Cite this article as: Umar, H. A., Muhammad, A. I., Gambo, K. B., Ahmad, A., & Mustapha, R. Z. (2025). The shifting tongue: Patterns and processes of language change. Sokoto Journal of Linguistics and Communication Studies (SOJOLICS), 1(2), 220–225. https://www.doi.org/10.36349/sojolics.2025.v01i02.024
THE SHIFTING
TONGUE: PATTERNS AND PROCESSES OF LANGUAGE CHANGE
By
Hamisu Aliyu Umar
Department of Languages, School Of General Studies and
Communication Skills
Kano State College of Education And Preliminary Studies
(KASCEPS)
&
Ali Ibrahim Muhammad
Ibrahimalimuhammad80@gmail.com
Department of Arts and HumanitiesSchool Of General and
Remedial Studies
Kano State Polytechnic
&
Kabiru Bature Gambo
Department of English and Literary Studies
Yusuf MaitamaSule Federal University of Education,
Kano(YUMS-FUE)
&
Aminu Ahmad
Department of Primary Education, School of Education
(Special Program)
Kano State College of Islamic, And Legal Studies (AKCILS)
&
Ruslan Zakari Mustapha
ruslanzakarimustapha@gmail.com
Department of Language and Communication Skills School of
GSE(Special Programme)
Kano State College of Education and Preliminary Studies
Abstract
Language change is an inevitable
and continuous process that affects all spoken languages. This study
investigates the causes, patterns, and processes of language change from a
sociolinguistic perspective. Key drivers identified include language contact,
technological advancement, globalization, social factors, and internal
structural evolution. The study further examines major linguistic theories that
explain the mechanisms and motivations behind language change, illustrating
these with examples from English, Hausa, and other languages. The findings
confirm that language change is a natural and necessary phenomenon, essential
for linguistic growth, adaptation, and the dynamic evolution of communication
in human societies.
Keywords: Language change,
Sociolinguistics, Semantic shift, Sound change, Language contact.
1. Introduction
Languages are inherently dynamic,
evolving over time under the influence of social, cultural, and structural
pressures. While previous research has addressed general patterns of language
change, many studies do not provide specific, real-world illustrations of how
these changes manifest across different linguistic levels, including phonology,
morphology, syntax, and semantics. This study addresses that gap by offering
concrete examples and analyzing both the mechanisms and motivations behind
language change.
Language evolution may be gradual
or accelerated, shaped by factors such as migration, trade, technology,
education, and interactions among different linguistic communities. Although
speakers may not always consciously perceive these changes, observable linguistic
patterns indicate that languages expand, contract, or transform depending on
usage. Examples of such changes include English forms like wouldja for would
you and telly for television, as well as Hausa innovations
such as zantafiyanzuyanzu, which urban youth shorten to zantafiyanzu-nan.
Semantic shifts further illustrate this evolution: in English, meat
originally referred to food in general but now specifically denotes animal
flesh, while in Hausa, yartsana, which initially meant “doll,” has
acquired the informal meaning of “a beautiful girl.”
2. Literature
Review
Language change has remained a central concern in
linguistics, drawing attention from historical linguistics, sociolinguistics,
phonology, syntax, semantics, pragmatics, and applied linguistics, as scholars
have long examined how and why languages evolve over time. Early foundations
were laid by scholars such as Grimm (1822) and Verner (1875), who demonstrated
that sound change follows systematic and regular patterns, while Saussure
(1916) later distinguished between synchronic and diachronic approaches, establishing
language as both a structured system and a dynamic entity. Building on this
foundation, modern theories broadened the scope of language change beyond sound
laws to include social influences, with Labov (1963, 1994) showing that factors
such as class, gender, prestige, and identity shape variation and drive change
across generations, and Milroy and Milroy (1985) highlighting the role of
social networks in either resisting or promoting innovation, a view further
supported by Trudgill’s Dialect Contact Theory. Scholars identify change across
phonological, morphological, syntactic, and semantic levels, including sound
shifts driven by articulatory ease, morphological simplification through usage
and grammaticalisation, gradual syntactic restructuring through competition
between forms, and semantic shifts such as widening, narrowing, and
metaphorical extension influenced by social and technological developments.
Language change is also explained through contact-induced processes such as
borrowing and convergence, internal motivations linked to structural balance
and communicative efficiency, and broader social forces including migration,
urbanisation, youth culture, media, and digital communication, which Crystal
(2008) identifies as accelerating innovation and spread. The diffusion of
change has been explained through models such as Wave Theory, Lexical
Diffusion, and Labov’s staged model of change, while contemporary debates focus
on whether change is predictable or probabilistic; however, there is broad
agreement that language change is natural, inevitable, and shaped by the
interaction of linguistic, social, and technological factors.
3. Methodology and
Theoretical Framework
This study adopts a
qualitative–descriptive research design, which is appropriate for explaining
patterns of language change through detailed description rather than numerical
measurement. Data were sourced from secondary materials, including academic journals,
linguistics textbooks, sociolinguistic surveys, online corpora, and documented
examples drawn primarily from English and Hausa. The analysis was conducted
through thematic categorisation of linguistic change across four major levels.
Phonological change was examined through patterns such as vowel reduction and
consonant weakening, including the realisation of Hausa /ts/ as /s/ among some
youth speakers. Morphological change was analysed through the emergence of new
affixes and the adaptation of loanwords, exemplified by forms such as famfo
‘pump’ and kwamfuta ‘computer’. Syntactic change was identified in the
increasing use of simplified structures, particularly in youth slang and
digital communication. Semantic change was explored through shifts in meaning,
such as English mouse extending from an animal to a computer device, and
Hausa ya’yangida shifting from ‘family members’ to ‘political
loyalists’. This methodological approach allows for an in-depth exploration of
the complexity, motivations, and processes of language change using descriptive
linguistic analysis.
The theoretical framework
integrates perspectives on attitudes toward language change and established
theories of linguistic evolution. Prescriptivism views non-standard varieties
as inferior, emphasises adherence to standard norms, and seeks to restrict or
prevent change, whereas descriptivism recognises linguistic diversity,
investigates change without value judgement, and accepts variation as a natural
aspect of language evolution. The study further draws on theories of language
change, including Crystal’s Tide Metaphor, which conceptualises language as a
dynamic system that continually absorbs new forms while discarding others;
Hockett’s Random Fluctuation Theory, which attributes change to chance events
and shifting contexts; and Halliday’s Functional Theory, which explains change
as a response to emerging communicative needs shaped by social and
technological developments. Additional insights are drawn from related
perspectives such as Conversationalisation (Fairclough), Informalisation
(Goodman), Euphemism Theory (Rollinger), and Lexical Gaps Theory, all of which
collectively account for the social, pragmatic, and functional forces driving
language change.
4. Data
Presentation and Analysis
English words spreading rapidly
into African and Asian languages.Types of Language Change
|
Process |
Description |
Examples |
|
Coinage/ Neologism
|
The
creation of completely new words. |
1.
“Muggle”A person who lacks skills or knowledge in a particular
area. 2.
“Kwatan-kwatama” means perfect resembles
|
|
Borrowing |
Words
are taken from other languages |
1) “Pizza” (Italian food) 2) “Afuwa”
(Arabic) forgiveness 3) “Alfindiki”
(Arabic) Hotel or name of place. |
|
Eponyms |
Words
that come from the name of person, place or brand |
4)
“Braille” Machine used by blind. Invented by Luis Braille 5)
“Mandawari” name of place in Kano. Named after the person came from
Mali. 6)
“Algorism” related to Mathematics invented by Muhammad ibn Musa Al
Kawarismi. |
|
Retronyms |
A
word that provides a new name for something to differentiate the original
word from a more recent form. |
7)
“Analog watch” instead of digital watch. 8)
“Electric guitar” instead of traditional guitar. 9)
‘Acibalbal’ traditional lamp than ‘fitila’ lamp than ‘cocilan’ which
it means torch. |
|
Clipping |
An
existing word is shortened. |
10) Back-clipping; ‘Exam’ instead of examination. 11) Fore-clipping; ‘Phone’ instead of telephone. 12) Middle-clipping; ‘Jams’ instead of pajamas. |
|
Archaisms |
Words
gradually stop being used. |
13) ‘Sweet
candy’ for candy or sweet. 14) ‘Torchlight’
for torch or light. |
Semantic Change refers
to the change in the of words over time. Consider the following Table:
|
Process |
Description |
Examples |
|
Amelioration
|
Shift
of words meaning over time from neutral or negative to positive. |
3.
‘Pretty’ means sly or crafty but now it refers to beauty. 4.
‘Bala’i’ means calamity but it may refer to great. 5.
‘Shege’ means insult but it may refer to praise. 6.
‘Maye’ meant witch 7.
‘Kwaro’ means insect but it may refer to genius. |
|
Pejoration |
Shift
of words’ meaning over time from neutral or positive to negative. |
8. ‘Silly’
in old English meant blessed but in
modern English meant innocent, in early modern English weak but in present
day English means stupid. 9. ‘Lahaula’
meant hardship and it may means
ingenuity. 10. ‘Tsibbu’ – Medicine but it may means sorcery. 11. ‘Kailula’
– siesta and it may means
absenteeism |
|
Broadening/generalization |
Change
in words’ meaning over time to more general or inclusive. |
12. ‘Holiday’
meant Holy day and now it means any
day that people do not need to work. 13. ‘Arrive’
meant getting to dry land after a
long boat journey but now it means the ending of any kind of journey. 14. ‘Afuwa’
meant forgiveness but it may refers
to discount, seek of divorce, recover from sick. 15. ‘Barka’
means congratulation and it may meant
greeting. 16. ‘Shawara’
meant discussion or advice. But it
may means warning, yellow fever. 17. ‘Sallama’
meant seeking for permission to enter
and it also means to agree to sell at price offered, give off, acknowledge,
dismissed, divorce, discharge, release from custody, end the prayer, discard
something, abandoning, traditional title.
|
|
Narrowing |
Chang
in word’s meaning over time to more specific meanings. |
18. ‘courage’
meant heart, mind, disposition,
nature, bravery, valor, narrowed to bravery and valor. 19. ‘Hakiim’
meant a governor or a ruler but
narrowed to head district. 20. ‘Darika’
meant path but narrowed to Sufism
(theologian). 21. ‘Musabaka’
meant competition but narrowed to
Qur’anic competition. |
|
Metonymy/Synecdoche |
A
new meaning is created when the word for a part represent the whole or the
whole to represent the part. |
22. ‘Wheel’
meant a circular device for machine
but may refer to the whole car. 23. ‘Plastic’
may means an ATM card. 24. ‘Dankwali’
meant scarp but it may refer to the
women. 25. ‘Masarauta’
the name of palace and it may meant
the king himself. 26. ‘Villa’
meant the presidential place of
Nigeria and also meant the president of Nigeria himself. |
4. Findings
The findings indicate that
language change operates as a continuous and multidimensional process affecting
all levels of linguistic structure, including phonology, morphology, lexis,
syntax, and semantics, thereby confirming that no aspect of language remains
fixed over time. The analysis further shows that borrowing and semantic shift
are the most prominent mechanisms of change within multilingual environments
such as Nigeria, where sustained language contact encourages constant
adaptation and restructuring. Technological advancement and globalisation were
also found to play a crucial role in accelerating language change, particularly
through social media and other digital communication platforms that enable the
rapid diffusion of new forms, expressions, and usage patterns. In addition, the
study reveals divergent attitudes toward language change, with prescriptivist
perspectives often construing change as linguistic decline or corruption, while
descriptivist orientations regard it as a natural, inevitable, and necessary
feature of linguistic evolution.
The findings also reveal several
challenges inherent in the study of language change. Capturing authentic and
spontaneous instances of change requires prolonged and systematic observation,
which poses practical difficulties for researchers. The persistent tension
between standardised language norms and everyday usage further complicates the
identification and classification of emerging forms. Moreover, the rapid pace
at which new expressions arise in digital spaces makes systematic tracking
difficult, while extensive dialectal diversity across regions and social groups
limits the generalisability of observed patterns.
Finally, the findings highlight
certain limitations of the study. The reliance on descriptive observation,
rather than longitudinal or experimental methods, constrains the ability to
establish causal explanations for language change. The focus on English and
Hausa restricts the representativeness of the data, as patterns in other
Nigerian and global languages may differ. In addition, the absence of
quantitative measurement of digitally mediated linguistic change limits precise
assessment of the rate and direction of recent developments.
5. Conclusion
Language change is a constant, unavoidable process shaped by
social, cultural, and technological forces. While prescriptivists may resist
change, descriptivists embrace it as a natural part of linguistic evolution.
Without change, language would stagnate, limiting communication and cultural
exchange.
References
Aitchison, J. (2013). Language change: Progress or decay? (4th
ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Bloomfield, L. (1933). Language.
New York, NY: Holt.
Bussmann, H. (2010). Routledge dictionary of language and
linguistics.Routledge.
Bybee, J. (2015). Language change.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139857016
Crystal, D. (2000). Language death.Cambridge University
Press.
Crystal, D. (2008). A dictionary of
linguistics and phonetics (6th ed.). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Eckert, P. (2012). Language and
adolescence. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511791879
Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and social change.Polity
Press.
Grimm, J. (1822). Deutsche
Grammatik.Göttingen, Germany: Dieterich.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An introduction to functional grammar.
Edward Arnold.
Hock, H. H., & Joseph, B. D.
(2009).Language history, language change, and language relationship: An
introduction to historical and comparative linguistics (2nd ed.). Berlin,
Germany: Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110216432
Hockett, C. (1958). A course in modern linguistics.
Macmillan.
Holmes, J. (2013). An introduction to sociolinguistics (4th ed.). Routledge.
Holmes, J., & Wilson, N. (2017). An introduction to sociolinguistics (5th
ed.). Routledge.
Hyman, L. M. (2013). Language
change: The interplay of internal and external factors. Oxford, UK: Oxford
University Press.
Kroch, A. (1989). Reflexes of
grammar in patterns of language change. Language Variation and Change,
1(3), 199–244. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954394500000140
Labov, W. (1994).Principles of linguistic change: Internal factors.Wiley-Blackwell.
Labov, W. (1963).The social
motivation of a sound change. Word, 19(3), 273–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1963.11659799
Milroy, L., & Milroy, J. (1985).Linguistic
change, social network and speaker innovation. Journal of Linguistics,
21(2), 339–384. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700016593
Milroy, L., & Milroy, J. (1992).Social network and social class: Toward an
integrated sociolinguistic model. Language in Society, 21(1), 1–26.
Saussure, F. de.(1916). Course in
general linguistics (C. Bally & A. Sechehaye, Eds.; W. Baskin, Trans.).
New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. (Original work published 1916)
Schmidt, J. (1872). Die
Sprachgesellschaften und die Wellenbewegung. Leipzig, Germany:
Breitkopf&Härtel.
Thomason, S. G., & Kaufman, T.
(1988). Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics.
Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Trudgill, P. (1986). Dialects in
contact. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Trudgill, P. (2011). Sociolinguistic typology: Social
determinants of linguistic complexity. Oxford University Press.
Ullmann, S. (1962).Semantics: An
introduction to the science of meaning. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
Verner, K. (1875). EineAusnahme des
erstenLautgesetzes.Helsingfors, Finland: SuomalainenTiedeakatemia.
Wang, W. S.-Y. (1969). Competing
changes as a cause of residue. Language, 45(1), 9–25.
https://doi.org/10.2307/411971
Yule, G. (2010). The study of language (4th ed.). Cambridge University Press.
0 Comments