This paper makes three claims: first, that constructions in languages can be largely analyzed as public goods; second, that in cases where this is not true, they are common pool resources; and third, that in communication, there are systematic and intrinsic conflicts between speaker and hearer, such that in some cases, those conflicts will lead to a tragedy of the commons. It will be argued that at least some instances of language change can be seen as cases where short-term speaker interests impose costs on short-term hearer interests, and that in the long run, they also go against the best interests of speakers.