Editor for this issue: Karen Milligan <karen
linguistlist.org>
Since I was quoted in the first message in this thread as one of the proponents of the use of the term ''inflation'' in the context of weakening of meaning, I feel I have to make my position clear. If linguists use ''inflation'' as a metaphor, this is really a two-step process: the use of the word in economics is already metaphorical, and the equivocation in the interpretation has been there from the beginning, due to the dual perspective one can take on a change in exchange values: when prices go up, the buying-power of money goes down. However, the point of calling certain kinds of language change ''inflationary processes'' is that there are arguably interesting parallels between them and the processes that we are used to calling ''inflation'' in economics. More specifically, since both the value of a currency and the meanings of linguistic expressions are conventional, short-time advantages may be obtained by for instance, printing an excessive amount of banknotes or using expressions such as intensifiers, titles, evaluative adjectives etc. more than their meaning warrants, with the long-time effect that these items, whether economic or linguistic, lose their value or part of it. This means that ''inflation'' is not simply another word for ''semantic bleaching'', it connects the process to a specific mechanism of change. One may well imagine situations in which the meaning or value of an expression is weakened without any inflation being involved. Thus, the value of a title such as ''Duke'' may be weakened if a monarch appoints an excessive number of dukes (which would be inflation) but also if a previously non-existing rank of ''Grand Duke'' is introduced. R�my Viredar (Linguist 14.675) objects that one cannot compare a word to a currency since ''the currency is rather the language itself, while a word would be an individual coin or note.'' I do not know if he thinks of instances or rather types of coins, but in either case the analogy is a bad one. The value of a coin wholly depends on the value of the currency (if it does not become a collectioner's item), but the meanings/values of expressions in a language are basically independent of each other. When I choose between two adjectives such as ''excellent'' and ''terrific'', it is actually rather like choosing between euros and dollars than like choosing between a five cent coin and a ten cent one. - �sten Dahl Reference Dahl, �sten. 2001. Inflationary effects in language and elsewhere. Frequency and the Emergence of Linguistic Structure, ed. by Joan Bybee and Paul J. Hopper, 471-80. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. [Now viewable at www.ebrary.com.)Mail to author|Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue