Linguistic history requires reliable models that correlate varieties of grammatical change with social factors. The composite model presented here considers scenarios of intergenerational monolingualism leading to stable language transmission, intergenerational multilingualism leading to areal features, and mass nonnative acquisition leading to grammatical reduction. It considers the agency of the individual in the transfer of features from one language to another according to patterns of linguistic dominance. These factors allow the linguistic historian to diagnose social changes from specific kinds of grammatical change and, vice versa, to predict some kinds of grammatical change within known historical upheavals of population. Terms from contact linguistics, such as pidgin, creole, and semicreole, are adopted after thorough explanation and contextualization.

This book is about the early evolution of the Persian language, specifically the emergence of Middle Persian from Old Persian in the time of the Achaemenian Persian Empire. The Introduction explains the project and defines critical terms. The concept of linguistic history is explained, followed by further notes on the critical use of certain terms and a sketch of the plan of the book.

The first inscription in Old Persian was carved into the mountainside of Bisitun, in present-day Iran, in 520–518 BCE. Less than two hundred years later, Old Persian inscriptions in the same written tradition appear to be “getting the grammar wrong” – drastically wrong. Scholars agree on the linguistic phenomena but have disagreed about how to explain them. The problem of this book is how the Persian language came to be restructured grammatically so quickly, in about five generations. The outcome was Middle Persian, which apparently was in use in an early form by the time of Alexander. This first chapter frames this problem and explains what is at stake in its resolution.

Chapter 6 focuses on the role of mas (< Sp. más) in Q’eqchi’-Maya and the function of the modern comparative construction (long thought to be a calque of its Spanish equivalent). In contrast to previous analyses, it shows that Q’eqchi’ mas does not function as a comparative (like Spanish más), but rather as a degree modifier, indefinite quantity, and differential operator (like Spanish muy and mucho). It shows that the comparative construction does not require mas but only the positive form of gradable predicate, along with the adposition chiru (before, in the face of) to mark the standard. It shows that mas came into Q’eqchi’ during the late 1800s and seems to have functioned this way from the beginning. In addition, it offers reasons for this shift in meaning and its frequent misanalysis by linguists.

Once covered by the enormous and highly biodiverse Bengalian rainforest, the region was attractive to early humans, who gradually developed settled rice cultivation. Archaeological finds show complex and multilingual prehistoric societies that established urban cultures. Today the ruined remains of fortified cities and large religious structures testify to Bangladesh’s early human history.