From: Handbook of Historical Linguistics (ed. by B. Joseph & R. Janda), Blackwell Publishers (2003), pp. 472-492 1 MORPHOLOGIZATION FROM SYNTAX Brian D. Joseph 1. Introduction It is clear that the set of changes effected by speakers in their languages include those that are often labelled “grammaticalization”, “grammaticization”, or even “grammatization”. This notion is variously defined, 1 but especially in recent years, almost always in such a way as to refer to something that, first of all, morphemes do, as opposed to (referring to) what is done by speakers, and that, second, echoes the characterization of Kurylowicz 1965: “an increase of the range of a morpheme advancing from a lexical to a grammatical or from a less grammatical to a more grammatical status”. Indeed, several other chapters in this volume — Bybee, Fortson, Harrison, Heine, Hock, Mithun, Rankin, and Traugott, to be exact — are concerned, to one degree or another, with grammaticalization. As Heine’s chapter points out, the notion of “grammaticalization” has been extended by many practitioners to cover other sorts of change than strictly the movement of an item along a scale (“cline”) of increasing grammatical status (from content word > grammatical word > clitic > inflectional affix, cf. Hopper & Traugott 1993:7), and thus Kurylowicz’s definition isprobably too narrow. McMahon (1994: 160), for instance, notes that grammaticalization encompasses essentially all types of language change, since “grammaticalization is not only a syntactic change, but a 1 See Janda Forthcoming/1999 for a survey of more than 20 definitions of this term which documents tellingly the general absence from these definitions of references to what speakers do.