They argue that the sociolinguistic means at our disposal today (e.g. face-to-face interviews, recording of data, large and diverse sampling, etc.)
They therefore argue that it is exceedingly difficult to do socio-historical linguistics, and that the results will always be suspect due to lack of data and access to native speakers in real-world situations.
Those arguing for the validity of socio-historical linguistics reply that it is better to use what remaining textual evidence is available to begin to posit likely scenarios rather than leave some questions completely unanswered.
Lesley Milroy) that look at human interactions and their effects on the larger society are particularly well-suited to socio-historical research.
[3][4] Due to the lack of recordings of spoken language, sociohistorical linguistics has to rely exclusively on written corpora.