-date bibliography would have enriched the book. For example, lecture 9 on grammaticalization and typology ignores major recent works, notably Narrog & Heine (Reference Narrog and Heine2018) or Haspelmath (Reference Haspelmath, Schmidtke-Bode, Levshina, Michaelis and Seržant2019). Other central disputes, such as the relevance of grammaticalization relative to Diachronic Construction Grammar, would also have deserved a more thorough treatment (see e.g. Traugott & Trousdale Reference Traugott and Trousdale2013; Hilpert Reference Hilpert2021). These minor shortcomings may be explained by the lecture-based format of the book, but at the revision stage, it would have been appropriate to add key references, as well as a conclusion at the end of every chapter.
In conclusion, Lehmann’s Ten Lectures on Grammaticalization is a must-read for any linguist interested in the internal history of languages. It provides a comprehensive introduction to how and why grammatical signs develop in natural languages. The essential elements of Lehmann’s work are clearly presented in this book, so it is highly recommended for those wishing to discover his contribution to our understanding of language structure, notably the intricacies of the lexicon–grammar interface. This book offers compelling insights into some of the most fundamental questions in linguistics: Why do all natural languages develop grammatical systems? What are the links between linguistic structures and human cognition? To what extent is the evolution of linguistic patterns comparable in the world’s languages? On a more personal note, these very questions led me to study linguistics, and eventually pursue research in grammaticalization, so I consider this book one of the most intellectually satisfying I have read in this research field. Despite the areas for improvement suggested above, the book’s claims are all clearly substantiated. It presents numerous hypotheses on language universals, so I believe it should inspire new generations of linguists to confirm or qualify grammaticalization theory with a wealth of recent data on a diversity of languages.
