Selected Papers from the Fourteenth International ... - STIBA Malang
Selected Papers from the Fourteenth International ... - STIBA Malang
Selected Papers from the Fourteenth International ... - STIBA Malang
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
English historical linguistics 2006<br />
volumE i
AMSTERDAM STUDIES IN THE THEORY AND<br />
HISTORY OF LINGUISTIC SCIENCE<br />
general Editor<br />
E.F.K. KoErnEr<br />
(Zentrum für allgemeine sprachwissenschaft, typologie<br />
und universalienforschung, Berlin)<br />
series iv – currEnt issuEs in linguistic thEorY<br />
Advisory Editorial Board<br />
lyle campbell (salt lake city)<br />
sheila Embleton (toronto)<br />
Elly van gelderen (tempe, ariz.)<br />
Brian D. Joseph (columbus, ohio)<br />
John E. Joseph (Edinburgh)<br />
manfred Krifka (Berlin)<br />
martin maiden (oxford)<br />
E. Wyn roberts (vancouver, B.c.)<br />
Joseph c. salmons (madison, Wis.)<br />
volume 295<br />
maurizio gotti, marina Dossena and richard Dury (eds.)<br />
English Historical Linguistics 2006. Volume I: Syntax and Morphology<br />
<strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> fourteenth <strong>International</strong> Conference on<br />
English Historical Linguistics (ICEHL 14), Bergamo, 21–25 August 2006
English historical<br />
linguistics 2006<br />
sElEctED PaPErs From<br />
thE FourtEEnth intErnational conFErEncE<br />
on English historical linguistics (icEhl 14),<br />
BErgamo, 21–25 august 2006<br />
volumE i: sYntax anD morPhologY<br />
Edited by<br />
mauriZio gotti<br />
marina DossEna<br />
richarD DurY<br />
University of Bergamo<br />
John BEnJamins PuBlishing comPanY<br />
amstErDam/PhilaDElPhia
The paper used in this publication meets <strong>the</strong> minimum requirements of american national<br />
standard for information sciences — Permanence of Paper for Printed library materials,<br />
ansi Z39.48-1984.<br />
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data<br />
international conference on English historical linguistics (14th : 2006 : Bergamo university)<br />
English historical linguistics 2006 : selected papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> fourteenth international conference on<br />
English historical linguistics (icEhl 14), Bergamo, 21-25 august 2006.<br />
p. cm. -- (amsterdam studies in <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>ory and history of linguistic science. series iv, current issues<br />
in linguistic <strong>the</strong>ory, issn 0304-0763 ; v. 295)<br />
includes bibliographical references and index.<br />
1. English language--grammar, historical--congresses. 2. English language--history--congresses. i.<br />
gotti, maurizio. ii. Dossena, marina, 1961- iii. Dury, richard. iv. title. v. series.<br />
PE1075.i57 2008<br />
425--dc22 2008002770<br />
isBn 978 90 272 4810 7 (hb; alk. paper)<br />
© 2008 – John Benjamins B.v.<br />
no part of this book may be reproduced in any form, by print, photoprint, microfilm, or any o<strong>the</strong>r means,<br />
without written permission <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> publisher.<br />
John Benjamins Publishing Co. • P.O.Box 36224 • 1020 ME Amsterdam • The Ne<strong>the</strong>rlands<br />
John Benjamins North America • P.O.Box 27519 • Philadelphia PA 19118-0519 • USA
Table of contents<br />
Foreword vii<br />
Introduction ix<br />
Maurizio Gotti, Marina Dossena & Richard Dury<br />
Part I. Old and Middle English 1<br />
The balance between syntax and discourse in Old English 3<br />
Ans van Kemenade, Tanja Milicev & R. Harald Baayen<br />
The Old English copula weorðan and its replacement<br />
in Middle English 23<br />
Peter Petré & Hubert Cuyckens<br />
Verb types and word order in Old and Middle English<br />
non-coordinate and coordinate clauses 49<br />
Kristin Bech<br />
From locative to durative to focalized? The English progressive<br />
and ‘PROG imperfective drift’ 69<br />
Kristin Killie<br />
Gender assignment in Old English 89<br />
Letizia Vezzosi<br />
On <strong>the</strong> position of <strong>the</strong> OE quantifier eall and PDE all 109<br />
Tomohiro Yanagi<br />
On <strong>the</strong> post-finite misagreement phenomenon<br />
in Late Middle English 125<br />
Richard Ingham & Klean<strong>the</strong>s K. Grohmann<br />
Syntactic dialectal variation in Middle English 141<br />
Cristina Suárez-Gómez<br />
Particles as grammaticalized complex predicates 157<br />
Bettelou Los
vi Table of contents<br />
Part II. Early and Late Modern English 181<br />
Adverb-marking patterns in Earlier Modern English<br />
coordinate constructions 183<br />
Amanda Pounder<br />
’Tis he, ’tis she, ’tis me, ’tis – I don’t know who …: Cleft and<br />
identificational constructions in 16th to 18th century English plays 203<br />
Claudia Lange & Ursula Schaefer<br />
Emotion verbs with to-infinitive complements: From specific<br />
to general predication 223<br />
Thomas Egan<br />
Subjective progressives in seventeenth and eighteenth century English:<br />
Secondary grammaticalization as a process of objectification 241<br />
Svenja Kranich<br />
Index of subjects, terms & languages 257
Foreword<br />
The conference at which <strong>the</strong> papers in this volume were first presented took place<br />
on 21–25 August 2006 at <strong>the</strong> University of Bergamo (Faculty of Foreign Languages<br />
and Literatures). This was <strong>the</strong> 14th biennial meeting of <strong>the</strong> <strong>International</strong> Conference<br />
on English Historical Linguistics (ICEHL), which has been held each time in<br />
a different European country and, until <strong>the</strong>n, had never been hosted by an Italian<br />
institution. The choice of Bergamo was found to be appropriate, as this University<br />
has a strong tradition in English historical linguistics, international scholarly exchanges<br />
and has held three important conferences dedicated to English Diachronic<br />
Syntax (1992) and English Historical Dialectology (2003 and 2007).<br />
The ICEHL conference proved to be very successful, as over 220 well established<br />
as well as younger scholars, <strong>from</strong> Europe and <strong>from</strong> as far away as <strong>the</strong> United<br />
States, Canada, New Zealand and Japan, took an active part in both presenting a<br />
wide range of stimulating papers and participating in <strong>the</strong> ensuing discussions.<br />
The various conference events – which included plenary lectures, papers, panels<br />
and workshops – provided an excellent opportunity for <strong>the</strong> assessment of how<br />
research in this field had progressed and what results had been obtained, giving<br />
evidence of <strong>the</strong> many ways in which linguistic, textual and cultural aspects have<br />
characterized <strong>the</strong> development of <strong>the</strong> English language. We would like to thank all<br />
those who presented a paper, and especially <strong>the</strong> plenary speakers for offering main<br />
<strong>the</strong>oretical guidelines to <strong>the</strong> various sections of <strong>the</strong> conference.<br />
We are particularly indebted to colleagues and staff in Bergamo who made<br />
this conference possible: in particular, Professor Alberto Castoldi, Rector of our<br />
University, Professor Giuliano Bernini, Dean of <strong>the</strong> Faculty of Foreign Languages<br />
and Literatures, and Professor Angela Locatelli, <strong>the</strong>n Head of <strong>the</strong> Department of<br />
Comparative Languages, Literatures and Cultures. We are also very grateful to our<br />
colleagues in <strong>the</strong> English Language branch of our Department, for <strong>the</strong>ir great help<br />
and support in <strong>the</strong> organisation and management of this conference.<br />
From <strong>the</strong> academic point of view, this conference proved to be a very rewarding<br />
experience. Indeed, <strong>the</strong> generally high quality of <strong>the</strong> presentations led to our<br />
decision of offering more than one volume of selected, peer-reviewed and revised<br />
papers for publication in an internationally renowned series, in order to secure<br />
<strong>the</strong> widest distribution possible and thus contribute to <strong>the</strong> advancement of our<br />
understanding of <strong>the</strong> structure and development of <strong>the</strong> English language. All <strong>the</strong><br />
numerous papers that were submitted underwent a thorough referee ing process,
viii Foreword<br />
and we are very grateful to senior members of <strong>the</strong> scholarly community, including<br />
of course <strong>the</strong> anonymous readers consulted by <strong>the</strong> Series Editor, for devoting so<br />
much of <strong>the</strong>ir time to this task. Their comments and suggestions proved to be<br />
extremely useful already in <strong>the</strong> selection process, which led us to <strong>the</strong> identification<br />
of three well-structured and cohesive volumes, <strong>the</strong> first of which (<strong>the</strong> present<br />
volume) is devoted to syntax and morphology, <strong>the</strong> second to lexis and semantics,<br />
and <strong>the</strong> third to geo-historical variation. We are extremely grateful to Professor<br />
Dr. E.F.K. Koerner, General Editor of “Current Issues in Linguistic Theory” (CILT),<br />
for having agreed to include <strong>the</strong>se three volumes of selected papers in his prestigious<br />
series, as well as for his advice and constant support. Our special thanks are<br />
also due to Ms. Anke de Looper at John Benjamins for her patience, great care,<br />
and assistance.<br />
Bergamo, November 2007 The Editors
Introduction<br />
Maurizio Gotti, Marina Dossena & Richard Dury<br />
Università degli Studi di Bergamo<br />
This volume contains selected papers concerning syntax and morphology originally<br />
presented at <strong>the</strong> 14th meeting of <strong>the</strong> <strong>International</strong> Conference on English Historical<br />
Linguistics (ICEHL) held in Bergamo on 21–25 August 2006. The area covered<br />
by this volume — morphology and syntax — is traditionally a central one for many<br />
scholars working in <strong>the</strong> field of diachronic linguistics. Its continued importance is<br />
shown by <strong>the</strong> continued production of numerous important monographs and studies,<br />
as <strong>the</strong> bibliographical references in <strong>the</strong> papers of this volume attest. Studies in <strong>the</strong><br />
field of syntax and morphology have also become wider and richer with <strong>the</strong> contribution<br />
of many recent methodological innovations – <strong>from</strong> grammaticalisation studies<br />
to textual perspectives, <strong>from</strong> pragmatics to a sociolinguistic approach – which have<br />
influenced both synchronic and diachronic studies.<br />
The order in which contributions appear in this volume reflects closely <strong>the</strong><br />
basically-diachronic order of <strong>the</strong> conference programme. It is divided into two<br />
main sections; <strong>the</strong> first one deals with Old and Middle English, while <strong>the</strong> second<br />
with <strong>the</strong> Early and Late Modern English periods.<br />
The first section opens with a paper by Ans van Kemenade, Tanja Milicev<br />
and R. Harald Baayen, who present an innovative approach to Old English word<br />
order aiming to reconcile <strong>the</strong> insights that derive <strong>from</strong> formal syntactic work with<br />
<strong>the</strong> data problems that <strong>the</strong>se approaches have raised. In particular, <strong>the</strong>ir perspective<br />
highlights <strong>the</strong> discourse features of Old English texts in order to explain <strong>the</strong>ir<br />
typically high degree of word order flexibility. Significant determining features<br />
that <strong>the</strong>y have identified are adverbs that function as discourse partitioners, and<br />
pronominal elements used in strategies of discourse reference. The use of <strong>the</strong>se<br />
elements allows an extension of <strong>the</strong> range of possible subject and object positions<br />
and facilitates greater discourse flexibility.<br />
In <strong>the</strong>ir paper on <strong>the</strong> Old English copula weorðan, Peter Petré and Hubert<br />
Cuyckens make use of a specially compiled corpus to account for its rapid decline<br />
in use in Middle English and its replacement, mainly by become. Drawing<br />
on Goldberg’s (1995, 2006) Construction Grammar, <strong>the</strong> paper posits <strong>the</strong> existence<br />
of a lexeme-independent conceptual space with which a network of copular uses<br />
of weorðan are associated. These uses already in Old English served as a model
x Maurizio Gotti, Marina Dossena & Richard Dury<br />
for <strong>the</strong> analogical extension of becuman as a copula. In early Middle English, <strong>the</strong><br />
emergence of a ‘true’ passive construction made weorðan seem archaic in this<br />
function and blocked <strong>the</strong> spread to it of becuman. At <strong>the</strong> same time, becuman<br />
became associated with a new type of time-stable predicates. Having no collocational<br />
preferences, becuman <strong>the</strong>n extended its use to o<strong>the</strong>r types of predicates and<br />
eventually took over <strong>from</strong> weorðan completely.<br />
Kristin Bech’s paper focuses on <strong>the</strong> relation between word order, verb types<br />
and clause types in Old and Middle English, with reference to <strong>the</strong> change <strong>from</strong> a<br />
language with a verb-second constraint to a verb-medial language. The word order<br />
patterns discussed are <strong>the</strong> XVS, SVX and XSV patterns, and <strong>the</strong> verb categories<br />
operated with are verbs with a complement, verbs without a complement, copulas<br />
and existential verbs. A distinction is made between coordinate clauses, i.e.,<br />
clauses introduced by a coordinating conjunction, and non-coordinate clauses.<br />
The results of Bech’s analysis show that <strong>the</strong>re is a difference between <strong>the</strong> two clause<br />
types and between <strong>the</strong> word order patterns in <strong>the</strong> distribution of verbs. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore,<br />
<strong>the</strong>re is a clear development <strong>from</strong> Old to Middle English as regards verb<br />
distribution in <strong>the</strong> clause types and word order patterns, and this development<br />
is especially noticeable in <strong>the</strong> XVS pattern. The findings suggest that word order<br />
is not only determined by syntactic rules, but is also related to <strong>the</strong> information<br />
content of <strong>the</strong> sentence.<br />
In her paper, Kristin Killie investigates whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> English progressive has<br />
undergone <strong>the</strong> ‘prog imperfective drift’ hypo<strong>the</strong>sised by Bertinetto et al. (2000).<br />
According to <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>the</strong>ory, an originally locative construction develops into a durative<br />
progressive, and subsequently into a focalized progressive, to end up in some<br />
cases as a pure marker of imperfectivity. To test this hypo<strong>the</strong>sis, Killie examines<br />
data taken <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Helsinki Corpus of English Texts. Her results indicate that <strong>the</strong><br />
English progressive has clearly become more focalized through time. However,<br />
durative uses are only a minority use in <strong>the</strong> earliest texts (though it is not impossible<br />
that a dominantly durative progressive existed before <strong>the</strong>n in speech).<br />
Ra<strong>the</strong>r than supporting <strong>the</strong> ‘locative hypo<strong>the</strong>sis’, <strong>the</strong> data <strong>the</strong>refore suggest that<br />
<strong>the</strong> English progressive most probably originated in <strong>the</strong> (presumably) emphatic<br />
beon/wesan/weor∂an + Vende construction, or alternatively, <strong>from</strong> more than one<br />
source. On <strong>the</strong> basis of her analysis, <strong>the</strong> author concludes that if <strong>the</strong> English progressive<br />
has gone through <strong>the</strong> PROG imperfective drift, <strong>the</strong> formulation of this<br />
process must be such as to allow for different types of source constructions, not<br />
only a locative source.<br />
Gender assignment in Old English is <strong>the</strong> topic investigated by Letizia<br />
Vezzosi. Her analysis shows that although Old English has a three-gender formal<br />
assignment system, <strong>the</strong>re are several instances in which <strong>the</strong> same noun shows more
Introduction xi<br />
than one gender. The author classifies Old English data (selected through <strong>the</strong><br />
analysis of electronically available corpora and literary works), making comparisons<br />
with relevant data <strong>from</strong> typological investigations and historical linguistic<br />
studies. She is thus able to show that Old English gender variance depends on<br />
semantic and pragmatic factors that interfere with grammatical gender assignment.<br />
In particular, beside cross-linguistically frequent semantic traits such as<br />
[±animate] [±human], gender assignment in Old English seems to be sensitive to<br />
semantic roles. The author demonstrates that this parameter does not conflict with<br />
<strong>the</strong> previous semantic ones, since all of <strong>the</strong>m can be derived <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> more general<br />
feature [± individuated].<br />
Through a study of a corpus of Ælfric’s Catholic Homilies, Tomohiro Yanagi<br />
shows that <strong>the</strong> quantifier eall in Old English exhibited <strong>the</strong> same distributional<br />
properties as <strong>the</strong> quantifier all in Present-day English. Indeed, eall can modify<br />
a nominative noun phrase, or an accusative noun phrase when this is followed<br />
by a predicative complement; moreover, <strong>the</strong> ‘pronoun-quantifier’ order is more<br />
frequent than <strong>the</strong> ‘quantifier-pronoun’ order. The paper also argues that <strong>the</strong> quantifier<br />
eall is base-generated as <strong>the</strong> head of <strong>the</strong> quantifier phrase, and generally selects<br />
a noun phrase as its complement. The data examined show that although <strong>the</strong><br />
‘full-NP-quantifier’ order can be derived by adjoining <strong>the</strong> noun phrase to <strong>the</strong><br />
quantifier phrase, this operation is not applied to a noun phrase in <strong>the</strong> argument<br />
position, due to <strong>the</strong> ban on adjunction to arguments. Yanagi’s analysis suggests<br />
that, unlike noun phrases, pronouns can be adjoined to <strong>the</strong> head of a quantifier<br />
phrase, thus yielding greater flexibility to <strong>the</strong> ‘pronoun-quantifier’ order.<br />
Richard Ingham and Klean<strong>the</strong>s K. Grohmann focus on misagreement between<br />
a singular verb and a plural subject, and examine a corpus of 15th-century<br />
London chronicles in order to investigate <strong>the</strong> origins of this phenomenon, and to<br />
assess whe<strong>the</strong>r it should be handled in structural terms. Their analysis shows that<br />
misagreement almost always arose with a postfinite (not prefinite) subject, and<br />
co-occurred in texts allowing null impersonal subjects. This phenomenon is analysed<br />
as agreement with a singular expletive subject, overt or null, existing as an<br />
option alongside <strong>the</strong> option of regular number agreement. As a preverbal subject<br />
contained no expletive element, number agreement was regular. Their study also<br />
shows that <strong>the</strong> structural position of <strong>the</strong> postverbal subject is irrelevant: three<br />
post-finite subject configurations have been identified, in all of which agreement<br />
is optional. The authors fur<strong>the</strong>r note that an increase in <strong>the</strong> phenomenon occurred<br />
during <strong>the</strong> 15th century, and propose a dialect contact explanation: <strong>the</strong> influx of<br />
Nor<strong>the</strong>rn speakers using <strong>the</strong> Nor<strong>the</strong>rn Subject Rule in late medieval London may<br />
have activated a structural re-analysis of singular verb forms with plural subjects<br />
by London speakers in terms of agreement with a singular null subject.
xii Maurizio Gotti, Marina Dossena & Richard Dury<br />
As Middle English is widely known as <strong>the</strong> dialectal phase of English, it is<br />
unsurprising that so many scholars have studied <strong>the</strong> linguistic differences among<br />
Middle English dialects for such a long time. It is generally assumed that nor<strong>the</strong>rn<br />
dialects innovate mainly due to Scandinavian influence, while sou<strong>the</strong>rn dialects<br />
appear to be more resistant to change. The aim of Cristina Suárez-Gómez’ study<br />
is to test whe<strong>the</strong>r this tendency is also reflected in relativisation, both in <strong>the</strong> system<br />
of relativisers and in <strong>the</strong> position adopted by <strong>the</strong> relative clause in relation<br />
to <strong>the</strong> main clause. Based on data <strong>from</strong> The Helsinki Corpus of English Texts, her<br />
investigation shows that <strong>the</strong> system of relativisers inherited <strong>from</strong> Old English and<br />
<strong>the</strong> tendency towards extraposition typical of Middle English are associated with<br />
sou<strong>the</strong>rn dialects, while <strong>the</strong> North shows a simplified system of relativisers as well<br />
as a marked tendency for relative clauses to be intraposed.<br />
Bettelou Los’ paper discusses <strong>the</strong> origins of English phrasal verbs and, in<br />
particular, <strong>the</strong> arguments advanced against identifying particles as grammaticalized<br />
predicates (such as <strong>the</strong> failure of many particles to function as independent<br />
predicates, <strong>the</strong> lack of telicity in many cases, and <strong>the</strong> failure of constituency tests<br />
and topicalisation). She argues that <strong>the</strong>se same “quirks” are exhibited by predicates;<br />
indeed, resultative complex predicates show various degrees of productivity,<br />
transparency and idiosyncrasy which mirror those of particle verbs, and easily acquire<br />
idiomatic meanings that only work in combination with specific verbs. Her<br />
analysis shows that <strong>the</strong> semantic and syntactic similarities of complex predicates<br />
and particles point to a common origin, with particles having become grammaticalized<br />
<strong>from</strong> phrase to head. Moreover, <strong>the</strong> most striking quirks of <strong>the</strong> complex<br />
predicate construction, i.e., unselected objects and idiomaticity (fixed combinations<br />
of verb and predicate), are also shared by particle verbs. She concludes that<br />
although <strong>the</strong> similarity in behaviour of predicates and particles can be traced into<br />
Old English, it is only in Early Modern English that a significant point is marked<br />
in <strong>the</strong> development of <strong>the</strong> particle verb system. At that time <strong>the</strong> verbs participating<br />
in <strong>the</strong> combination are no longer restricted to ‘light’ verbs, but include deadjectival<br />
and denominal verbs, unergatives, and ‘manner-of-motion’ verbs.<br />
The second part of <strong>the</strong> volume is devoted to contributions investigating syntactic<br />
and morphological issues in <strong>the</strong> Early and Late Modern English periods. In<br />
<strong>the</strong> first paper in this section Amanda Pounder examines adverb-marking patterns<br />
(zero or -ly) in coordinate constructions. She suggests that while both a paradigmatic<br />
selection analysis (Pounder 2004) and a suspended affixation analysis<br />
(Kabak 2007) could be applied, <strong>the</strong> systemic availability of <strong>the</strong> zero-derived adverb<br />
makes <strong>the</strong> former <strong>the</strong>oretically preferable. However, <strong>the</strong> available data show that<br />
<strong>the</strong>re are some cases in which a suspended affixation or morphological ellipsis<br />
analysis must be invoked. The paper <strong>the</strong>n focuses on <strong>the</strong> available patterns of morphological<br />
marking of derived adverbs in coordinate constructions in all periods
Introduction xiii<br />
of Modern English. The analysis shows that in <strong>the</strong> coordination of adverbs one<br />
strongly dominant pattern remains constant, i.e., X-ly and Y-ly, while <strong>the</strong> minority<br />
patterns X and Y-ly and X-ly and Y are rare in <strong>the</strong> written texts examined. This<br />
can be explained by <strong>the</strong> fact that considerations of symmetry overcome <strong>the</strong> desire<br />
to avoid repetition of <strong>the</strong> -ly suffix, which has often been suggested for sequences<br />
of adverbs or adverbial modifiers in which <strong>the</strong> zero form appears.<br />
It is generally assumed that <strong>the</strong> construction It is me emerged in <strong>the</strong> 16th century<br />
as a more colloquial alternative to It is I. In <strong>the</strong>ir paper, Claudia Lange and<br />
Ursula Schaefer focus on <strong>the</strong> structure and distribution of two constructions featuring<br />
It is I / me, namely, cleft constructions and identificational copular clauses<br />
in plays <strong>from</strong> 1600 to 1800. The analysis shows that it is I constitutes <strong>the</strong> generally<br />
preferred form; <strong>the</strong> very limited number of occurrences of me in <strong>the</strong> relevant<br />
constructions are ei<strong>the</strong>r licensed by <strong>the</strong> syntactic context in cleft constructions or<br />
by referential conditions in identificational copular clauses. Lange and Schaefer<br />
fur<strong>the</strong>r provide evidence for <strong>the</strong> assumption that identificational copular clauses<br />
are historically prior to cleft constructions, which in turn are not fully grammaticalised<br />
in <strong>the</strong> period under discussion, since <strong>the</strong>y do not unambiguously display<br />
<strong>the</strong> biclausal structure which is a defining property of clefts.<br />
Thomas Egan’s paper traces <strong>the</strong> evolution of to-infinitive complement constructions<br />
with emotion matrix verbs like, love, hate and prefer over <strong>the</strong> past two<br />
hundred years. His analysis proposes that when <strong>the</strong> matrix verb is not preceded by<br />
a modal auxiliary, <strong>the</strong>se constructions should be analysed in Present-day English<br />
as encoding general ra<strong>the</strong>r than specific predications. In Late Modern English,<br />
on <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, <strong>the</strong>se same constructions were widely used to encode specific<br />
predications. Using data <strong>from</strong> The British National Corpus and The Corpus of Late<br />
Modern English Texts, <strong>the</strong> author demonstrates how <strong>the</strong>se constructions have become<br />
increasingly restricted to encoding general predications over <strong>the</strong> past two<br />
centuries. This development is related to <strong>the</strong> parallel expansion of –ing-complement<br />
constructions and of to-infinitive complement constructions with modalised<br />
matrix verbs.<br />
The aim of Svenja Kranich’s study is to analyse <strong>the</strong> progressive form in 17th-<br />
and 18th-century English, identifying its uses as expressions of speaker attitude.<br />
After an overview of <strong>the</strong> Old and Middle English meanings of <strong>the</strong> progressive,<br />
<strong>the</strong> paper discusses <strong>the</strong> three different types of subjective progressives found in<br />
data <strong>from</strong> ARCHER-2. In this context, <strong>the</strong> author discusses some methodological<br />
issues, as formal criteria have proved insufficiently reliable for <strong>the</strong> distinction of<br />
subjective uses. Kranich <strong>the</strong>n looks at <strong>the</strong> relation between subjective and o<strong>the</strong>r<br />
meanings of <strong>the</strong> progressive. In <strong>the</strong> 17th- and 18th centuries, <strong>the</strong> aspectual function<br />
of <strong>the</strong> progressive grammaticalises, which leads to changing relative frequencies<br />
between subjective and objective uses. The paper ends with <strong>the</strong> identification
xiv Maurizio Gotti, Marina Dossena & Richard Dury<br />
of general tendencies in <strong>the</strong> relation between grammaticalisation and subjectification/objectification.<br />
As illustrated in this brief overview, <strong>the</strong> studies presented here are an expression<br />
of ongoing <strong>the</strong>oretical developments as well as new analytical approaches to<br />
<strong>the</strong> study of English diachronic syntax and morphology. Toge<strong>the</strong>r, <strong>the</strong>y reflect <strong>the</strong><br />
challenges and opportunities that confront a linguist working with complex developments<br />
in a language, and <strong>the</strong>ir far-reaching implications. It is to be hoped that<br />
<strong>the</strong> volume will encourage fur<strong>the</strong>r discussion and reflection, streng<strong>the</strong>ning our<br />
understanding of <strong>the</strong> evolution of <strong>the</strong>se phenomena.<br />
References<br />
Bertinetto, Pier Marco, Karen H. Ebert & Casper de Groot. 2000. The Progressive in Europe.<br />
Tense and Aspect in <strong>the</strong> Languages of Europe ed. by Östen Dahl, 517–558. Berlin: Mouton<br />
de Gruyter.<br />
Goldberg, Adele. 1995. Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure.<br />
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.<br />
Goldberg, Adele. 2006. Constructions at Work: The nature of generalization in language. Oxford:<br />
Oxford University Press.<br />
Kabak, Barış. 2007. Turkish Suspended Affixation. Linguistics 45: 311–348.<br />
Pounder, Amanda. 2004. Haplology in English Adverb Formation. New Perspectives on English<br />
Historical Linguistics: <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> 12 ICEHL, Glasgow, 21–26 August 2002 ed. by<br />
Christian Kay. Carole Hough & Irené Wo<strong>the</strong>rspoon, Volume II: Lexis and Transmission,<br />
193–211. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
part i<br />
Old and Middle English
The balance between syntax and discourse<br />
in Old English<br />
Ans van Kemenade<br />
Radboud University Nijmegen<br />
Tanja Milicev<br />
University of Novi Sad<br />
R. Harald Baayen<br />
University of Alberta<br />
Old English morpho-syntax allows a degree of word order flexibility that is<br />
exploited by discourse strategies. Key elements here are: adverbs functioning as<br />
discourse partitioners, and a wider range of pronominal elements, extending <strong>the</strong><br />
number of strategies for anaphoric reference. The syntactic effect is an extended<br />
range of subject and object positions, which are exploited for discourse flexibility.<br />
In particular, a class of high adverbs, including primarily þa “<strong>the</strong>n” and þonne<br />
“<strong>the</strong>n”, define on <strong>the</strong>ir left an area in which discourse-(linked) elements occur,<br />
including a range of pronouns, but also definite nominal subjects. The latter occur<br />
here because <strong>the</strong> Old English weak demonstrative pronouns that serve to mark<br />
definiteness also allow specific anaphoric reference to a discourse antecedent.<br />
We also develop a model of quantitative analysis that brings out <strong>the</strong> relationship<br />
between <strong>the</strong> narrowly circumscribed syntactic system and <strong>the</strong> relative diffuseness<br />
of <strong>the</strong> discourse referential facts.<br />
In this chapter, we present a novel approach to Old English word order that attempts<br />
to reconcile <strong>the</strong> insights into Old English word order achieved so far within formal<br />
syntactic work with <strong>the</strong> data problems that <strong>the</strong>se same approaches have raised. In<br />
order to achieve this, we present a perspective in which <strong>the</strong> discourse properties<br />
of Old English word order are unified with <strong>the</strong> formal syntax of Old English. Old<br />
English grammar possesses a number of morpho-syntactic properties which allow<br />
a degree of word order flexibility that is exploited by discourse strategies. Beside <strong>the</strong><br />
case system, to which an incredible amount of word order flexibility is commonly<br />
and often ra<strong>the</strong>r impressionistically attributed, <strong>the</strong>se properties concretely include:<br />
adverbs that function as discourse partitioners, and a wider range of pronominal<br />
elements, which extends <strong>the</strong> number of strategies for anaphoric reference to a discourse<br />
antecedent. The concrete syntactic effect of this is that, by virtue of <strong>the</strong>se<br />
discourse partitioners, Old English grammar extends <strong>the</strong> range of possible subject<br />
and object positions. These extra positions are exploited for <strong>the</strong> purposes of
Ans van Kemenade, Tanja Milicev & R. Harald Baayen<br />
discourse flexibility. In this article, we concentrate on one of <strong>the</strong>se extended<br />
‘positions’. We claim that a particular class of high adverbs and particles, including<br />
elements such as þa “<strong>the</strong>n”; þonne “<strong>the</strong>n”, nu “now”, eac “also”, la “lo” define on <strong>the</strong>ir<br />
left an area in which discourse-(linked) elements occur: These include a range of<br />
pronouns, but also definite nominal subjects. We will show that definite nominal<br />
subjects may occur here because <strong>the</strong> Old English weak demonstrative pronouns<br />
that serve to mark definiteness also allow specific anaphoric reference<br />
to a discourse antecedent.<br />
In <strong>the</strong> second part of <strong>the</strong> paper, we develop a model of quantitative analysis<br />
which is capable of bringing out <strong>the</strong> relationship between <strong>the</strong> narrowly circumscribed<br />
syntactic system and <strong>the</strong> relative diffuseness of <strong>the</strong> discourse referential<br />
facts. The interesting thing <strong>the</strong>n is that what in formal syntactic treatments often<br />
counts as a class of ‘problems’ or ‘counterexamples’, falls into place in a principled<br />
manner without having to include fur<strong>the</strong>r syntactic claims, at <strong>the</strong> same time<br />
broadening <strong>the</strong> approach to include discourse strategies.<br />
1. A problem in Old English<br />
Let us first outline <strong>the</strong> descriptive problem that we wish to analyse. At <strong>the</strong> heart<br />
of <strong>the</strong> dataset are subjects and pronominal objects that occur in a relatively high<br />
position in <strong>the</strong> clause.<br />
A well-known feature of Old English word order is that personal pronouns may<br />
occur in positions higher than <strong>the</strong>ir nominal counterparts, and this is true almost<br />
categorically for subject pronouns, and optionally for object pronouns, as exemplified<br />
by <strong>the</strong> following examples, (1) for main clauses, (2) for subclauses:<br />
(1) a. Be ðæm we magon suiðe swutule oncnawan ðæt …<br />
By that, we may very clearly perceive that …<br />
“By that, we may perceive very clearly that …” (cocura,CP: 26.181.16.1202)<br />
b. þa axodon hine Pharisei & þa boceras<br />
and <strong>the</strong>n asked him Pharisees and <strong>the</strong> learned men,<br />
hwi ne gað þine leorningcnihtas æfter ure yldrena<br />
why not go your disciples after our forefa<strong>the</strong>rs’<br />
gesetnysse. ac besmitenum handum hyra half þicgað?<br />
law, but with.defiled.hands <strong>the</strong>ir bread eat?<br />
“Then <strong>the</strong> Pharisees and scribes asked him, Why walk not thy disciples<br />
according to <strong>the</strong> tradition of <strong>the</strong>ir elders, but eat bread with unwashed<br />
hands?” (cowsgosp,Mk_[WSCp]: 7.5.2678)<br />
c. Hwæt tacnað us ðonne Saul buton yfle hlafurdas?<br />
What betokens us <strong>the</strong>n Saul except evil lords?<br />
“What is signified to us by Saul but bad masters?”<br />
(cocura,CP: 28.197.22.1328)
The balance between syntax and discourse in Old English<br />
(2) a. Gif hire ðonne se wiðsace, ðonne is cynn ðæt him<br />
if it <strong>the</strong>n he refuse, <strong>the</strong>n is proper that him<br />
spiwe ðæt wif on ðæt nebb<br />
spits <strong>the</strong> woman in <strong>the</strong> face<br />
“But if he refuse it, it is proper for <strong>the</strong> woman to spit in his face”<br />
(cocura,CP: 5.45.2.249)<br />
b. gif hine ðonne ðæt fleah mid ealle ofergæð, ðonne ne<br />
if him <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> albugo with all covers, <strong>the</strong>n not<br />
mæg he noht geseon.<br />
can he naught see<br />
“if it [<strong>the</strong> pupil of <strong>the</strong> eye] is entirely covered with albugo, he cannot see<br />
anything.” (cocura,CP: 11.69.17.448)<br />
This fact has been taken to indicate that personal pronouns are syntactically special<br />
and exhibit a form of syntactic cliticization (van Kemenade 1987 & Pintzuk 1991).<br />
The positional evidence was made more precise in van Kemenade (1999, 2000);<br />
Haeberli (1999), which is illustrated by <strong>the</strong> examples in (3), reflecting a word order<br />
template as in (4) (see also Rissanen 1999):<br />
(3) a. Ne het he us na leornian heofonas to wyrcenne<br />
not ordered he us not learn heavens to make<br />
“He did not bid us learn to make <strong>the</strong> heavens”<br />
(coaelive,ÆLS_[Memory_of_Saints]: 127.3394)<br />
b. Ne sæde na ure Drihten þæt he mid cynehelme oððe<br />
not said not our Lord that he with diadem or<br />
mid purpuran gescryd, cumanwolde to us<br />
with purple clo<strong>the</strong>d, come wanted to us<br />
“Our Lord said not that He would come to us with a diadem or clo<strong>the</strong>d<br />
with purple..” (coaelive,ÆLS_[Martin]: 762.6453)<br />
(4) personal pronoun – secondary negator – nominal subject<br />
Very similar syntactic analyses of this state of affairs are Haeberli (1999) and van<br />
Kemenade (1999, 2000), whose structures we adapt for <strong>the</strong> time being as (5): 1<br />
(5) [ CP [XP] C [ AgrP PronounSubj/Obj Agr [ NegP Neg Adv Neg [ TP NPSubj T … ]]]]<br />
Personal pronouns occur in a designated pronoun position on <strong>the</strong> left of a NegP<br />
(signalled by <strong>the</strong> secondary negative) in <strong>the</strong> higher position, while <strong>the</strong> position<br />
for nominal subjects is lower than NegP, in SpecTP. It turns out <strong>the</strong>n, that <strong>the</strong> secondary<br />
negator has considerable diagnostic value in pinpointing <strong>the</strong> position of<br />
1. Haeberli (1999) dubs SpecAgrP a Subject1 position and Spec,TP a Subject2 position. But<br />
this ‘Subject1’ position hosts object pronouns as well.
Ans van Kemenade, Tanja Milicev & R. Harald Baayen<br />
elements in <strong>the</strong> higher part of <strong>the</strong> clause. This is true for a number of o<strong>the</strong>r adverbs<br />
as well, and is illustrated here for ðonne:<br />
(6) a. Hu mæg he ðonne ðæt lof & ðone gilp fleon<br />
how may he <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> praise and <strong>the</strong> vainglory avoid<br />
“How can he avoid praise and vainglory…?” (cocura,CP: 9.57.18.364)<br />
b. Hu gerades mæg ðonne se biscep brucan ðære<br />
how properly may <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> bishop enjoy <strong>the</strong><br />
hirdelican are<br />
pastoral dignity<br />
“How, <strong>the</strong>n, can <strong>the</strong> bishop properly enjoy <strong>the</strong> pastoral dignity?”<br />
(cocura,CP: 18.133.3.898)<br />
By way of example, findings for root clause questions in one text, Cura Pastoralis,<br />
are presented in Table 1.<br />
Table 1. Relative position of adverb ðonne and various types of subject in Cura Pastoralis<br />
Personal pronoun<br />
Nominal subject subject or object<br />
subject precedes ðonne 0 10<br />
subject follows ðonne 17 0<br />
This yields a clear picture for main clauses. However, <strong>the</strong> picture is considerably<br />
more complex in subclauses (see also Haeberli & Ingham 2007 for early Middle<br />
English). Examination of all <strong>the</strong> subclauses containing þa/þonne shows <strong>the</strong> distribution<br />
for subjects in Table 2 (based on an exhaustive search of <strong>the</strong> York Corpus of<br />
Old English (YCOE), Taylor et al. 2003):<br />
Table 2. Relative position of adverb ðonne and various types of subject in YCOE<br />
Old English subclauses Pronominal subjects Nominal subjects<br />
subject precedes þa/þonne 1250 221<br />
subject follows þa/þonne 5 129<br />
Table 2 shows that subject pronouns almost categorically occur on <strong>the</strong> left of <strong>the</strong><br />
adverb. An example of this, also including object pronouns, is (7).<br />
(7) on Salomonnes bocum, hit is awrieten ðæt mon ne<br />
in Solomon’s books, it is written that that.one not<br />
scyle cweðan to his frind: Ga, cum to morgen, ðonne<br />
shall say to one’s friend: Go, come tomorrow, <strong>the</strong>n
The balance between syntax and discourse in Old English<br />
selle ic ðe hwæthwugu, gif he hit him ðonne sellan mæge.<br />
give I you something, if he it him <strong>the</strong>n give may.<br />
“in <strong>the</strong> books of Solomon, it is written that we are not to say to our friend: “Go,<br />
and come tomorrow, <strong>the</strong>n I will give you something,” if we can give it him <strong>the</strong>n.”<br />
(cocura, CP.44.323.24)<br />
However, <strong>the</strong> figures for nominal subjects in Table 2 show that we are not dealing<br />
merely with a position reserved for personal pronouns. The relatively high<br />
frequency of nominal subjects preceding <strong>the</strong> adverb renders this particularly problematic,<br />
and <strong>the</strong>re is no ready generalization with respect to <strong>the</strong> choice of nominal<br />
subject on <strong>the</strong> left or right of <strong>the</strong> adverb; higher and lower nominal subjects, for<br />
instance, include definite NPs, as <strong>the</strong> representative examples (8) and (9) show.<br />
(8) Forðæm bið se sige micle mara ðe man mid<br />
<strong>the</strong>refore is <strong>the</strong> victory much greater which one with<br />
geðylde gewinð, forðæm sio gesceadwisnes ðonne hæfð<br />
patience wins, because this wisdom <strong>the</strong>n has<br />
ofercumen ðæt mod & gewielð, swelce he self<br />
overcome <strong>the</strong>.mind and subdued, as.if he self<br />
hæbbe hiene selfne gewildne, & sio geðyld hæbbe ðæt<br />
have himself conquered, and <strong>the</strong> patience have <strong>the</strong><br />
mod geðreatod & gecafstrod.<br />
mind intimidated and curbed.<br />
“Therefore <strong>the</strong> victory which is won with patience is much greater, because this<br />
wisdom (patience) has overcome and subdued <strong>the</strong> mind, as if he himself had<br />
conquered himself, and patience had intimidated and curbed <strong>the</strong> mind.”<br />
(cocuraC,CP_[Cotton]: 33.218.19.42)<br />
(9) Gif ðonne se sacred bið ungerad ðæs lareowdomes, hwæt<br />
If <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> teacher is unskilled <strong>the</strong>.instruction, what<br />
forstent ðonne his gehlyd?<br />
avails <strong>the</strong>n his cry?<br />
“<strong>the</strong>n if <strong>the</strong> teacher is unskilled in instruction, what avails his cry?”<br />
(cocura, CP, 15,91,25)<br />
Thus, we cannot say that <strong>the</strong> position preceding <strong>the</strong> adverb is reserved exclusively<br />
for pronouns. And because <strong>the</strong> diagnostic value of <strong>the</strong> position of <strong>the</strong> adverb is so<br />
strong (as shown by Rissanen 1999; van Kemenade 2000 for a diachronic picture<br />
spanning <strong>the</strong> entire history of English), we should hesitate to give up on <strong>the</strong> generalization<br />
concerning <strong>the</strong> nature of <strong>the</strong> position preceding <strong>the</strong> adverb. Since pronouns<br />
are well-known to have discourse-referential properties, we have <strong>the</strong>refore<br />
pursued an approach in which we take into account <strong>the</strong> discourse properties of <strong>the</strong><br />
elements preceding <strong>the</strong> adverb.
Ans van Kemenade, Tanja Milicev & R. Harald Baayen<br />
2. Discourse domains and discourse reference<br />
In this section, we outline an approach, following up van Kemenade & Milicev<br />
(to appear), van Kemenade & Los (2006), in which clause structure incorporates<br />
and encodes information structural considerations in such a way that, subject to<br />
certain syntactic restrictions, presupposed, old material is separated <strong>from</strong> focused,<br />
new material by an adverb functioning as a discourse particle. This is what we take<br />
to be <strong>the</strong> function of high adverbs like þa and þonne. This is fur<strong>the</strong>r discussed<br />
in 2.1. A fur<strong>the</strong>r claim, discussed in 2.2, is that Old English has a wider range of<br />
discourse-referential expressions: simple demonstratives, used as definiteness<br />
markers in a NP, allow a specific presuppositional reading for that NP. In section 2.3,<br />
we will flesh out our analysis of Old English <strong>from</strong> this perspective.<br />
2.1 Adverbs/particles as discourse partitioners<br />
Adverbs are often used as word order diagnostics. This is well-known <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
word order literature cross-linguistically, and more particularly <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> literature<br />
on (West)-Germanic syntax. Our hypo<strong>the</strong>sis is that Old English has a set of high<br />
adverbs, or perhaps more properly particles, that act as discourse partitioners, and<br />
that <strong>the</strong>ir function is to separate anaphoric/presupposed and discourse-linked elements,<br />
occurring on <strong>the</strong> left of <strong>the</strong> adverb, <strong>from</strong> discourse-new elements on <strong>the</strong><br />
right of <strong>the</strong> particle. From this perspective, let us look at two prime candidates for<br />
such particle status.<br />
The adverbs þa and þonne may occur as clause introducers of various kinds, or<br />
<strong>the</strong>y may occur in clause-internal position. As clause introducers, <strong>the</strong>y subsume a<br />
variety of subtly different functions. Although <strong>the</strong>se uses are not <strong>the</strong> main focus of<br />
this article, we discuss <strong>the</strong>m briefly, in order to clarify <strong>the</strong> distinction with clauseinternal<br />
uses.<br />
(10) illustrates an extremely frequent use of <strong>the</strong> adverbs þa and þonne. The<br />
first þonne seems to act as a subordinating conjunction and this subordinate clause<br />
sets out <strong>the</strong> condition <strong>from</strong> which <strong>the</strong> next clause, a main clause with a finite verb<br />
of movement, may follow. The second þonne introduces this main clause as an<br />
adverb. This construction also occurs in (11): <strong>the</strong> preceding conditional clause sets<br />
<strong>the</strong> condition for <strong>the</strong> second clause introduced by þonne.<br />
(10) þonne se unclæna gast gæþ ut of ðam men, þonne færð<br />
when <strong>the</strong> uncleaned ghost goes out of <strong>the</strong> man, <strong>the</strong>n travels<br />
he worigende on unwæterigum stowum secende him reste<br />
he wandering on desert places seeking him rest<br />
“When <strong>the</strong> unclean ghost goes out of <strong>the</strong> man, he travels <strong>the</strong>n wandering<br />
in desert places, seeking rest” (coaelhom,ÆHom_4: 41.540)
The balance between syntax and discourse in Old English<br />
(11) and gif heo hyre wer oferbit, þonne byð heo frig<br />
and if she her man outlives, <strong>the</strong>n be she free<br />
“and if she outlives her husband, <strong>the</strong>n she should be free”<br />
(coaelhom,ÆHom_20: 84.2972)<br />
Þa and þonne are also used more loosely as clause introducers, where <strong>the</strong>re is,<br />
somewhat vaguely, a sense of temporal or even causal sequence as in (12). (13) is a<br />
slightly more emphatic frame-setting variant of this.<br />
(12) & þonne se þe ungelyfende byþ in þon þe he tweoþ<br />
and <strong>the</strong>n that who unbelieving is in that that he doubts<br />
he ne seceð na þone geleafan …<br />
he not seeks not <strong>the</strong> belief…<br />
“and <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> one who doesn’t believe in what he doubts, he does not seek <strong>the</strong><br />
belief…” (cogregdC,GDPref_and_4_[C]: 1.262.10.3797)<br />
(13) þa æfter þære lare, he het alætan ut þone halgan<br />
<strong>the</strong>n after <strong>the</strong> teaching, he ordered take out <strong>the</strong> saint<br />
Petrum his scip on ðære dypan<br />
Peter his ship on <strong>the</strong> sea<br />
“Then, after <strong>the</strong> teaching, he ordered Saint Peter to take out his ship to <strong>the</strong> sea”<br />
(coaelhom,ÆHom_15: 16.2142)<br />
Let us now turn to clause internal þa/þonne, <strong>the</strong> main focus of this paper. Both adverbs<br />
can be used as pure rhetorical devices, often with <strong>the</strong> purpose “to underline<br />
<strong>the</strong> admonishing and exhorting effect in context” (van Kemenade & Los 2006),<br />
especially in exclamatory combinations like hwæt þa “what lo”:<br />
(14) a. Hwæt ða la ongunnon þa godes cempan hnexian<br />
what <strong>the</strong>n lo began <strong>the</strong>n God’s champions yield<br />
and heora mod awendon to hyre maga sarnysse.<br />
and <strong>the</strong>ir mood turn to <strong>the</strong>ir kinsmen’s anguish<br />
“Well, <strong>the</strong>n, behold! God’s champions began to yield, and to turn <strong>the</strong>ir<br />
thought on <strong>the</strong>ir kinsmen’s anguish.” (coaelive,ÆLS_[Sebastian]: 48.1238)<br />
b. Ono hwæt he þa se ilca cyning Osweo æfter Pendan<br />
lo what he <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> same king Oswio after Penda’s<br />
slege þreo winter ful Mercna þeode & swylce eac<br />
death three winters whole Mercia’s people and also<br />
tham oðrum folcum þara suðmægða in aldordome<br />
<strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r nations of.<strong>the</strong> sou<strong>the</strong>rn.provinces authority<br />
ofer wæs.<br />
over was.<br />
“Now this king Oswio after Penda’s death for three whole years had<br />
authority over <strong>the</strong> Mercians and <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r nations also of <strong>the</strong> sou<strong>the</strong>rn<br />
provinces.” (cobede,Bede_3: 18.238.27.2439)
10 Ans van Kemenade, Tanja Milicev & R. Harald Baayen<br />
It should be noted that <strong>the</strong>y are not topic/focus markers, in <strong>the</strong> sense that <strong>the</strong>y<br />
cliticize morpho-syntactically to elements in order to mark <strong>the</strong>m as presuppositional<br />
or focal, ra<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong>y seem to indicate that what follows is <strong>the</strong> focus part<br />
of <strong>the</strong> clause. The same kind of presupposition-focus inferences can very likely<br />
be obtained by specific structural re-organizations without <strong>the</strong>se adverbs. However,<br />
<strong>the</strong> overwhelming presence of <strong>the</strong>se two particular adverbs strongly suggests<br />
that overt marking of presupposition-focus domains is of primary concern for OE<br />
writers.<br />
Our hypo<strong>the</strong>sis is that <strong>the</strong> adverbs structure parts of <strong>the</strong> utterance/proposition<br />
itself with respect to <strong>the</strong> preceding discourse.<br />
(15) [previous discourse] [ utterance presupposition þa/þonne focus]<br />
This will be elaborated fur<strong>the</strong>r in Section 2.3.<br />
2.2 More referring expressions<br />
Old English had a wider range of discourse-referential expressions than Presentday<br />
English does. In particular, Old English morpho-syntax includes <strong>the</strong> weak<br />
demonstrative pronouns. Let us first list <strong>the</strong> paradigms which can be picked <strong>from</strong><br />
any grammar of Old English (Table 3).<br />
Table 3. Old English demonstrative pronouns<br />
singular plural<br />
masculine feminine neuter<br />
Nom se sēo þæt þā<br />
Acc þone þā þæt þā<br />
Gen þæs þæ¯ re þæs þāra<br />
Dat þæ¯ m þæ¯ re þæ¯ m þæ¯ m<br />
Demonstrative pronouns are often called ‘definite determiners’, as one of <strong>the</strong>ir primary<br />
known uses in Old English is to mark definiteness in a NP, thus se monn “<strong>the</strong><br />
man”; þæ¯ re fæmnan fæder; “<strong>the</strong> woman’s fa<strong>the</strong>r” and so on (see recently Denison<br />
2006). However, <strong>the</strong> term ‘determiner’ is, we claim, a singular misnomer, in particular<br />
because it is often used when comparing <strong>the</strong> Old English weak demonstratives<br />
to <strong>the</strong> Present-day English definite determiners. Determiners (we refer<br />
here to <strong>the</strong>, not to deictic demonstratives such as this, that, <strong>the</strong>se, those) are clearly<br />
morphologically invariant and cannot be used independently. In comparison, Old<br />
English demonstratives are a ra<strong>the</strong>r versatile class. While <strong>the</strong>y mark definiteness<br />
like <strong>the</strong> Present-day English determiners do, <strong>the</strong>y can also be used as independent<br />
pronouns.
The balance between syntax and discourse in Old English 11<br />
(16) Se casere hi sealde his gerefan, þæs nama wæs Dulcitius,<br />
<strong>the</strong> caesar <strong>the</strong>m gave his prefect, whose name was Dulcitius,<br />
þæt se hi genedde þæt hi Criste wiðsocan.<br />
that DEM <strong>the</strong>m urge that <strong>the</strong>y Christ reject<br />
“The Caesar gave <strong>the</strong>m his prefect, whose name was Dulcitius, that HE urge<br />
<strong>the</strong>m that <strong>the</strong>y reject Christ” (comart3,Mart_5_[Kotzor]: Ap3,A.7.506)<br />
This in itself shows that this set of pronouns has independent pronominal function,<br />
and serves to mark a type of pronominal reference. This is reinforced by <strong>the</strong><br />
fact that <strong>the</strong>y are also used as relative pronouns: relative pronouns are anaphoric<br />
elements par excellence, as <strong>the</strong>y must refer back to <strong>the</strong> antecedent of <strong>the</strong> relative<br />
clause <strong>the</strong>y introduce, sharing features for number and gender, and, optionally, for<br />
case as in (17b).<br />
(17) a. Ure Drihten arærde anes ealdormonnes dohtor,<br />
Our Lord raised an alderman’s daughter (A),<br />
seo ðe læg dead<br />
who (N) that lay dead<br />
“Our Lord brought to life an alderman’s daughter who lay dead”<br />
(ÆHom VI, 176)<br />
b. Ic wat witodlice ðæt ge secað ðone hælend<br />
I know truly that you seek <strong>the</strong> Lord (A)<br />
ðone ðe on rode ahangen wæs<br />
whom (A) that on cross hung was<br />
“I know truly that you seek <strong>the</strong> Lord, who was hung on <strong>the</strong> cross”<br />
(Mt. 1766)<br />
The claim here is that demonstrative pronouns mark a type of (pronominal) reference<br />
that is both definite and specific, and when used as ‘definite determiners’<br />
in a NP, serve to render that NP definite and to give it a specific reference to a<br />
discourse antecedent. This fact allowed a more versatile form of discourse linking,<br />
as it allows a definite NP to have a specific anaphoric reference as well, and to be<br />
positioned accordingly: on <strong>the</strong> left of a discourse particle.<br />
2.3 Discourse and syntactic structure in OE<br />
In this section, we present a hypo<strong>the</strong>sis about <strong>the</strong> relation between discourse and<br />
syntax in Old English. We will show that <strong>the</strong>re are clear overall generalizations to<br />
be made about <strong>the</strong> clause structure of Old English, and <strong>the</strong> discourse properties<br />
of <strong>the</strong> elements that occur in specific positions in that structure, in particular <strong>the</strong><br />
‘high’ position under discussion here. We will see as well that for each syntactic<br />
generalization, <strong>the</strong>re are cases that one might call exceptional, so that <strong>the</strong> facts on<br />
<strong>the</strong> surface seem to be ra<strong>the</strong>r more diffuse than is warranted by our hypo<strong>the</strong>sized<br />
system. We will show, however, that <strong>the</strong>se ‘exceptions’ fall into place if we consider
12 Ans van Kemenade, Tanja Milicev & R. Harald Baayen<br />
<strong>the</strong> discourse context. This account, we claim, does justice to both <strong>the</strong> diffuseness<br />
and <strong>the</strong> systematicity of Old English word order, without giving up on <strong>the</strong> insights<br />
achieved so far in <strong>the</strong> syntactic literature on Old English word order.<br />
The proposal <strong>the</strong>n is that <strong>the</strong> area to <strong>the</strong> left of þa/þonne is indeed presuppositional.<br />
This is supported by <strong>the</strong> fact that it is <strong>the</strong> default position for pronominal<br />
subjects and <strong>the</strong> preferred position for pronominal objects.<br />
With a few exceptions, subject pronouns are always to <strong>the</strong> left of <strong>the</strong> adverbs.<br />
Even though <strong>the</strong> exceptions are sometimes presented so as to question <strong>the</strong> fixed<br />
position for subject pronouns (van Bergen 2000), a careful study of <strong>the</strong> exceptional<br />
cases shows that <strong>the</strong>y are also subject to certain regularities. Pronominal subjects<br />
following þa/þonne are ei<strong>the</strong>r instances of <strong>the</strong> so-called Proposition-in-Focus,<br />
when <strong>the</strong> entire clause is given as new information focus (cf. van Kemenade &<br />
Milićev to appear) or involve internal (object-like) nominative arguments, and<br />
essentially behave like object pronouns taking a lower object pronoun position<br />
(cf. Milićev in preparation).<br />
Object pronouns also regularly appear <strong>the</strong>re, following <strong>the</strong> subject pronoun.<br />
(18) forþæm he wenð þæt he hi þonne ealle hæbbe<br />
because he knows that he <strong>the</strong>m <strong>the</strong>n all have<br />
“because he knows that he <strong>the</strong>n had <strong>the</strong>m all” (coboeth,Bo: 24.56.16.1031)<br />
It is often taken for granted that object pronouns appear in <strong>the</strong> high position<br />
optionally, since <strong>the</strong>y can also be separated <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> subject pronoun and occur<br />
to <strong>the</strong> right of þa/þonne. This notion of optionality holds only if object pronouns<br />
in different positions are assumed to be of <strong>the</strong> same type. Upon a closer look,<br />
however, it becomes clear that <strong>the</strong> distribution of pronouns is conditioned by<br />
both structural and pragmatic factors. In order to be found in <strong>the</strong> high position,<br />
adjacent to <strong>the</strong> subject pronoun to <strong>the</strong> left of þa/þonne, an object pronoun needs<br />
to be a clitic (i.e., have reduced syntactic form) and needs to have a discourse<br />
prominent antecedent. The prominence of an antecedent can be reduced in various<br />
ways, most of <strong>the</strong>m involving narrow/contrastive focus, and when <strong>the</strong>se conditions<br />
interfere, an object pronoun occurs in a lower position (see Milićev, in<br />
preparation).<br />
(19) a. Þa he þa ne mihte hi mid his<br />
when he <strong>the</strong>n [not could]-narrow focus her with his<br />
wordum oncerran, þa het he hi ahon be hire locum<br />
words turn, <strong>the</strong>n ordered he her hang by her locks<br />
ond hi þreagean mid missenlicum witum<br />
and her punish with various tortures<br />
“When he could not avert her with his words, he ordered that she be hung<br />
by her hair and tortured in various ways”<br />
(comart3,Mart_5_[Kotzor]: Ap27,A.9.641)
The balance between syntax and discourse in Old English 13<br />
b. Ða he þa ne mihte mid þæm<br />
when he <strong>the</strong>n [not could with <strong>the</strong>se]-narrow focus<br />
hi oferswiðan, þa het he hi lædan to beheafdianne.<br />
her overpower, <strong>the</strong>n ordered he her lead to beheading<br />
“When he could not overpower her with <strong>the</strong>se, <strong>the</strong>n he ordered that she be<br />
led to beheading” (comart3,Mart_5_[Kotzor]: Ap27,A.12.642)<br />
As far as nominal expressions are concerned, <strong>the</strong> situation is <strong>the</strong> following: indefinite<br />
NPs, introducing new discourse entities in <strong>the</strong> lower subject position, follow<br />
þa/þonne (20), whereas definite NPs can be found both preceding and following<br />
<strong>the</strong> adverbs.<br />
(20) Gif ðonne hwelc mon forbireð his synna …<br />
if <strong>the</strong>n any man forebears his sins …<br />
“If anyone <strong>the</strong>n refrains <strong>from</strong> his sins” (cocura,CP: 37.265.1.1719)<br />
The general lack of indefinite nominal expressions to <strong>the</strong> left of <strong>the</strong> adverbs is<br />
straightforward: as <strong>the</strong> area is reserved for d-linked, presupposed material, new<br />
discourse entities will not be able to occur <strong>the</strong>re.<br />
The distribution of definite nominal subjects, on <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, is more<br />
puzzling. Since all definite NPs have <strong>the</strong> same morphological make-up (<strong>the</strong> presence<br />
of <strong>the</strong> demonstrative pronoun), <strong>the</strong> category of definiteness alone cannot<br />
be held responsible for <strong>the</strong> positional variation. However, certain semantic differences<br />
can be observed. The definite NP se sacerd “<strong>the</strong> priest” in (21) is used<br />
attributively ra<strong>the</strong>r than referentially, and is interpreted as “whoever has <strong>the</strong><br />
property of being a priest”.<br />
(21) Gif ðonne se sacred bið ðæs ungerad lareowdomes, hwæt<br />
If <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> priest is unskilled in instruction, what<br />
forstent ðonne his gehlyd?<br />
avails <strong>the</strong>n his cry?<br />
“if <strong>the</strong> priest is unskilled in instruction, what avails his cry?”<br />
(cocura, CP, 15,91,25)<br />
In <strong>the</strong> high position, definite nominal expressions receive a specific reading.<br />
(22) Þa se biscop þæt þa geseah, þe him big sæt, þa<br />
when <strong>the</strong> bishop that <strong>the</strong>n saw, who him by sat, <strong>the</strong>n<br />
licode him seo arfæste dæd þæs cyninges;<br />
liked him <strong>the</strong> virtuous deed of.<strong>the</strong> king<br />
“When <strong>the</strong> bishop, who sat next to him, saw that, <strong>the</strong> king’s virtuous deed<br />
appealed to him” (cobede,Bede_3: 4.166.8.1593)<br />
Generic NPs are possible in <strong>the</strong> high position, but only if <strong>the</strong>y have a discourse<br />
antecedent, as in (23). Even though not referring to a uniquely identifiable entity,
1 Ans van Kemenade, Tanja Milicev & R. Harald Baayen<br />
se þeowa “<strong>the</strong> servant” in (23b) has an antecedent in <strong>the</strong> preceding line (23a) (<strong>the</strong><br />
dative pronoun him). This seems to suggest that discourse-givenness overrides<br />
specificity<br />
(23) a. Gif se hlaford him þonne wif sealde, sie hio & hire<br />
if <strong>the</strong> lord him <strong>the</strong>n wife gave, be she and her<br />
bearn þæs hlafordes<br />
child of.<strong>the</strong> lord<br />
“If <strong>the</strong> lord gave him a wife, she and her child will belong to <strong>the</strong> lord”<br />
(colawafint,LawAfEl: 11.24)<br />
b. Gif se þeowa þonne cweðe: Nelle ic <strong>from</strong> minum<br />
if <strong>the</strong> servant <strong>the</strong>n said: not.will I <strong>from</strong> my<br />
hlaforde ne <strong>from</strong> minum wife, ne <strong>from</strong> minum<br />
lord nor <strong>from</strong> my wife nor <strong>from</strong> my<br />
bearne ne <strong>from</strong> minum ierfe, brenge hine þonne<br />
child nor <strong>from</strong> my property, bring him <strong>the</strong>n<br />
his hlaford to ðære dura þæs temples<br />
his lord to <strong>the</strong> door <strong>the</strong> temple<br />
“If <strong>the</strong> servant <strong>the</strong>n says: I will not leave my lord, or my wife, or my child or<br />
my property, let his lord <strong>the</strong>n bring him to <strong>the</strong> door of <strong>the</strong> temple”<br />
(colawafint,LawAfEl: 11.25)<br />
So far, we have established that <strong>the</strong>re seems to be a strong correlation between <strong>the</strong><br />
high position of an NP and <strong>the</strong> fact that it is discourse-given. But <strong>the</strong>re are also<br />
some more problematic cases.<br />
Even though specificity strongly correlates with anaphoricity, <strong>the</strong> relation is<br />
not absolute. Definite expressions without an antecedent can appear in <strong>the</strong> high<br />
position when <strong>the</strong>y are associated with a strong sense of presupposition. Discourse<br />
entities such as God need not be ‘formally’ introduced in <strong>the</strong> discourse.<br />
(24) Hu God þa þa mæstan ofermetto gewræc on þæm folce<br />
how God <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> greatest pride advanced on <strong>the</strong> people<br />
“How God <strong>the</strong>n advanced <strong>the</strong> greatest pride on <strong>the</strong> people”<br />
(coorosiu,Or_6: 2.134.24.2833)<br />
The truly exceptional cases are definite/specific nominal expressions after þa/<br />
þonne, and with an antecedent. In (25), <strong>the</strong> definite NP se his gefera has an antecedent<br />
six lines above <strong>the</strong> relevant line.<br />
(25) þa þæt þa se his gefera geseah & ongeat, þa<br />
when that <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> his companion saw and perceived, <strong>the</strong>n<br />
frægn he hine<br />
asked he him<br />
“When his companion saw that, <strong>the</strong>n he asked him”<br />
(cobede,Bede_4: 26.352.22.3553)
The balance between syntax and discourse in Old English 1<br />
Even though of low frequency, <strong>the</strong> existence of such examples points to <strong>the</strong> fact<br />
that specificity and anaphoricity do not entirely cover <strong>the</strong> domain to <strong>the</strong> left of<br />
<strong>the</strong> adverbs þa/þonne. The link with <strong>the</strong> previous discourse, however, is again<br />
highly relevant. Comparing instances of high and low definite, specific, anaphoric<br />
subjects in subordinate clauses involving a demonstrative object þæt, Milićev (in<br />
preparation) shows that <strong>the</strong> antecedent of <strong>the</strong> high definite expression needs to<br />
be sufficiently prominent/accessible in <strong>the</strong> preceding discourse. This is especially<br />
<strong>the</strong> case when ano<strong>the</strong>r anaphoric expression is found to <strong>the</strong> left of <strong>the</strong> adverb, i.e.,<br />
pronominal and demonstrative objects. This may make it necessary to refine <strong>the</strong><br />
account so far, since different levels of discourse givenness clearly play a role in<br />
<strong>the</strong> positioning of a discourse old entity (recall that a similar situation holds for<br />
pronominal objects). We leave it for fur<strong>the</strong>r research to provide an explanation of<br />
<strong>the</strong> interrelations of <strong>the</strong>se more intricate discourse-internal conditions.<br />
On <strong>the</strong> basis of <strong>the</strong> discussion so far, <strong>the</strong> following generalization seems warranted:<br />
those cases in which <strong>the</strong> definite NP is high (on <strong>the</strong> left of þa/þonne), <strong>the</strong><br />
demonstrative is definite + anaphoric. But we have also seen that <strong>the</strong>re are some less<br />
clear cases. In <strong>the</strong> following section, we will develop a statistical approach which<br />
shows that <strong>the</strong> generalizations so far established do achieve a very significant level<br />
of statistical probability. This shows that, counterexamples notwithstanding, <strong>the</strong><br />
analysis presented here appears to be on <strong>the</strong> right track.<br />
On <strong>the</strong> basis of <strong>the</strong> discussion so far, we come to <strong>the</strong> following conclusions:<br />
morpho-syntactically, Old English is tailored to allow a certain amount of discourse<br />
flexibility. The morpho-syntax allows this by virtue of <strong>the</strong> extra position created by<br />
<strong>the</strong> discourse particle, and <strong>the</strong> availability of an extra class of referential expression<br />
extending <strong>the</strong> range of discourse-anaphoric strategies. In terms of discourse, <strong>the</strong><br />
strongest trigger for an NP to occur in <strong>the</strong> high position seems to be <strong>the</strong> presence of<br />
a discourse antecedent. To fur<strong>the</strong>r streng<strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> conclusions reached so far, we will<br />
develop a quantitative approach to <strong>the</strong> relation between <strong>the</strong> key syntactic properties<br />
and discourse relations. This is <strong>the</strong> topic for <strong>the</strong> next section.<br />
3. A quantitative approach<br />
In this section, we develop a methodology which serves to provide statistical<br />
evidence for <strong>the</strong> approach presented in this article. The focus of <strong>the</strong> quantitative<br />
evidence is on subject-initial subclauses, as it is here that we find <strong>the</strong> full range<br />
of subject types (personal pronoun, definite NP, indefinite NP, impersonal man,<br />
and so on, and thus we need to show that <strong>the</strong> generalizations we have established<br />
bear fur<strong>the</strong>r scrutiny. The methodology developed here is much inspired<br />
by Bresnan et al. (2007). A database was created with all <strong>the</strong> relevant subclauses
1 Ans van Kemenade, Tanja Milicev & R. Harald Baayen<br />
<strong>from</strong> YCOE. To help manage <strong>the</strong> data, <strong>the</strong> query results <strong>from</strong> CorpusSearch were<br />
imported into a simple Microsoft Access database. This was accomplished with<br />
a specially-written script in <strong>the</strong> computer language perl, which transformed <strong>the</strong><br />
CorpusSearch output into several tables in ‘comma-separated value’ (CSV) format.<br />
These tables were <strong>the</strong>n imported into Access (using its interactive ‘Import’<br />
command).<br />
The Access database includes one table for <strong>the</strong> subclauses found by <strong>the</strong> queries<br />
in YCOE, a second table for <strong>the</strong> complete sentence containing <strong>the</strong> clause in context,<br />
and a third table for <strong>the</strong> manually-entered subject properties. A fourth table was<br />
added later listing <strong>the</strong> source documents and <strong>the</strong> chronological period <strong>the</strong>y belong<br />
to. These tables are related to each o<strong>the</strong>r with appropriate keys and relationships,<br />
and are edited <strong>from</strong> a form that arranges <strong>the</strong> information conveniently. 2<br />
3.1 Parameters and values<br />
The discourse-relevant properties of each subject were entered in numerical values.<br />
We here discuss only those properties primarily relevant for <strong>the</strong> quantitative analysis<br />
in this article.<br />
The first relevant parameter is NP type, <strong>the</strong> numerical values are as in (26):<br />
(26) Numerical values for NP type<br />
1 personal pronoun<br />
2 weak demonstrative (<strong>the</strong> se paradigm)<br />
3 strong demonstrative (this, that, <strong>the</strong>se, those)<br />
4 definite NP<br />
5 indefinite NP<br />
6 reflexive pronoun<br />
7 Man<br />
8 proper name<br />
The second relevant parameter is NP position, <strong>the</strong> values are in (27):<br />
(27) Numerical values for NP position<br />
1 left periphery (e.g., wh-words in questions)<br />
2 high (preceding þa/þonne)<br />
3 mid (immediately following þa/þonne)<br />
4 low (preceding <strong>the</strong> non-finite verb)<br />
5 low (following <strong>the</strong> non-finite verb)<br />
2. The database and <strong>the</strong> import script were built by Alexis Dimitriadis. They made it possible<br />
to analyze a large number of sentences with a considerably increased level of efficiency and<br />
accuracy.
The balance between syntax and discourse in Old English 1<br />
The third relevant parameter is <strong>the</strong> specificity of NP. This parameter is especially<br />
important, as it should allow us to measure <strong>the</strong> correctness of our hypo<strong>the</strong>sis<br />
that a NP in <strong>the</strong> high position refers back specifically to an antecedent in <strong>the</strong><br />
discourse, while a NP in <strong>the</strong> mid position is more likely to have a generic reading.<br />
Specificity is here used ra<strong>the</strong>r informally, in <strong>the</strong> sense of ‘uniquely identifiable by<br />
<strong>the</strong> speaker’; <strong>the</strong> values are as in (28).<br />
(28) Numerical values for Specificity of NP<br />
1 Specific<br />
2 non-specific<br />
The fourth relevant parameter is <strong>the</strong> presence and NP-type of <strong>the</strong> antecedent in <strong>the</strong><br />
discourse; <strong>the</strong> values are as in (29).<br />
(29) Numerical values for Antecedent type<br />
0 None<br />
1 personal pronoun<br />
2 weak demonstrative<br />
3 strong demonstrative<br />
4 definite NP<br />
5 indefinite NP<br />
6 Reflexive<br />
7 Man<br />
8 proper name<br />
Every individual example in <strong>the</strong> database was coded manually for <strong>the</strong>se parameters.<br />
The numerical values for <strong>the</strong> parameters were <strong>the</strong>n extracted <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> database<br />
in <strong>the</strong> form of a comma-separated file. The following gives a good idea of <strong>the</strong><br />
format (bearing in mind that more parameters were coded than explicated here<br />
for our present purposes)<br />
(30) “coaelhom,ÆHom_19:253”,2810,0,1,5,2,1,1,2,-1,-1,,,,,,,2,2,“subnps-tmp.q”,<br />
“coaelhom”,3<br />
“coaelhom,ÆHom_19:253”,2810,0,1,5,2,1,1,2,-1,-1,,,,,,,3,3,“subnps-tmp.q”,<br />
“coaelhom”,3<br />
“coaelhom,ÆHom_19:376”,2872,0,1,5,2,1,1,2,-1,-1,,,,,,,2,2,“subnps-tmp.q”,<br />
“coaelhom”,3<br />
“coaelhom,ÆHom_19:376”,2872,0,1,5,2,1,1,2,-1,-1,,,,,,,3,3,“subnps-tmp.q”,<br />
“coaelhom”,3<br />
“coboeth,Bo:38.117.31”,2344,0,1,4,3,3,1,1,-1,-1,-1,-1,,,-1,-1,3,3,“subtmp-sn.q”,<br />
“coboeth”,2<br />
“coboeth,Bo:38.124.1”,2471,0,1,4,2,3,1,1,1,1,2,1,26,4,1,1,3,3,“subnps-tmp.q”,<br />
“coboeth”,2
1 Ans van Kemenade, Tanja Milicev & R. Harald Baayen<br />
The format gives: first <strong>the</strong> text reference, <strong>the</strong>n a number of parameter values,<br />
<strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> source file named after <strong>the</strong> query files with which YCOE was searched,<br />
<strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> source text, and, finally, <strong>the</strong> subperiod of <strong>the</strong> text as defined in <strong>the</strong> Helsinki<br />
Corpus.<br />
The results coded in <strong>the</strong> comma-separated file were <strong>the</strong>n inputted in R (R<br />
Development Core team 2004). We analysed <strong>the</strong> data with a generalized linear<br />
mixed model (Baayen 2007 & Faraway 2006) with <strong>the</strong> NP Specificity as binary<br />
dependent variable to model <strong>the</strong> probability of a specific realization of <strong>the</strong> high<br />
NP. The text in which an example was attested was included as a random effect<br />
factor in <strong>the</strong> model. Two fixed-effect predictors emerged as significant. As shown<br />
in Figure 1, <strong>the</strong> likelihood of a specific realization of <strong>the</strong> high NP decreased when<br />
<strong>the</strong> position of <strong>the</strong> NP was mid ra<strong>the</strong>r than high (log odds contrast coefficient<br />
–1.46, p < 0.0002). Figure 1 also visualizes that this likelihood increased for<br />
NPs realizing proper names (log odds contrast coefficient 2.76, p = 0.0186) and<br />
decreased for indefinite NPs (log odds contrast coefficient –4.24, p < 0.0001).<br />
The standard deviation of <strong>the</strong> text random variable was estimated at 1.055. The<br />
estimated scale was 0.993, indicating that <strong>the</strong> use of a binomial link function for<br />
this data set is fully justified.<br />
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0<br />
probability of specific NP<br />
o<br />
high<br />
position of NP<br />
o<br />
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0<br />
probability of specific NP<br />
o<br />
mid definite indefinite proper name<br />
definiteness<br />
Figure 1. Relation between NP-type, NP position and specificity of NP.<br />
Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, we have measured <strong>the</strong> relevance of a discourse antecedent. A<br />
generalized linear mixed effect model with a binomial link revealed that <strong>the</strong> likelihood<br />
of specific realization of <strong>the</strong> high NP decreased when it appeared in <strong>the</strong> mid<br />
position ra<strong>the</strong>r than in <strong>the</strong> high position (estimated log odds contrast coefficient<br />
−1.18, p < 0.0001) and that it increased when an antecedent was present (estimated<br />
log odds contrast coefficient 1.67, p < 0.0001), see Figure 2. The estimated<br />
o<br />
o
The balance between syntax and discourse in Old English 1<br />
standard deviation for <strong>the</strong> text source random effect was 0.80. The estimated scale<br />
was 0.93, indicating that <strong>the</strong> choice of <strong>the</strong> link function is reasonable.<br />
probability of specific NP<br />
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0<br />
high<br />
mid absent present<br />
position of NP<br />
presence of antecedent<br />
Figure 2. Relation between NP specificity, NP position and <strong>the</strong> presence of an antecedent.<br />
. Discussion and conclusion<br />
o<br />
o<br />
probability of specific NP<br />
0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0<br />
The methodology developed in Section 3 provides substantial corroboration for<br />
<strong>the</strong> analysis presented in Section 2. In Section 2, we hypo<strong>the</strong>sized that Old English<br />
syntax allows a higher degree of discourse flexibility by virtue of an extra syntactic<br />
position on <strong>the</strong> left of a discourse particle, and a larger range of referring expressions<br />
provided by <strong>the</strong> presence of an articulate paradigm of weak demonstrative<br />
pronouns serving as definiteness and potentially also specificity markers. We hypo<strong>the</strong>sized<br />
that <strong>the</strong> most important trigger for an NP to occur in <strong>the</strong> position<br />
left of <strong>the</strong> discourse particle is <strong>the</strong> presence of an antecedent in <strong>the</strong> discourse,<br />
correlating strongly but not absolutely with specific reference to that antecedent.<br />
In <strong>the</strong> statistical model developed in Section 3, <strong>the</strong>se hypo<strong>the</strong>ses were fully confirmed,<br />
with a very convincing degree of statistical likelihood. Significant correlations<br />
were established between high position for <strong>the</strong> NP, definiteness of NP and<br />
specificity of NP. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, <strong>the</strong>re is a highly significant correlation between <strong>the</strong><br />
specificity of NP and <strong>the</strong> presence of a discourse antecedent. All in all, this shows<br />
that in Old English, syntax and discourse interact in interesting ways, in a fashion<br />
that was lost in <strong>the</strong> subsequent history of English, as discussed in van Kemenade &<br />
Los (2006) and van Kemenade & Milićev (to appear).<br />
o<br />
o
20 Ans van Kemenade, Tanja Milicev & R. Harald Baayen<br />
This leaves many avenues open for fur<strong>the</strong>r research, which we will pursue<br />
in future. This includes fur<strong>the</strong>r refinement of <strong>the</strong> discourse reference properties<br />
as discussed for Old English here, extension of <strong>the</strong> empirical basis to include more<br />
discourse particles, such as nu, la, na, eac and so on, consideration of <strong>the</strong> factors<br />
discussed here in <strong>the</strong> positioning of objects. Not least, we will need to consider<br />
in detail what happened to <strong>the</strong>se properties in <strong>the</strong> fur<strong>the</strong>r history of English. The<br />
analytical model presented here, in conjunction with <strong>the</strong> statistical model developed<br />
in Section 3, provide a sound and promising basis for <strong>the</strong>se fur<strong>the</strong>r questions.<br />
References<br />
Baayen, R. Harald. 2007. Analyzing Linguistic Data: A practical introduction to statistics. To<br />
appear 2007. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br />
Bergen, Linda van. 2000. Pronouns and word order in Old English, with particular reference to <strong>the</strong><br />
indefinite pronoun man. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Manchester.<br />
Bresnan, Joan, Anna Cueni, Tatiana Nikitina & Harald Baayen. 2007. Predicting <strong>the</strong> dative alternation.<br />
Cognitive Foundations of Interpretation ed. by Gerlof Bouma, Irene Kraemer and<br />
Joost Zwarts, 69–94. Royal Ne<strong>the</strong>rlands Academy of Arts and Sciences.<br />
Denison, David. 2006. Category change and gradience in <strong>the</strong> determiner system. The Handbook<br />
of <strong>the</strong> History of English ed. by Ans van Kemenade and Bettelou Los, 279–304. Oxford and<br />
Malden, MA: Blackwell.<br />
Faraway, Julian J. 2006. Extending Linear Models with {R}: Generalized Linear Mixed Effects and<br />
Nonparametric Regression Models. Boca Raton: Chapman and Hall.<br />
Haeberli, Eric.1999. Features, categories and <strong>the</strong> syntax of A-positions. Synchronic and diachronic<br />
variation in <strong>the</strong> Germanic languages. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Geneva.<br />
Haeberli, Eric & Richard Ingham. 2007. “The position of negation and adverbs in Early Middle<br />
English”. Lingua 117: 1–25.<br />
Kemenade, Ans van. 1987. Syntactic Case and Morphological Case in <strong>the</strong> History of English.<br />
Dordrecht: Foris.<br />
Kemenade, Ans van. 1999. Sentential negation and clause structure in Old English. Negation in<br />
<strong>the</strong> History of English ed. by Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade, Gunnel Tottie and Wim van der<br />
Wurff, 147–165. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.<br />
Kemenade, Ans van. 2000. Jespersen’s cycle revisited: formal properties of grammaticalization.<br />
Diachronic Syntax: Models and Mechanisms ed. by Susan Pintzuk, George Tsoulas and<br />
Anthony Warner, 51–74. Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.<br />
Kemenade, Ans van & Bettelou Los, eds. 2006. The Handbook of <strong>the</strong> History of English. Oxford<br />
and Malden, MA: Blackwell.<br />
Kemenade, Ans van & Tanja Milićev. To appear. Syntax and discourse in Old English and Middle<br />
English word order. Grammatical Change: Origins, Nature, Outcomes: Proceedings of DIGS<br />
VIII ed. by Dianne Jonas and Stephen Anderson. Oxford: Oxford University Press.<br />
Milićev, Tanja. In preparation. Syntax and Discourse linking in Old English. Ph.D. dissertation,<br />
Radboud University Nijmegen.
The balance between syntax and discourse in Old English 21<br />
Pintzuk, Susan. 1991. Phrase Structures in Competition: Variation and Change in Old English<br />
Word order. PhD dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.<br />
R Development Core Team. 2004. R: a language and environment for statistical computing.<br />
http://R-project.org.<br />
Rissanen, Matti. 1999. Isn’t it or is it not? On <strong>the</strong> order of postverbal subject and negative particle<br />
in <strong>the</strong> history of English. Negation in <strong>the</strong> History of English ed. by Ingrid Tieken-Boon van<br />
Ostade, Gunnel Tottie and Wim van der Wurff, 189–206. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.<br />
Taylor, Ann, Anthony Warner, Susan Pintzuk & Frank Beths. 2003. The York-Toronto-Helsinki<br />
Parsed Corpus of Old English Prose (YCOE). York: Department of Language and Linguistic<br />
Science, University of York. Available through <strong>the</strong> Oxford Text Archive.
The Old English copula weorðan<br />
and its replacement in Middle English<br />
Peter Petré<br />
Fund for Scientific Research-Flanders & University of Leuven<br />
Hubert Cuyckens<br />
University of Leuven<br />
With <strong>the</strong> aid of a specially compiled corpus, this paper accounts for <strong>the</strong><br />
replacement – mainly by become – of weorðan ‘become’, whose use rapidly<br />
decreased in Middle English. Drawing on Goldbergian construction grammar,<br />
<strong>the</strong> paper posits <strong>the</strong> existence of a lexeme-independent network of copular<br />
constructions [Copula + np/ap/…]. Copular uses of weorðan are associated<br />
with this network, but also form part of a second network exclusive to weorðan,<br />
which, already in Old English, served as a model for <strong>the</strong> extension of becuman<br />
to copular uses. In early Middle English, weorðan reacted to changes in <strong>the</strong><br />
lexeme-independent copular network. Weorðan was no longer used with<br />
adjectival participles when <strong>the</strong>se were constructionally separated <strong>from</strong> its most<br />
frequent collocates, namely human propensity adjectives. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, reacting<br />
to an influx of various adjectives in predicate position, becuman, which had no<br />
collocational preferences, extended its use to <strong>the</strong>se adjectives and eventually took<br />
over <strong>from</strong> weorðan completely.<br />
The focus of this paper is on <strong>the</strong> use of two verbs in copula-constructions. The first<br />
of <strong>the</strong>se verbs is obsolete in Present-day English (PDE); it still occurs as worth in<br />
<strong>the</strong> nineteenth-century idiom woe worth <strong>the</strong>e. In Old English (OE), its infinitive<br />
is usually spelt (ge)weorðan, and in Middle English (ME) (i)wor<strong>the</strong>n. The second<br />
verb is PDE become (OE becuman, ME bikomen), which, in early ME, is one of<br />
<strong>the</strong> two main verbs that replaced weorðan in most of its contexts (<strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r verb<br />
is PDE wax, OE weaxan, ME waxen). Because <strong>the</strong> emphasis in this paper is on <strong>the</strong><br />
OE period, we will <strong>from</strong> now on refer to <strong>the</strong>se verbs in <strong>the</strong>ir OE forms of weorðan<br />
and becuman. In addition, our main interest will be in <strong>the</strong> construction types<br />
. In <strong>the</strong> present paper, <strong>the</strong> prefixless verb weorðan and <strong>the</strong> prefixed verb geweorðan are treated<br />
as a single lexeme. While this is a simplification, <strong>the</strong> functions of <strong>the</strong>se two verbs are sufficiently<br />
similar to justify a global discussion of <strong>the</strong>m.
24 Peter Petré & Hubert Cuyckens<br />
(A)–(G), whereby (C)–(G) are <strong>the</strong> ‘real’ copula-constructions ((H) constitutes a<br />
residual category, containing all marginal constructions, copular as well as noncopular).<br />
An elaborate definition of <strong>the</strong> notion ‘copula’ and <strong>the</strong> various types of<br />
copula-construction, as exemplified in (C)–(G), will be given in section 2.<br />
(A) Intransitive construction (no copularizing function; meaning: ‘arise,<br />
happen, occur’)<br />
( ) Sona wearð micel eorðbyfung. (c 075. ChrodR : 4.2 )<br />
“Immediately a great earthquake occurred.”<br />
(B) Construction with dative object (no copularizing function; ‘happen to, occur to’)<br />
(2) Hu mihte æfre englum mara gefea & geofu & blis geweorþan, oþþe mannum<br />
mara weorðmynd þonne him on þyssum dæge gewearþ?<br />
(c 000. HomS 46 [BlHom ]: 23. 27)<br />
“How could ever befall <strong>the</strong> angels more joy and liberality and merriment, or<br />
more glory to men, than to him on this day happened?”<br />
(C) Copula + prepositional phrase (pp) construction (assignment of location/class<br />
to a subject; ‘come to, turn into’)<br />
(3) a. Hit wyrð on berne þæt to ðam belimpað.<br />
“It goes into <strong>the</strong> barn, that which belongs to <strong>the</strong>m.”<br />
(c 00. LawGer:3. )<br />
b. Gif þu sie Godes sunu, cweþ þæt þa stanas to hlafum geweorþan.<br />
(c 000. HomS 0 [BlHom 3]:27.4)<br />
“If you are God’s son, say that <strong>the</strong> stones turn into breads.”<br />
(D) Copula + adjectival phrase (ap) construction (assignment of property to a subject;<br />
‘get, become’)<br />
(4) For þinum wundrum forhte weorðað.<br />
“For your miracles <strong>the</strong>y get afraid.”<br />
(c970. MetPs 64:8)<br />
(E) Copula + noun phrase (np) construction (assignment of a class to a subject)<br />
(5) Ond binnan III gearum heo wearð þæs minstres abbud.<br />
(c 025. Mart [Herzfeld-Kotzor]:De25, C. 5)<br />
“And within three years she became abbess of that nunnery.”<br />
(F) Perfect participle construction (i.e., Copula + participle (pple) of intransitive<br />
verb; assignment of a resulting state to a subject)<br />
(6) Se hreofla, þe hym ær lange on wæs, wearð þa sona nyðer afeallen.<br />
(c 075. VSal [Cross]:33.7)<br />
“The leprosy, which formerly had been long on him, had <strong>the</strong>n immediately<br />
fallen off [lit. down].”<br />
(G) Passive participle construction (i.e., Copula + participle (pple) of transitive<br />
verb; assignment of a resulting state to a subject)<br />
(7) Þa feoll an of his handum, þæt hit wearð tobrocen & tostrægd on unarimedlice<br />
styccu. (c 075. GregD [C]:7.49.20- )<br />
“Then one [glass lantern] had fallen <strong>from</strong> his hands, so that it got broken and<br />
scattered in innumerable pieces.”
Old English weorðan and its replacement in Middle English 25<br />
(H) O<strong>the</strong>r constructions (e.g., <strong>the</strong> Copula + Genitive object construction)<br />
(8) Þa heo þonon hwurfon þa wurdon þa twege cnihtæs al swa fægeres.gen<br />
hiwæs.gen swa heoræ fæderæs wæron. (c 50. LS 5 [InventCrossNap]:280)<br />
“When <strong>the</strong>y moved <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong>re <strong>the</strong>n became <strong>the</strong> two youths also of a fair<br />
appearance just as <strong>the</strong>ir fa<strong>the</strong>rs were.”<br />
The different constructions are here illustrated with <strong>the</strong> verb weorðan, but as will<br />
become clear below, most of <strong>the</strong>m are also found for becuman at a particular time<br />
in <strong>the</strong> history of this verb. Note also that, in OE, weorðan is not only found in<br />
copula-constructions, but also in many o<strong>the</strong>r constructions (among <strong>the</strong>m, those<br />
exemplified in (A)–(B)).<br />
While weorðan was highly frequent in OE, ranging among <strong>the</strong> five most<br />
frequent OE verbs, its frequency rapidly decreased in ME, so that it had disappeared<br />
almost entirely by <strong>the</strong> end of <strong>the</strong> fourteenth century. This development,<br />
taking place during <strong>the</strong> transition <strong>from</strong> OE to ME, was far-reaching, as is made<br />
clear by <strong>the</strong> following two observations:<br />
a. Within a relatively short space of time, weorðan disappeared in all its uses.<br />
b. Instead of a single successor, weorðan apparently got replaced by a set of verbs,<br />
<strong>the</strong> most important of which is become. Importantly, not one single verb <strong>from</strong><br />
among this set will assume all former uses of weorðan.<br />
To our knowledge, no satisfactory explanation for ei<strong>the</strong>r of <strong>the</strong>se observations has<br />
so far been given. The main reason for this explanatory gap seems that most of<br />
<strong>the</strong> literature on weorðan focusses on one of its functions in isolation, ignoring its<br />
o<strong>the</strong>r functions. 2 In addition to this lack of a comprehensive account of <strong>the</strong> loss,<br />
and replacement, of weorðan, very little attention has been paid to OE and ME<br />
(semi-)copulas in general. Exemplary for this lack of interest is <strong>the</strong> total absence of<br />
any literature on <strong>the</strong> development of become as a copula.<br />
The present paper is a first attempt to fill <strong>the</strong>se gaps. It is structured as follows.<br />
A preliminary first section describes <strong>the</strong> corpus which was compiled for this specific<br />
purpose. In a second section, it is shown how <strong>the</strong> different functions of weorðan<br />
were, originally, interrelated in OE within a network of constructions, i.e., pairings<br />
of senses of weorðan with syntactic structures in which it occurs. A third section<br />
focusses on <strong>the</strong> emergence of <strong>the</strong> copula becuman, one of weorðan’s successors, and<br />
its relationship with weorðan. More specifically, it is shown how <strong>the</strong> development of<br />
<strong>the</strong> copularizing function of become can be seen as a process of analogical extension<br />
2. For instance, Biese ( 932, 952) and Zieglschmidt ( 930) concentrate on weorðan as a<br />
copula, whereas Frary ( 929) and Kilpiö ( 989) concentrate on weorðan as an auxiliary of <strong>the</strong><br />
passive.
26 Peter Petré & Hubert Cuyckens<br />
in which becuman copied <strong>the</strong> copularizing functions of weorðan. A final section,<br />
<strong>the</strong>n, provides an account of <strong>the</strong> differences in distribution between weorðan and<br />
becuman. In addition, this section will also try to shed light on what caused <strong>the</strong><br />
replacement of weorðan in <strong>the</strong> first place. It will be suggested that a major explanatory<br />
factor in this respect is a change in <strong>the</strong> lexeme-independent network of copulaconstructions<br />
in which <strong>the</strong> lexeme weorðan was used.<br />
. Methodological considerations: how (un)representative are <strong>the</strong> data?<br />
In general, two approaches exist in research on Old and Middle English, each taking<br />
a different position on problems that may arise in comparing <strong>the</strong>se two dialects.<br />
The first approach is mainly philological and descriptive in nature. Its position with<br />
respect to any problems involved in comparing Old and Middle English is basically<br />
one of resignation. The second approach is that of <strong>the</strong>oretical linguistics, which<br />
is concerned with mechanisms of language change such as grammaticalization<br />
(i.e., <strong>the</strong> development of (more) grammatical functions, see Hopper & Traugott<br />
2003) or lexicalization (i.e., idiomatization). In this approach, problems of comparison<br />
are more often than not ignored. Ei<strong>the</strong>r one of <strong>the</strong>se positions is, in essence,<br />
undesirable. In this section, we will first discuss what underlies <strong>the</strong>se positions; we<br />
will <strong>the</strong>n explain <strong>the</strong> principles on which <strong>the</strong> data sample (or corpus) used in this<br />
paper was based to avoid ei<strong>the</strong>r of <strong>the</strong>se undesirable positions.<br />
First, in philological research on English, it is commonly accepted that a wide<br />
gap exists between Old and Middle English (see, for instance, Milroy 996: 67 &<br />
Toon 996: 434–435). Old English manuscripts are predominantly preserved in<br />
<strong>the</strong> sou<strong>the</strong>rn West Saxon (WS) dialect. The earliest Middle English texts (<strong>from</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong> period 5 – 250), however, are almost exclusively written in <strong>the</strong> Midland<br />
dialect, which, if anything, is ra<strong>the</strong>r a continuation of <strong>the</strong> Anglian dialect of Old<br />
English. The usual conclusion drawn <strong>from</strong> this observation is one of resignation:<br />
OE and ME data should not be compared, because <strong>the</strong>y derive <strong>from</strong> two widely<br />
differing dialects.<br />
It cannot be denied that <strong>the</strong>se dialectical differences constitute a fundamental<br />
problem. And yet, in more <strong>the</strong>oretically oriented linguistic studies, this problem is<br />
often largely ignored, and comparisons between Old and Middle English are readily<br />
made – a point also discussed at length in Lass ( 994: –5). The main argument<br />
given in defence of this strategy is that <strong>the</strong> data are so scarce that <strong>the</strong> best one can<br />
do is to make use of all of <strong>the</strong>m. In particular, if <strong>the</strong> language items one is doing<br />
research on are fairly low or even average in frequency, ignoring is probably <strong>the</strong><br />
only option. However, for <strong>the</strong> purpose of this paper, i.e., explaining <strong>the</strong> loss of
Old English weorðan and its replacement in Middle English 27<br />
weorðan and its replacement by becuman, we are fortunate enough to be dealing<br />
with <strong>the</strong> most frequent kind of verbs found in language, namely copulas. Of <strong>the</strong><br />
copulas under investigation, only becuman is somewhat less frequent. Still, because<br />
of <strong>the</strong> overall high frequencies involved, we do not have to make <strong>the</strong> painful choice<br />
between resigning and ignoring. In this case, it is possible to come to a scientifically<br />
sound solution.<br />
To that effect, we compiled our own corpus making use of several existing corpora.<br />
For <strong>the</strong> OE period, we used <strong>the</strong> York Parsed Corpus of OE (YCOE), to which<br />
we added all verse <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> York-Penn parsed Corpus of OE poetry (YPC), as well<br />
as <strong>the</strong> complete Paris Psalter and Meters of Boethius. We added <strong>the</strong> verse to <strong>the</strong><br />
prose YCOE, mainly because OE verse is almost never purely WS, <strong>the</strong> dialect that<br />
is least interesting for purposes of comparison between OE and ME data. We also<br />
included fragment H of <strong>the</strong> Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. This fragment contains <strong>the</strong><br />
first instance of becuman + NP, whose absence in <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r OE texts of our corpus<br />
so far appears to constitute an accidental gap, and as such provides important additional<br />
information on <strong>the</strong> chronology of becuman. For <strong>the</strong> ME period, we used <strong>the</strong><br />
Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Middle English (PPCME2), with <strong>the</strong> addition of<br />
all texts found additionally in <strong>the</strong> Helsinki Corpus (mainly verse). We also included<br />
in <strong>the</strong> ME data <strong>the</strong> first half of The Middle English Genesis and Exodus, as well as<br />
<strong>the</strong> Winteney manuscript of <strong>the</strong> Benedictine Rule, which is a twelfth-century copy<br />
of an OE text, and whose language is sufficiently influenced by <strong>the</strong> early Middle<br />
English scribe to consider it an early ME text as regards copula use (it is also a rare<br />
example of <strong>the</strong> sou<strong>the</strong>rn dialect in early ME).<br />
Given <strong>the</strong> material thus compiled, <strong>the</strong>re are three possible ways to compare<br />
<strong>the</strong> OE and ME data. Applying <strong>the</strong> policy of ignoring <strong>the</strong> problem, we could simply<br />
use all of <strong>the</strong> material. If we did this, <strong>the</strong> frequency history of weorðan would<br />
show a development such as represented by line (A) in Figure . It is at once clear<br />
that this pattern of changing frequencies is highly unrealistic. Indeed, if it signalled<br />
a real development within a homogeneous dialect group, weorðan would<br />
have steadily increased during OE, and <strong>the</strong>n all of a sudden, <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> start of ME,<br />
would have drastically decreased (<strong>from</strong> 3,339 occurrences pmw in 05 – 50 to<br />
,5 4 pmw, i.e., less than half, in 5 – 250). This type of scenario is not very<br />
probable. The reason why <strong>the</strong> top line in Figure charts an unlikely development<br />
is that it is obviously based on an overrepresentation of WS in <strong>the</strong> OE material – in<br />
effect, this tells us that in WS weorðan was not disappearing at all, but was instead<br />
on <strong>the</strong> increase. While this increase in WS is interesting in its own right, our present<br />
purpose is to compile a corpus enabling a reliable comparison between OE<br />
and ME. An alternative way of selecting data <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> OE material is to take up<br />
Anglian texts only (ei<strong>the</strong>r purely Anglian or of mixed dialectical make-up). Such a
28 Peter Petré & Hubert Cuyckens<br />
3500<br />
3000<br />
2500<br />
2000<br />
1500<br />
1000<br />
500<br />
0<br />
750–950 951–1050 1051–1150 1151–1250 1251–1350<br />
Corpus Size<br />
(k = 1000 words)<br />
(A)<br />
(B)<br />
(C)<br />
(D)<br />
750 – 950<br />
360 k<br />
120 k<br />
120 k<br />
951–1050<br />
850 k<br />
230 k<br />
110 k<br />
110 k<br />
Figure 1. Weorðan: frequencies per million words.<br />
1051–1150<br />
340 k<br />
110 k<br />
120 k<br />
30 k<br />
1151–1250<br />
270 k<br />
270 k<br />
245 k<br />
190 k<br />
(A) All texts<br />
(B) Present<br />
sample<br />
(C) Only<br />
Anglia/Midlands<br />
(D) = (C) without<br />
outliers<br />
selection turns out to be much more promising. The development resulting <strong>from</strong><br />
it is represented in Figure as line (C). 3<br />
There is still a peculiar increase in late OE. This peak, however, can be<br />
accounted for by <strong>the</strong> presence of two outliers. First, in <strong>the</strong> period 05 – 50,<br />
Gregory’s Dialogues, which constitutes in itself about half of <strong>the</strong> entire Anglian<br />
corpus, contains twice as many occurrences of weorðan as <strong>the</strong> rest of <strong>the</strong> Anglian<br />
material (2,5 3 versus ,303 pmw). Since this text is a later copy of a WS original<br />
made by an Anglian scribe, ra<strong>the</strong>r than a WS copy based on an Anglian original<br />
(<strong>the</strong> usual situation for most o<strong>the</strong>r texts), it can be assumed that this scribe silently<br />
adopted <strong>the</strong> many occurrences of weorðan <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> WS original, because<br />
<strong>the</strong>y were not ungrammatical in his own dialect, only less frequent. The second<br />
outlier, <strong>the</strong> Ormulum (?c 200), is even more extreme: 3,089 occurrences pmw<br />
versus , 26 for <strong>the</strong> rest of <strong>the</strong> early ME material. In this case, <strong>the</strong> explanation<br />
for <strong>the</strong> idiosyncratic character of this text lies with its repetitive character and<br />
<strong>the</strong> frequent use of two idioms in particular, <strong>the</strong> first of <strong>the</strong>m patterned after<br />
<strong>the</strong> phrase Godd warrþ mann ‘God became man [i.e., through Christ’s birth]’<br />
(39 occurrences versus only one in <strong>the</strong> rest of <strong>the</strong> ME corpus), <strong>the</strong> second patterned<br />
after ʓho wass wurrþenn wiþþ childe ‘She [i.e., Mary or Elizabeth] became<br />
. Foreign words have been excluded in <strong>the</strong> word and frequency counts in Figure .<br />
1251–1350<br />
175 k<br />
175 k<br />
96 k<br />
96 k
Old English weorðan and its replacement in Middle English 29<br />
pregnant’ ( 7 occurrences versus two elsewhere). Leaving out <strong>the</strong>se two outliers<br />
produces <strong>the</strong> development represented by <strong>the</strong> bottom dotted line (D). Of all possible<br />
data selections, <strong>the</strong> one represented by this line provides <strong>the</strong> most realistic<br />
frequency history, and this corroborates <strong>the</strong> hypo<strong>the</strong>sis that early ME is mainly a<br />
continuation <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> OE Anglian dialect.<br />
Unfortunately, using only Anglian texts for OE results in a corpus whose size<br />
is simply too small (see Figure for respective corpus sizes). Therefore, <strong>the</strong> text<br />
sample we will use for this paper is a compromise between dialectical homogeneity<br />
and size. This sample (labelled ‘(B) Present sample’ in Figure ) consists of<br />
all <strong>the</strong> material which is not purely WS, as well as a small number of WS texts in<br />
<strong>the</strong> period 05 – 50 to increase its sample size. In Figure , no frequency information<br />
is provided with (B) for <strong>the</strong> period 750–950 because this period is not<br />
discussed any fur<strong>the</strong>r in this paper, which concentrates on <strong>the</strong> transition <strong>from</strong> late<br />
OE to early ME.<br />
2. The OE network of copula-constructions<br />
In order to account for <strong>the</strong> disappearance of weorðan in OE and <strong>the</strong> emergence<br />
of becuman as an alternative, we will make use of <strong>the</strong> Construction Grammar<br />
framework (see Goldberg 995, 2006; Kay & Fillmore 999 & Croft 200 ). A basic<br />
notion in this framework is that of construction, a non-compositional combination<br />
of form (<strong>the</strong> syntactic component) and meaning (<strong>the</strong> semantic component)<br />
(Goldberg 995: 4). As such, constructions constitute a language-specific subset<br />
of what in cognitive science are called schemas, cognitive devices that capture<br />
<strong>the</strong> commonalities within a group of similar occurrences (Taylor 999: 35).<br />
Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, related constructions form a taxonomic network with different<br />
levels of abstraction: less schematic (or low-level) constructions are connected<br />
to each o<strong>the</strong>r by means of a more schematic (or high-level) construction (Croft<br />
200 : 6–29).<br />
An important assumption of Croft’s construction grammar (Croft 2000) is<br />
that <strong>the</strong>re are no atomic (i.e., which “cannot be broken down into smaller parts in<br />
<strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>ory”; Croft 2000: 47) primitive units. More specifically, syntactic categories<br />
such as nouns, verbs, and adjectives are not <strong>the</strong> basic, primitive units of syntactic<br />
representation, and nei<strong>the</strong>r are copulas. While in <strong>the</strong> traditional view, <strong>the</strong>n, copulas<br />
have been defined as an atomic word class whose members are semantically<br />
empty, and which always co-occur with lexemes functioning as <strong>the</strong>ir predicate<br />
nucleus (Pustet 200 : 5), in a constructional view, verbs are considered copulas<br />
only in a derived way, as a class of fillers in a particular role in a copula-construction<br />
(whose form and meaning are discussed in detail below) – note that, although
0 Peter Petré & Hubert Cuyckens<br />
<strong>the</strong> constructional level is non-atomic, it is <strong>the</strong> basic, or primitive level of syntactic<br />
representation in construction grammar. To <strong>the</strong> extent that <strong>the</strong> term ‘copulaconstruction’<br />
evokes <strong>the</strong> idea of a category of copulas, it is somewhat of a misnomer,<br />
but it is used here simply for reasons of terminological convenience.<br />
Adopting a constructional framework allows us to reconsider constructions<br />
(A)–(G), which served as an illustrative sample of <strong>the</strong> constructions in which<br />
weorðan occurred in OE. Although <strong>the</strong>se constructions were given in <strong>the</strong> form of a<br />
list, numbered (A) through (G), it is important to realize that <strong>the</strong>y do not represent<br />
isolated uses of weorðan. In two different ways, <strong>the</strong>y form part of a larger network<br />
of constructions. First, most of <strong>the</strong>m, and particularly (C)–(G), in which weorðan<br />
is used as a copula, is an instantiation of a more schematic construction existing<br />
independently of <strong>the</strong> lexeme weorðan. At this level, for each of <strong>the</strong>m cognate constructions<br />
exist involving different copulas (See Figure 2, where Subj = subject,<br />
Cop = copula, and SubjComp = subject complement). Second, <strong>the</strong> verb weorðan<br />
itself unifies <strong>the</strong>se constructions into a single network, which can <strong>the</strong>refore be<br />
called a lexeme-dependent or partially substantive network, which means that its<br />
top node is situated at a lower level of schematicity than is <strong>the</strong> case with <strong>the</strong> general<br />
copula network (See Figure 3).<br />
NP.Subj Cop PPLE.SubjComp<br />
-Ag; -Vol; Predicates result<br />
NP.Subj IS PPLE.SubjComp<br />
…<br />
NP.Subj BIÐ PPLE.SubjComp<br />
…<br />
NP.Subj WIERÐ PPLE.SubjC<br />
…<br />
NP.Subj Cop XP.SubjComp<br />
-Agentive; -Volitional<br />
NP.Subj Cop AP.SubjComp<br />
-Ag; -Vol; Pred. property<br />
NP.Subj IS AP.SubjComp<br />
…<br />
NP.Subj BIÐ AP.SubjComp<br />
…<br />
NP.Subj WIERÐ AP.SubjC…<br />
…<br />
…<br />
C, F, H<br />
…<br />
G D E<br />
Figure 2. The OE network of copula-constructions.<br />
NP.Subj Cop NP.SubjComp<br />
-Ag; -Vol; Pred. class
G<br />
NP.Subj WIERÐ PPLE.SubjComp<br />
…<br />
D<br />
Old English weorðan and its replacement in Middle English<br />
NP.Subj WIERÐ (XP.SubjComp)<br />
-Agentive; -Volition; +Change (sudden)<br />
NP.Subj WIERÐ AP.SubjComp<br />
Figure 3. The constructional network marked by weorðan.<br />
…<br />
As regards <strong>the</strong> first type of constructional network, it is commonly known<br />
that weorðan is not <strong>the</strong> only copula found in OE; <strong>the</strong>re are also o<strong>the</strong>r verbs that are<br />
used in <strong>the</strong> construction types (C)–(G): <strong>the</strong>se are <strong>the</strong> highly frequent verbs is (no<br />
infinitive), beon and wesan (functioning as a suppletive past tense for both is and<br />
beon), as well as (less frequently) some verbs of position such as standan ‘stand’,<br />
licgan ‘lie’, belifan ‘remain’. Examples (9)–( 6) are illustrations of beon and is in<br />
<strong>the</strong>se construction types.<br />
(C) Copula + pp<br />
(9) ond on ða swiðran healfe þæm ingange […] is stænen bedd seofon fota lang.<br />
(c 000. Mart 5 [Kotzor]: Ma27, A. 4)<br />
“And on <strong>the</strong> right side of <strong>the</strong> entrance […] is/stands a stone bed seven feet long.”<br />
( 0) & mon þonne nohtes wyrþe his saule ne deþ […], þa hwile þe he her on life biþ.<br />
(c970. HomS 4 [BlHom 4]: 95.242)<br />
“And <strong>the</strong>n one will not do anything profitable for his soul […], as long as he is<br />
alive here.”<br />
(D) Copula + ap<br />
( ) His name is holy & dredeful. (c 350. Earliest Prose Psalter: 39)<br />
“His name is holy and dreadful.”<br />
( 2) Geseoþ nu hu bliþe þa earman beoþ, þonne hi mon mid mete & mid hrægle reteþ.<br />
(c970. HomS 4 [BlHom 4]: 4 .50)<br />
“Behold, now, how joyful <strong>the</strong> poor are whenever any one comforts <strong>the</strong>m with<br />
food and clothing.”<br />
E<br />
…<br />
NP.Subj WIERÐ NP.SubjComp<br />
…<br />
A, B, C, F, H
2 Peter Petré & Hubert Cuyckens<br />
(E) Copula + np<br />
( 3) Ha nis nan husewif ach is anchurcheancre. (c 225( 200). Ancrene Riwle-2:II.303)<br />
“She is not a housewife, but [she] is a church-anchoress.”<br />
(F) Perfect participle<br />
( 4) Nu is þæt bearn cymen. (c970. Christ: 66)<br />
“Now <strong>the</strong> child has come.”<br />
(G) Passive participle<br />
( 5) Iudas […] is cwylmed mid deoflum on þæm ecum witum.<br />
(c970. HomS 7 [BlHom 5]: 63. 42)<br />
“Judas […] is tortured by devils in eternal punishment.”<br />
( 6) He byþ gehæled. (c 025. Lch [Herb]: 0. )<br />
He will be cured.”<br />
The main difference between <strong>the</strong>se copulas is of an aspectual nature. For instance,<br />
weorðan + ap in (4) signals that <strong>the</strong> transition <strong>from</strong> ‘not-afraid’ to ‘afraid’ constitutes<br />
a sudden change (similar to PDE get), is + ap in ( ) expresses a timeless<br />
truth, and, finally, beoþ + ap in ( 2) is used to express a general condition. Similar<br />
aspectual distinctions can be read off <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r examples as well. Still, to a<br />
large extent, <strong>the</strong>se verbs are used as copulas in highly similar contexts. This distributional<br />
overlap, we would like to argue, has led in (pre-)OE to <strong>the</strong> emergence<br />
of a series of high-level constructions in which aspectual differences are no longer<br />
represented, and only syntactic and semantic similarities between <strong>the</strong> different<br />
copulas are preserved. Syntactically, <strong>the</strong>se high-level schemas represent <strong>the</strong> shared<br />
potential to co-occur with certain types of subject complement (i.e., pp, ap, np,<br />
and pple). With each syntactic schema corresponds a semantic schema. In <strong>the</strong><br />
case of NP complements, <strong>the</strong> shared semantics is that of categorization of <strong>the</strong> subject<br />
into a class of entities, in <strong>the</strong> case of aps that of assigning a property to <strong>the</strong><br />
subject, in <strong>the</strong> case of pps that of assigning a location or class to a subject, and in<br />
<strong>the</strong> case of pples that of a resulting state to a subject. At a still higher level, <strong>the</strong>se<br />
constructions (C)–(G) can be considered part of an even bigger constructional<br />
network, to which <strong>the</strong>y are related through an even more schematic construction.<br />
Syntactically, at least in OE, all <strong>the</strong> different types of subject complement share <strong>the</strong><br />
property (as in most Indo-European languages) of being in <strong>the</strong> nominative case,<br />
and <strong>the</strong>y are obligatory. 4 Semantically, <strong>the</strong> properties of non-agentivity and nonvolitionality<br />
of <strong>the</strong> subject are shared. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, <strong>the</strong> subject complements coconstitute<br />
(with <strong>the</strong> copulas) what is being predicated of <strong>the</strong> subject, whereby <strong>the</strong><br />
semantic content of <strong>the</strong> copula verb is subsidiary to that of <strong>the</strong> subject complement.<br />
4. As prepositions are uninflected for case in OE, <strong>the</strong> case criterion is not relevant for PPs.
Old English weorðan and its replacement in Middle English<br />
The subsidiary status of <strong>the</strong> copula verb can, for instance, be inferred <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
scope of <strong>the</strong> negation in sentences such as Druncen wyrhta ne wyrð he na welig “A<br />
drunken worker does not become rich” (c 075. ChrodR :60.6), where <strong>the</strong> negative<br />
marker invariably negates <strong>the</strong> subject complement ra<strong>the</strong>r than <strong>the</strong> copula verb.<br />
Similarly, Ne becumaþ heo to ænigre reste “They do not get to any resting-place”<br />
(HomU 5. [Scragg]: 75), for instance, mainly differs <strong>from</strong> Margareta to ece<br />
reste becom “Margaret got to [her] eternal resting-place” (LS 6 [Margaret]:2. 0)<br />
in <strong>the</strong> negation of <strong>the</strong> goal location. 5 It is this unique pairing of form and meaning<br />
which defines <strong>the</strong> copula-construction and which allows us to treat not only<br />
[Copula + ap/np] but also [Copula + pp] and [Copula + pple] as instances of <strong>the</strong><br />
copula-construction. A diagram of <strong>the</strong> resulting taxonomically structured network<br />
of copula-constructions in OE is given in Figure 2 (<strong>the</strong> aspectual distinctions<br />
marked by <strong>the</strong> individual verbs have been compressed for <strong>the</strong> sake of clarity).<br />
What is important about this constructional network is <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong> topmost<br />
schematic construction as well as its immediate daughter constructions (which are<br />
situated on an intermediate level of schematicity) are not associated with a particular<br />
lexical form. In o<strong>the</strong>r words, <strong>the</strong> similar behaviour of weorðan, beon and wesan<br />
points to <strong>the</strong> existence of a constructional network at least to some extent independent<br />
of one verb in particular. As such, <strong>the</strong> existence of a network of schematic copula-constructions<br />
is not very surprising, as copula-constructions also behave very<br />
similarly cross-linguistically (Stassen 997; Pustet 200 & Croft 200 : 283–3 9).<br />
As regards <strong>the</strong> second type of constructional network, all uses of weorðan can<br />
also be considered as interrelated, if we assume that weorðan is a single, polysemous<br />
lexeme ra<strong>the</strong>r than a single form covering several unrelated meanings. In<br />
favour of a single network is <strong>the</strong> shared semantics of ‘(sudden) transition into a<br />
new state’ found in all uses of weorðan. Syntactically as well, we can see a common<br />
denominator, in that weorðan is nearly always used intransitively, being ei<strong>the</strong>r<br />
non-copular in nature, or being used as an intransitive copula linking a subject to<br />
a subject complement. The lexeme-dependent constructional network marked by<br />
weorðan, <strong>the</strong>n, is represented in Figure 3.<br />
In addition to <strong>the</strong> existence of (i) a lexeme-independent constructional copula<br />
network in which weorðan participates and (ii) a constructional network specific<br />
to <strong>the</strong> lexeme weorðan itself, it should be noted that <strong>the</strong> affinity between differ-<br />
5. Compare in this respect He was not rushed to hospital [which is why he was dead on arrival],<br />
where <strong>the</strong> PP to <strong>the</strong> hospital fills <strong>the</strong> same slot as <strong>the</strong> PP in a copula-construction. In this sentence,<br />
<strong>the</strong> negative marker only affects <strong>the</strong> manner of motion towards <strong>the</strong> goal-PP, while <strong>the</strong> fact<br />
that <strong>the</strong> patient actually ended up in hospital is not negated; this suggests that it is <strong>the</strong> information<br />
in <strong>the</strong> PP which is subsidiary to that in <strong>the</strong> verb, and <strong>the</strong> PP hence cannot fill <strong>the</strong> subject<br />
complement slot.
4 Peter Petré & Hubert Cuyckens<br />
ent subconstructions within <strong>the</strong>se networks is not always equally strong. In this<br />
respect, <strong>the</strong> link between APs and participles deserves special attention, as it is<br />
particularly strong in <strong>the</strong> case of weorðan in comparison to <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r copulas (this<br />
strength is indicated in Figure 3 by a dotted line).<br />
i. In general, (D) and (G) are very similar syntactically, because, in OE, <strong>the</strong> past<br />
participle in (G) still behaves to a large extent as an adjective (denoting <strong>the</strong> resulting<br />
quality of <strong>the</strong> subject after <strong>the</strong> event has taken place). More specifically, participles<br />
still show number and case agreement with <strong>the</strong> subjects <strong>the</strong>y are predicated<br />
of. This feature is shared by all copulas.<br />
( 7) His deoflu:nom.m.pl mid him wurdon aworpene:nom.m.pl on hellegrund.<br />
(c970. LS 20 [AssumptMor[BlHom 3]]: 59.378)<br />
“His devils, toge<strong>the</strong>r with him, were thrown on <strong>the</strong> bottom of hell.”<br />
ii. In <strong>the</strong> constructions marked by weorðan, however, this link seems to have<br />
been stronger than it was in those marked by o<strong>the</strong>r copulas. Syntactically as well as<br />
semantically, <strong>the</strong> strong link between adjectives and participles is evidenced in <strong>the</strong><br />
occasional occurrence of <strong>the</strong> co-ordination of adjectives and participles following<br />
a single occurrence of weorðan.<br />
( 8) Þanon eorþe wearð eall mid blode mane gemenged:pple, misdædum fah.adj.<br />
(c970. PPs: 05.28)<br />
“Thence <strong>the</strong> earth got wholly mixed with blood-guilt, filthy with evil deeds.”<br />
( 9) And hys flæsc wearð eall gesett:pple and hal.adj geworden.<br />
(c 075. VSal [Cross]:9. )<br />
“And his flesh had become entirely set and sound.”<br />
(20) & ward swa wrað.adj & swa awed:pple; þt he al o wodschipe demde hire to deaþe.<br />
(c 225. St. Margaret:87)<br />
“And [he] became so angry and so angered, that he wholly out of anger judged<br />
her to death.”<br />
Moreover, a look at <strong>the</strong> distribution of complement types of weorðan (see Figure 4)<br />
in <strong>the</strong> sample used reveals that <strong>the</strong> constructional profile of weorðan is dominated<br />
precisely by such adjectival and participial complements, which makes a high degree<br />
of cognitive association between <strong>the</strong> two all <strong>the</strong> more likely (<strong>the</strong> juxtaposition of adjectival<br />
and participial complements, as illustrated in ( 8)–(20), occurs twelve times<br />
and is classified under (D); n gives <strong>the</strong> raw frequencies on which Figure 4 is based).<br />
iii. Finally, <strong>the</strong> drift towards <strong>the</strong> disappearance of weorðan in all <strong>the</strong>se constructions<br />
points towards <strong>the</strong> homogeneous status of <strong>the</strong> network associated with<br />
weorðan. This homogeneous status, or <strong>the</strong> existence of strong links between all<br />
of <strong>the</strong> constructions marked by weorðan, is corroborated by <strong>the</strong> gradual loss
100%<br />
90%<br />
80%<br />
70%<br />
60%<br />
50%<br />
40%<br />
30%<br />
20%<br />
10%<br />
0%<br />
951–1050<br />
(n = 572)<br />
1051–1150<br />
(n = 252)<br />
Old English weorðan and its replacement in Middle English 5<br />
1151–1250<br />
(n = 360)<br />
Figure 4. Weorðan, distribution of constructions.<br />
of weorðan in all its uses, and at <strong>the</strong> same pace, as is made clear by <strong>the</strong> largely<br />
uniform distribution of <strong>the</strong> weorðan-constructions in Figure 4. If one of <strong>the</strong>se<br />
constructions had been isolated <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>rs, a possible scenario would have<br />
been that weorðan was lost in this construction only. Consider in this respect <strong>the</strong><br />
development of <strong>the</strong> modals, which in OE still occurred with nps as fully transitive,<br />
lexical verbs, but which, partially because of <strong>the</strong> widening gap in syntax and<br />
semantics between transitive constructions and constructions involving infinitival<br />
complements, shed off <strong>the</strong>ir use as transitive, lexical verbs + np during <strong>the</strong> ME<br />
period (see, for instance, Plank 984).<br />
. The development of becuman as a copula<br />
1251–1350<br />
(n = 77)<br />
H O<strong>the</strong>r constructions<br />
G Passive Participle<br />
F Perfect Participle<br />
E Copula + NP<br />
D Copula + AP<br />
C Copula + PP<br />
B With dative object<br />
A Intransitive<br />
In ME, <strong>the</strong> frequency of weorðan decreased, and a range of alternatives emerged:<br />
arise in (A); become in (B)–(E) (become to nought, become rich, become a Christian);<br />
grow in (D)–(E) (grow old); turn in (C)–(D) (turn into rain, turn pale); <strong>the</strong> now<br />
obsolete wax in (A) and (D)–(E) (wax old, wax a man); fall and come in (D) (Biese<br />
932 & Visser 963: 97–208). In those cases where weorðan was used as a marker of<br />
<strong>the</strong> future (as for instance in (35) below), it is replaced by will/shall + inf (Wischer<br />
2005). Where weorðan, as in (G), contributed a specific semantics in combination<br />
with a passive participle (e.g., its connotation of sudden change of state) which was<br />
different <strong>from</strong> that of beon and is, it is not immediately clear which constructions<br />
existed to express <strong>the</strong>se semantics in ME (Mustanoja 960: 592).
6 Peter Petré & Hubert Cuyckens<br />
One of <strong>the</strong> newly emerging alternatives, becuman, deserves special attention, as<br />
it is <strong>the</strong> most frequent alternative <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> very beginning, and, more importantly,<br />
because it went down <strong>the</strong> grammaticalization path <strong>the</strong> fur<strong>the</strong>st, eventually shedding<br />
off all its non-copularizing functions. By ME already, becuman had assumed<br />
most copula functions of weorðan, as is illustrated in (2 )–(23).<br />
(C) Copula + pp<br />
(2 ) Vor al þe lost of þise wordle […] ne byeþ bote a drope of deau/ to þe ziȝþe of þe<br />
welle. […] huanne me wenþ hine nime: he ualþ agrund/ and to naʓte becomþ.<br />
(c 340. Ayenbite of Inwit:9 )<br />
“Because all <strong>the</strong> lust of this world […] is but a drop of dew in comparison to <strong>the</strong><br />
well. When one thinks to take it, it falls down and comes to nought [= becomes<br />
nothing].”<br />
(D) Copula + ap<br />
(22) And he bicom riʓth fyne wroþ. (c 400 (?a 300). Kyng Alisaunder I:235)<br />
“And he became pretty much angry.” (compare (20))<br />
(E) Copula + np<br />
(23) Þe uerste is. huanne/ eny uor drede/ of pouerte. oþer uor couaytise/ uor to wynne:<br />
uorzaʓþ god/ and þe cristene bileaue. and becomþ bougre. oþer ieu. oþer sarasin.<br />
(c 340. Ayenbite of Inwit:43)<br />
“The worst is, when anyone, because of dread for poverty, or for <strong>the</strong> desire to<br />
make profit, abandons God and <strong>the</strong> catholic belief, and becomes heretic, or Jew,<br />
or Saracen.”<br />
The only frequent function of weorðan not found for becuman is its use with participial<br />
complements. O<strong>the</strong>rwise, <strong>the</strong> types of construction found with becuman in<br />
ME are very similar to <strong>the</strong> major types associated with weorðan. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, <strong>the</strong><br />
relative frequencies of becuman in ME differ far less <strong>from</strong> those of weorðan than in<br />
<strong>the</strong> preceding OE periods, as is made clear by a comparison of Figure 5 (in which<br />
occurrences of weorðan + past participle are left out) to Figure 6. In sum, in <strong>the</strong><br />
ME period becuman has acquired all <strong>the</strong> major functions found with weorðan: it<br />
occurred as an intransitive verb meaning ‘arise’, with a dative object meaning ‘befall’,<br />
and as a copula with Prepositional, Adjectival and Nominal subject complements.<br />
The most striking difference between weorðan and becuman in ME (apart<br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> absence of participial complements) is <strong>the</strong> higher number of NP subject<br />
complements in <strong>the</strong> case of becuman.<br />
While <strong>the</strong>se relative frequencies make clear that weorðan and becuman behave<br />
similarly in early ME, <strong>the</strong>y also reveal <strong>the</strong> vast difference between <strong>the</strong> two verbs in<br />
OE. Indeed, while weorðan in OE showed copula uses with adjectival and nominal<br />
subject complements (in addition to intransitive uses, uses with dative objects,<br />
and copula uses with pp complements), becuman saw a relatively high proportion of<br />
copula uses with pp complements, but was hardly ever used as a copula marking
100%<br />
90%<br />
80%<br />
70%<br />
60%<br />
50%<br />
40%<br />
30%<br />
20%<br />
10%<br />
0%<br />
Old English weorðan and its replacement in Middle English 7<br />
Figure 5. Weorðan, distribution of constructions (without participial constructions).<br />
100%<br />
90%<br />
80%<br />
70%<br />
60%<br />
50%<br />
40%<br />
30%<br />
20%<br />
10%<br />
0%<br />
951–1050<br />
(n = 401)<br />
951–1050<br />
(n = 98)<br />
1051–1150<br />
(n = 142)<br />
1051–1150<br />
(n = 86)<br />
1151–1250<br />
(n = 249)<br />
1151–1250<br />
(n = 68)<br />
Figure 6. Becuman, distribution of constructions.<br />
1251–1350<br />
(n = 53)<br />
1251–1350<br />
(n = 45)<br />
H O<strong>the</strong>r constructions<br />
E Copula + NP<br />
D Copula + AP<br />
C Copula + PP<br />
B With dative object<br />
A Intransitive<br />
H O<strong>the</strong>r constructions<br />
E Copula + NP<br />
D Copula + AP<br />
C Copula + PP<br />
B With dative object<br />
A Intransitive<br />
adjectival or nominal subject complements. It is only <strong>from</strong> early ME onwards that<br />
adjectival and nominal subject complements with becuman increased; and this<br />
increase was quite dramatic, especially if we take into account that our corpus<br />
sample was set up to be as well balanced as possible. If we assume that <strong>the</strong> corpus<br />
was representative in this respect, <strong>the</strong> quick success of becuman in <strong>the</strong>se new copularizing<br />
functions constitutes an unprecedented type of diachronic development.<br />
It would mean an increase <strong>from</strong> almost zero frequency prior to 50 to a frequency
8 Peter Petré & Hubert Cuyckens<br />
of 75 occurrences pmw in <strong>the</strong> period 5 – 250 (more or less one occurrence in<br />
half an hour of spoken language).<br />
Such a sudden change is improbable, at least in <strong>the</strong> constructional framework<br />
we adopt. According to Croft (2000), change takes place in <strong>the</strong> replication of utterances<br />
(unlike in some generative <strong>the</strong>ories, according to which it is <strong>the</strong> grammar<br />
as a unit that changes through its replication by <strong>the</strong> child). In a first stage, one or<br />
more individuals replicate one or more utterances while altering one particular<br />
element in <strong>the</strong>m. The result of this process is an innovation. While an innovation<br />
in an individual’s language is, by definition, sudden, <strong>the</strong> spread of an innovation<br />
in a linguistic community – such as <strong>the</strong> spread of becuman in <strong>the</strong> new ap/np<br />
copula-constructions – involves speakers replicating <strong>the</strong> new utterances (coined by<br />
<strong>the</strong> innovators) until <strong>the</strong> gradual cumulation of this process of replication reaches<br />
a point at which a change has taken place in <strong>the</strong> language as a whole (for empirical<br />
support, see Croft 2000: 53–78). In this view, it is very unlikely that <strong>the</strong> early Middle<br />
English texts, with <strong>the</strong>ir overall high frequency of becuman in copula-constructions,<br />
all represent sudden independent innovations, simultaneously providing <strong>the</strong> necessary<br />
spread in <strong>the</strong> language for <strong>the</strong> change to occur. Those advocating <strong>the</strong> resignation<br />
policy will find a good argument in this case: Old and Middle English simply do<br />
not compare. However, a more satisfying explanation is not impossible. In this respect,<br />
it is crucial that at least three examples of construction (D) (Copula + ap) can<br />
be attested in <strong>the</strong> OE material; this suggests that becuman had already developed<br />
a copula function by <strong>the</strong> end of <strong>the</strong> tenth century, at least with adjectival subject<br />
complements (<strong>the</strong>se occurrences are considerably earlier than <strong>the</strong> earliest attestations<br />
given in <strong>the</strong> OED and MED, which date <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> mid-twelfth century):<br />
(24) Us milde bicwom meahta waldend æt ærestan þurh þæs engles word.<br />
(c970. Christ (Exeter):26.820)<br />
“The wielder of powers became merciful to us at first through <strong>the</strong> word of <strong>the</strong> angel.”<br />
(25) Gemun ðu min Drihten. þonne ðu mihtig becymst.<br />
(c 000. ÆCHom II, 4. : 46.253)<br />
“Remember my Lord, when you become powerful.” 6<br />
(26) Breac longe ær wlencea under wolcnum; he þy wyrs meahte þolian þa þrage,<br />
þa hio swa þearl becom. (c970 MetBo : 55.75)<br />
“[Boethius’] had possessed for a long time before a pride under <strong>the</strong> sky; he<br />
could endure this painful time <strong>the</strong> worse, as it became so strong.”<br />
These examples indicate that <strong>the</strong> OE data we have available are at least misleading.<br />
One plausible explanation is that <strong>the</strong> OE manuscripts are all very conservative<br />
in nature, refusing to pick up <strong>the</strong> new development occurring with a verb such<br />
6. This example is not derived <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> present sample, but <strong>from</strong> WS material.
Old English weorðan and its replacement in Middle English 9<br />
as becuman, and trying to copy <strong>the</strong> Alfredian model of ‘good’ Anglo-Saxon (see<br />
Milroy 996: 67 & McWhorter 2002). Apparently, <strong>the</strong> one genre which seems less<br />
resistant to new function words is that of poetry, <strong>from</strong> which two of <strong>the</strong> three examples<br />
above derive. In this respect, <strong>the</strong>refore, OE poetry seems <strong>the</strong> genre closest<br />
to <strong>the</strong> constructional potential of spoken language of that time, a finding which is<br />
in sharp contrast to <strong>the</strong> lexical archaisms found in it.<br />
Having described <strong>the</strong> establishment of becuman in late OE and early ME, <strong>the</strong><br />
question remains how becuman spread to <strong>the</strong> ap and np copula-constructions. We<br />
would like to argue that <strong>the</strong> basic mechanism underlying this spread is a process<br />
of analogical extension of becuman on <strong>the</strong> basis of <strong>the</strong> similarity of its functional<br />
and semantic range with that of <strong>the</strong> verb weorðan. This ‘copying’ of constructions<br />
of weorðan by becuman was likely enabled by <strong>the</strong> prior existence of a firm distributional<br />
(and semantic) overlap between <strong>the</strong>se two verbs. While beon and wesan, by<br />
<strong>the</strong> time of OE, were already grammaticalized to such an extent that <strong>the</strong>ir original<br />
semantic content was hardly retained, weorðan, besides its abstract function as a<br />
copula denoting <strong>the</strong> aspect of sudden change, still preserved its original spatial<br />
sense in a considerable number of occurrences. It is precisely in <strong>the</strong>se spatial uses<br />
that a strong parallelism is revealed between weorðan and becuman. The similarity<br />
between weorðan and becuman in this respect is illustrated in (27)–(30).<br />
(27) a. Þa wæs geworden to him sweg, se wæs of heofenum sended on windes<br />
onlicnesse. (c970. HomS 47 [BlHom 2]: 33.4 )<br />
b.<br />
“Then a sound had come to him, which was sent <strong>from</strong> heaven on a<br />
resemblance of wind.”<br />
Swylce eac ær þam becwom hlisa to him þære cristenan æfestnesse, forþon he<br />
Cristen wif hæfde. (c900. Bede : 4.58. )<br />
“For (earlier) rumour had come to him of <strong>the</strong> Christian religion, because<br />
he had a Christian wife.”<br />
(28) a. And cwædon hwæt þæt tacen beon myhte þæt on Ysrahela lande<br />
geworden wæs. (c 00. Nic [A]: 4.3. )<br />
b.<br />
“And [<strong>the</strong>y] said what that sign might be that had arrived in <strong>the</strong> land of Israel.”<br />
Ða becwoman we on þa londgemæro Medo & Persa. (c 000. Alex: 23.7)<br />
“Then we arrived at <strong>the</strong> territories of <strong>the</strong> Medes and <strong>the</strong> Persians.”<br />
(29) a. Swa doð wudufuglas; þeah hi wel sien, tela atemede, gif hi on treowum<br />
weorðað holte tomiddes, hræðe bioð forsewene heora lareowas, þe hi lange ær<br />
tydon and temedon. (c970. MetBo 3: 72.35)<br />
b.<br />
“They act like wild fowl; even if <strong>the</strong>y are good, well tamed, if <strong>the</strong>y get/come<br />
in <strong>the</strong> trees amidst <strong>the</strong> forest, promptly <strong>the</strong>ir teachers are neglected, who<br />
taught and tamed <strong>the</strong>m long before.”<br />
And þa he on þa ceastre becom Libie, he þa sona axode hwæt hyt soðes wære,<br />
for hwig hym man swa færlice æfter asende. (c 075. VSal [Cross]: .2)
40 Peter Petré & Hubert Cuyckens<br />
“And when he came/got in <strong>the</strong> fortress Libia, he <strong>the</strong>n immediately asked<br />
what it was really, why <strong>the</strong>y sent him so suddenly after.”<br />
(30) a. Gif ðu weorðest on wege rihtum up to ðæm earde, […] ðonne wilt þu secgan<br />
and sona cweðan: ðis is eallunga min agen cyð, eard and eðel.<br />
(c970. MetBo 24: 90.44)<br />
“If you get on <strong>the</strong> way right up to that country, […] <strong>the</strong>n will you call out<br />
and immediately say: this is indeed my own home, soil and country.”<br />
b. Se becom on wege to Prisce þam hæþnan gerefan þær he deofolgeldum geald.<br />
(c 000. Mart 5 [Kotzor]:Se4, A.2. 639)<br />
“He got on <strong>the</strong> way to Prisce, <strong>the</strong> hea<strong>the</strong>n sheriff, where he worshipped<br />
images of <strong>the</strong> devil.”<br />
In addition to this similar use with locational complements, becuman had developed<br />
an intransitive sense ‘happen, occur’ (possibly independently of weorðan), and a related<br />
construction with a dative object, meaning ‘befall, happen to’. These extensions<br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> original sense of becuman ‘arrive at’ result <strong>from</strong> applying <strong>the</strong> (well-known)<br />
metaphor Time is Space (cf. Lakoff & Johnson 980; Traugott & Dasher 2002:<br />
75–78). Taking <strong>the</strong>se senses also into account clearly streng<strong>the</strong>ns <strong>the</strong> initial similarity<br />
between weorðan and becuman. Consider in this respect examples (3 )–(32):<br />
(A) Intransitive, sense ‘happen, occur, arise’<br />
(3 ) a. sona wearð micel eorðbyfung. (c 075. ChrodR : 4.2 )<br />
“Immediately a great earthquake occurred.”<br />
b. Þær becom þa on þære hwile mycel swetnysse stænc.<br />
(a 50. LS 28 [Neot]: 0. 03)<br />
“There arose <strong>the</strong>n in that period a strong fragrance of sweetness.”<br />
(B) With dative complement, sense ‘come upon, happen to, befall’<br />
(32) a. Lyt sorgodon hwylc him þæt edlean æfter wurde. (c 000. Andreas: 227)<br />
“They little cared what retribution might come upon/happen to <strong>the</strong>m<br />
afterwards.’<br />
b. & hie gesecgað þæm men þe hie frineð, hwæt godes oþðe yfles him becuman<br />
sceal. (c 000. Alex:32. )<br />
“And <strong>the</strong>y tell <strong>the</strong> men who ask <strong>the</strong>m, what good or evil shall come<br />
upon/befall <strong>the</strong>m.”<br />
In later OE, <strong>the</strong> initial similarity between becuman and weorðan caused becuman<br />
to copy o<strong>the</strong>r functions of weorðan as well, which it may not have developed without<br />
this model. As well, it sometimes adjusted its semantics in already existing<br />
patterns to <strong>the</strong> abstract copularizing semantics of weorðan. For instance, <strong>the</strong> hespatial sense of becuman in <strong>the</strong> construction with a prepositional complement is occasionally<br />
lost, resulting in becuman acquiring an abstract sense similar to <strong>the</strong> one<br />
frequently found for weorðan + pp. Compare (33) with (3b):<br />
(33) Gif sio adl biþ to langsum becymeþ þonne on wæterbollan.
Old English weorðan and its replacement in Middle English 4<br />
(c950. Lch II [2]:36. .5)<br />
“If <strong>the</strong> disease is protracted too much, [it] turns <strong>the</strong>n into dropsy.”<br />
Importantly, becuman assumed a copularizing function with adjectival subject<br />
complements, such as those occurring in (24)–(26). Sentence (24), here repeated<br />
as (34), provides evidence that this usage of becuman is directly based on similar<br />
uses found with weorðan ra<strong>the</strong>r than being an independent development. The collocation<br />
becuman + dative + milde ‘merciful’ found in this example has a frequent<br />
counterpart in which weorðan is used instead, an illustration of which is given in<br />
(35) (in total, <strong>the</strong>re are 3 occurrences of this pattern in our sample).<br />
(34) us milde bicwom meahta waldend æt ærestan þurh þæs engles word.<br />
(c970. Christ (Exeter):26.820)<br />
“<strong>the</strong> wielder of powers became merciful to us at first through <strong>the</strong> word of <strong>the</strong> angel.”<br />
(35) … þu me on mode milde weorðe æfter þinre spræce.<br />
(c970. PPs:<br />
“ … you will be merciful of mind to me in harmony with your words.”<br />
8.58)<br />
Later evidence that becuman gradually assumed <strong>the</strong> functions of weorðan can be<br />
found by comparing different manuscripts of <strong>the</strong> same text. In <strong>the</strong> sentences given<br />
in (36) for instance, <strong>the</strong> earlier manuscript has weorðan, while <strong>the</strong> later one has<br />
becuman:<br />
(36) a. He wearð gehyrsum toþi, þæt he willes deað þrowade.<br />
(c 025. Benedictine Rule [version translated by Æþelwold])<br />
“He grew obedient to <strong>the</strong> extent that he willfully endured death.”<br />
b. He becom ʓehyrsum anan to deaþe.<br />
(c 225. Benedictine Rule [early ME, Winteney version])<br />
“He grew obedient all <strong>the</strong> way to death.”<br />
In sum, different kinds of evidence suggest that <strong>the</strong> development of becuman as<br />
a marker of copula-constructions was made possible, or was at least considerably<br />
facilitated, by <strong>the</strong> existence of an original similarity in distribution with weorðan,<br />
which served as a basis for a process of analogical extension and, in turn, enabled<br />
becuman to become a member of <strong>the</strong> group of lexemes used in <strong>the</strong> constructional<br />
network of copula-constructions.<br />
4. Distributional differences between weorðan and becuman explained<br />
In Section 2, we posited a general network of copula-constructions in OE, and,<br />
distinct <strong>from</strong> it, a constructional network specific to weorðan. The discussion in<br />
Section 3 has offered an explanation for <strong>the</strong> emergence of an extensive copularizing
42 Peter Petré & Hubert Cuyckens<br />
function realized by becuman in late Old and early Middle English. The questions<br />
to be tackled in this section, <strong>the</strong>n, are: why did becuman (and weaxan and several<br />
o<strong>the</strong>r verbs) extend to <strong>the</strong> network of copula-constructions in <strong>the</strong> first place, and<br />
why did weorðan disappear <strong>from</strong> this network (and, as a consequence, disappear<br />
altoge<strong>the</strong>r)? Ideally, an answer to <strong>the</strong>se questions should also explain <strong>the</strong> distributional<br />
differences between weorðan and <strong>the</strong> newly emerging copulas.<br />
In general, <strong>the</strong> answer lies with two kinds of changes in <strong>the</strong> general network<br />
of copula-constructions. Before going into <strong>the</strong>se changes into somewhat<br />
greater detail, it is useful to briefly summarize <strong>the</strong>m. The first change involves<br />
<strong>the</strong> emancipation (Bybee 2003: 54) of a ‘true’ passive construction out of construction<br />
(G), which was originally a construction in which a copula combined<br />
with an adjectival participle based on a transitive verb and predicating a result<br />
[[np.Subj Cop pple.SubjComp]/[-Ag.; -Vol; +Result]]. The result of this emancipation<br />
is that <strong>the</strong> link (represented by <strong>the</strong> solid line in Figure 2) <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
topmost schematic copula-construction (i.e., [[np.Subj Cop xp.SubjComp]/<br />
[-Agentive; -Volitional]]) to this construction is lost. However, <strong>the</strong> constructional<br />
network of weorðan resisted this split-off, and, as a consequence, weorðan must<br />
have sounded increasingly archaic. By <strong>the</strong> same token, this split also prevented<br />
becuman <strong>from</strong> spreading to <strong>the</strong> emancipated passive construction. The second<br />
change in <strong>the</strong> constructional network consists in its accommodating <strong>the</strong> requirements<br />
of newly appearing time-stable predicates (certain kinds of APs as well as<br />
NPs) in combination with copulas of change. While <strong>the</strong>re is no principled reason<br />
why weorðan would not meet <strong>the</strong>se requirements, its high degree of entrenchment<br />
in collocational patterns involving time-unstable predicate types prevented it <strong>from</strong><br />
spreading to <strong>the</strong> new, time-stable ones. By contrast, becuman, being a new copula,<br />
had no such (conservative) collocational profile, and was thus perfectly suited to<br />
fill this need, as will fur<strong>the</strong>r be illustrated below. The emergence of new kinds of<br />
predicates, <strong>the</strong>refore, also helps explain <strong>the</strong> success of becuman.<br />
The first of <strong>the</strong>se changes, <strong>the</strong> development of a passive construction, was<br />
made possible by <strong>the</strong> disappearance – caused by phonetic erosion – of adjectival<br />
endings on participles and <strong>the</strong> concomitant loss of agreement marking between<br />
subject and subject complement. This, in turn, gave rise to a new syntactic pattern<br />
(Mustanoja 960: 440): through structural reanalysis, <strong>the</strong> [Cop + Adjectival<br />
Participle] construction (G) developed into a periphrastic verbal construction of<br />
<strong>the</strong> passive [Subj Aux V], in which <strong>the</strong> former copula became an auxiliary containing<br />
largely grammatical information (tense, number, aspect) and in which <strong>the</strong><br />
verbalized participle carried all <strong>the</strong> lexical content (Langacker 99 : 27– 47 &<br />
Denison 993). Moreover, this new passive construction also developed a new<br />
function (see Seoane 2006), whereby <strong>the</strong> subject of <strong>the</strong> passive was conceived as<br />
<strong>the</strong> patient of a transitive event ra<strong>the</strong>r than as <strong>the</strong> non-agent of an instance
Old English weorðan and its replacement in Middle English 4<br />
of intransitive predication. This new semantics of <strong>the</strong> subject enabled using<br />
<strong>the</strong> passive construction as a way to topicalize <strong>the</strong> patient of a transitive event.<br />
While topic function of a transitive patient could still be signalled by OSV word<br />
order in OE, this order was no longer available in ME, during which period <strong>the</strong><br />
SVO order typical of PDE was established. The new SVO order, <strong>the</strong>n, required<br />
a new topicalizing strategy, and using <strong>the</strong> passive (or formerly, Copula + pple)<br />
construction for this purpose was <strong>the</strong> easiest way out. As such, <strong>the</strong> new function<br />
of <strong>the</strong> passive implied a definite split-off <strong>from</strong> construction (D), which, being a<br />
one-participant construction without any (implicit) agent, had never been used<br />
in this way.<br />
While it is generally assumed that this new function only developed in late<br />
ME, <strong>the</strong>re is evidence that it already came into being in early ME, precisely <strong>the</strong><br />
period in which weorðan started to disappear. Restricting ourselves to a single<br />
piece of evidence for this earlier date (for a more detailed account, see Petré 2006),<br />
let us consider <strong>the</strong> emergence of prepositional passives. Contrary to what is often<br />
assumed, <strong>the</strong> first attestation of this passive type, given in (37) already dates <strong>from</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong> thirteenth century.<br />
(37) Þer wes sorhe te seon hire leoflich lich faren so reowliche wið.<br />
(c 225. St.Juliana (Roy):22. 95)<br />
“It was painful to see her lovely body dealt so cruelly with.”<br />
(Taken <strong>from</strong> Denison 985: 9 )<br />
The emergence of this remarkable construction can be seen as constituting a<br />
clear actualization of <strong>the</strong> new function of <strong>the</strong> passive. First, it differs in its syntax<br />
<strong>from</strong> construction (D) (Copula + ap), and, second, it also illustrates how <strong>the</strong> new<br />
topicalizing strategy was implemented. Compare in this respect (37) to (38) and<br />
(39) respectively:<br />
(38) *he is afraid of (meaning: someone was afraid of him)<br />
(39) ?With her body <strong>the</strong>y dealt cruelly (infelicitous construction <strong>from</strong> ME onwards)<br />
While weorðan is found with past participles during its entire period of use, it is<br />
not found with prepositional passives, nor is <strong>the</strong>re any indication that it participated<br />
in <strong>the</strong> new topicalizing function of <strong>the</strong> passive construction. We would like to<br />
argue that this lack of participation can be accounted for by means of <strong>the</strong> close association<br />
between participle and adjectival constructions with weorðan, described<br />
in Section . This association prevented <strong>the</strong> spread of weorðan to non-adjectival<br />
passives. As a consequence, weorðan started to sound archaic and eventually was<br />
lost. The split of <strong>the</strong> passive <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> rest of <strong>the</strong> copula network can also explain<br />
that becuman was not used in combination with participles at all. The spread of
44 Peter Petré & Hubert Cuyckens<br />
becuman to different copula-constructions is a gradual process, which seems to<br />
have proceeded <strong>from</strong> Copula + pp (early OE already) to Copula + ap (see (24)–(26))<br />
to Copula + np (twelfth century). Apparently, <strong>the</strong>n, before becuman was able to<br />
extend to <strong>the</strong> Copula + pple construction, this construction had split <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
o<strong>the</strong>r copula-constructions, in that way creating an associative gap that could not<br />
be overcome by becuman. An additional reason why becuman did not spread to<br />
<strong>the</strong> passive construction can be found in its semantics. Unlike weorðan, becuman<br />
sometimes seems to carry a connotation of volition (see, for instance, <strong>the</strong> free<br />
choice involved in becoming a Jew, Saracen or heretic in (23)). Such a connotation<br />
is infelicitous in <strong>the</strong> case of a true passive construction, in which <strong>the</strong> patient is emphatically<br />
involuntarily affected by <strong>the</strong> action denoted by <strong>the</strong> participle.<br />
Besides a possible connotation of volition, becuman also seems to express a<br />
more gradual type of change than weorðan, and is, in its copular use, similar in<br />
meaning to a concept such as ‘develop into’, a sense that naturally derives <strong>from</strong><br />
its original spatial meaning ‘come to some place’, which expresses an accomplishment.<br />
Toge<strong>the</strong>r, <strong>the</strong>se two semantic components of becuman can be related to <strong>the</strong><br />
second change we mentioned, as <strong>the</strong>y provide <strong>the</strong> main reason for <strong>the</strong> development<br />
of becuman into a copula, namely its usefulness in meeting <strong>the</strong> need of new<br />
types of predicates introduced in <strong>the</strong> English language. Specifically, comparing<br />
<strong>the</strong> time-stability of <strong>the</strong> subject complements collocating with weorðan to those<br />
collocating with becuman enables us to provide an elegant explanation of <strong>the</strong> loss<br />
of weorðan and <strong>the</strong> specific development of becuman.<br />
The OE verb weorðan seems to have had a general preference for time-unstable<br />
collocates. More specifically, its most frequent collocates are ei<strong>the</strong>r resultative participles<br />
or adjectives denoting human propensity, such as angry or happy. The first<br />
group of collocates, that of resultative participles, is inherently time-unstable. The<br />
participle hurt in he got hurt refers to <strong>the</strong> fact that being hurt may be associated<br />
with a resulting feeling of pain, a state that does not last very long (as compared,<br />
for instance, to an entire lifetime) – it never refers to an enduring state of pain. The<br />
second group of collocates of weorðan derives largely <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> semantic field of<br />
human propensity; examples are: milde ‘merciful’, forht ‘afraid’, bliðe ‘joyful’, sæne<br />
‘hesitant’, wrað ‘angry’, yrre ‘angry’, fyrwitgeorn ‘curious’, ormod ‘despairing’. These<br />
adjectives are low on <strong>the</strong> time-stability scale, and differ considerably <strong>from</strong> more<br />
time-stable adjectives such as those denoting age (old, young) or those denoting<br />
material (wooden, silver) (see Stassen 997 & Pustet 200 ). The similar degree of<br />
time-stability found in participles and adjectives collocating with weorðan is an<br />
additional indication that a strong link existed between <strong>the</strong>m. The co-ordination<br />
of wrað ‘wroth’ and awed ‘angered’ in (20), for instance, shows that <strong>the</strong> same timeunstable<br />
concept can be expressed sometimes by both participles and adjectives.
Old English weorðan and its replacement in Middle English 45<br />
By contrast, <strong>the</strong> verb becuman, if used as a copula, does not have such a<br />
restricted collocational profile and could also be found with more time-stable<br />
adjectives, such as those denoting age or colour in (40) and (4 ) respectively:<br />
(40) Ich was ʓonge, and by-come olde. (c 350. Earliest Prose Psalter:44)<br />
“I was young, and became old.”<br />
(4 ) þe yefþe of pite. þet is a grace þet bedeaweþ þe herte and makeþ his zuete […],<br />
and makeþ his al become grene. (c 340. Ayenbite of Inwit: 6)<br />
“<strong>the</strong> gift of pity, which is a grace that bedews <strong>the</strong> heart and makes it sweet […],<br />
and makes it all become green.”<br />
Recall <strong>from</strong> Section 3 that becuman has a preference for <strong>the</strong> Copula + NP construction<br />
not found with weorðan. This preference can now be explained in terms<br />
of time-stability as well: NPs prototypically denote entities or classes, which are<br />
‘self-contained units’, and <strong>the</strong>refore inherently time-stable. In sum, unlike weorðan,<br />
becuman has no preference for time-unstable subject complements.<br />
The predication of time-stable concepts in combination with a copula of<br />
change, however, is peculiar. This holds in particular for a subject entity linked by<br />
such a copula to an NP subject complement referring to a class of entities: it is not<br />
to be expected that this entity changes class membership spontaneously or instantaneously;<br />
that is, a certain degree of effort will be required. For instance, in order<br />
for John to change class-membership <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> class of non-teachers to <strong>the</strong> class of<br />
teachers (as in <strong>the</strong> proposition John became a teacher), John will first have to study<br />
for a degree enabling him to teach. Moreover, in this particular instance this effort<br />
is volitional. Such cases of volitional change of class membership can also be found<br />
in ME uses of becuman, as example (23) illustrates. The difference in collocational<br />
profile between weorðan and becuman, <strong>the</strong>n, mirrors a difference in semantics:<br />
sudden change beyond <strong>the</strong> control of <strong>the</strong> subject (weorðan) and gradual change,<br />
possibly controlled by <strong>the</strong> subject (becuman). The influx of new types of predicates<br />
involving gradual change or volition accounts for <strong>the</strong> quick success of becuman<br />
(and probably also weaxan). Once again, <strong>the</strong> strong association of weorðan with<br />
time-unstable collocates prevented this verb <strong>from</strong> extending to <strong>the</strong>se new predicate<br />
types. As a consequence, weorðan was felt to be archaic, and copulas such as<br />
becuman or weaxan were preferred instead.<br />
The final question that remains is <strong>the</strong> following: where do <strong>the</strong>se new predicate<br />
types come <strong>from</strong>? As a first tentative explanation, we would like to suggest that<br />
this increase indicates a kind of typological shift. The increase in Copula + NP<br />
constructions could be attributed to a takeover by intransitive predication constructions<br />
of some of <strong>the</strong> functions previously expressed by transitive constructions.<br />
An illustration is <strong>the</strong> development of <strong>the</strong> well-known OE idiom he feng to rice<br />
‘he came into power [lit. he took to <strong>the</strong> kingdom]’ into <strong>the</strong> PDE intransitive
46 Peter Petré & Hubert Cuyckens<br />
predicate construction He became king. This might not be <strong>the</strong> only example of such<br />
a change of idiom, but more research is necessary to establish <strong>the</strong> general character<br />
of this kind of shift. As regards <strong>the</strong> increase in Copula + AP constructions,<br />
becuman + AP can be seen as <strong>the</strong> successor of <strong>the</strong> second class of weak verbs,<br />
which disappeared in early ME. Many verbs <strong>from</strong> this class expressed properties<br />
of all degrees of time-stability, as for instance ealdian ‘grow old’, hwitian ‘whiten’,<br />
ascortian ‘shorten’, etc. It would indeed be highly unlikely that <strong>the</strong> co-occurrence<br />
of <strong>the</strong> disappearance of this class and <strong>the</strong> emergence of phrases such as become old<br />
or become green are a coincidence. In sum, <strong>the</strong>se changes point towards a sweeping<br />
change in <strong>the</strong> constructional idioms available in English, a change which, however,<br />
will have to be examined in more detail in future research.<br />
5. Conclusion<br />
In this paper, we have established <strong>the</strong> existence of a constructional network of<br />
copula-constructions in OE and ME. We have focussed on two verbs used in this<br />
constructional network, namely weorðan, which disappeared in early ME, and<br />
becuman, which appeared as an alternative. The appearance of becuman has been<br />
shown to be an instance of analogical extension, made possible through <strong>the</strong> initial<br />
distributional similarity between this verb and <strong>the</strong> copula weorðan. Moreover, <strong>the</strong><br />
replacement of weorðan by becuman (and o<strong>the</strong>r copulas such as weaxan) has been<br />
explained in terms of a change of <strong>the</strong> constructional network of copulas. More<br />
specifically, (i) <strong>the</strong> emancipation of a passive construction seems to have contributed<br />
to <strong>the</strong> archaisization of weorðan and prevented <strong>the</strong> spread of becuman to this<br />
new passive construction; and (ii) becuman also apparently filled a need for a new<br />
copula of change, allowing volitional and gradual kinds of change, which emerged<br />
as a consequence of <strong>the</strong> influx of time-stable predicates (both aps and nps) during<br />
<strong>the</strong> late OE and early ME periods. The causes for this influx, finally, are still in need<br />
of a more thorough investigation.<br />
References<br />
Biese, Yrjö M. 932. Die neuenglischen Ausdrücke des Werdens in sprach geschichtlicher<br />
Beleuchtung. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 33: 2 4–224.<br />
Biese, Yrjö M. 952. Notes on <strong>the</strong> Use of Ingressive Auxiliaries in <strong>the</strong> Works of William Shakespeare.<br />
Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 53: 9– 8.<br />
Bybee, Joan. 2003. Cognitive Processes in Grammaticalization. The New Psychology of Language<br />
ed. by Michael Tomasello, vol. 2, 45– 67. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Old English weorðan and its replacement in Middle English 47<br />
Croft, William. 2000. Explaining Language Change: An Evolutionary Approach. Harlow, Essex:<br />
Longman.<br />
Croft, William. 200 . Radical Construction Grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.<br />
Denison, David. 985. Why Old English Had no Prepositional Passive. English Studies<br />
66: 89–204.<br />
Denison, David. 993. English Historical Syntax: Verbal Constructions. London: Longman.<br />
Frary, Louise G. 929. Studies in <strong>the</strong> Syntax of <strong>the</strong> OE Passive, with Special Reference to <strong>the</strong> Use of<br />
‘Wesan’ and ‘Weorðan’. Language Dissertation No. 5 (Linguistic Society of America).<br />
Goldberg, Adele. 995. Constructions: A Construction Grammar Approach to Argument Structure.<br />
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.<br />
Goldberg, Adele. 2006. Constructions at Work: The Nature of Generalization in Language. Oxford:<br />
Oxford University Press.<br />
Hopper, Paul J. & Elizabeth C. Traugott. 2003. Grammaticalization, 2nd edition. Cambridge:<br />
Cambridge University Press.<br />
Kay, Paul & Charles J. Fillmore. 999. Grammatical Constructions and Linguistic Generalizations:<br />
The What’s X doing Y? construction. Language 75: –33.<br />
Kilpiö, Matti. 989. Passive Constructions in Old English Translations <strong>from</strong> Latin: With Special<br />
Reference to <strong>the</strong> OE Bede and <strong>the</strong> Pastoral Care (= Mémoires de la Société néophilologique de<br />
Helsinki, 49.). Helsinki: Société néophilologique.<br />
Lakoff, George & Mark Johnson. 980. Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago<br />
Press.<br />
Langacker, Ronald W. 99 . Concept, Image, and Symbol: The Cognitive Basis of Grammar.<br />
Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.<br />
Lass, Roger. 994. Old English: A Historical Linguistic Companion. Cambridge: Cambridge<br />
University Press.<br />
McWhorter, John H. 2002. What Happened to English?Diachronica 9: 2 7–272.<br />
Milroy, James. 996. Middle English Dialects. The Cambridge history of <strong>the</strong> English language ed.<br />
by Richard Blake, vol. 2, 56–206. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br />
Mustanoja, Tauno F. 960. A Middle English Syntax. Helsinki: Société néophilologique.<br />
Petré, Peter. 2006. The History of <strong>the</strong> English ‘Passive’ Construction: From Intransitive Predication<br />
to Passive Construction through Intersubjectification. Paper presented at <strong>the</strong> third<br />
BAAHE conference ‘Varieties of voice’, Leuven, 7–9 December 2006.<br />
Plank, Frans. 984. The Modals Story Retold. Studies in Language 8: 305–364.<br />
Pustet, Regina. 200 . Copulas. Universals in <strong>the</strong> Categorization of <strong>the</strong> Lexicon. Oxford: Oxford<br />
University Press.<br />
Seoane, Elena. 2006. Information Structure and Word Order Change: The Passive as an<br />
Information-rearranging Strategy in <strong>the</strong> History of English. The Handbook of <strong>the</strong> History of<br />
English ed. by Ans van Kemenade & Bettelou Los, 360–39 . Oxford: Basil Blackwell.<br />
Stassen, Leon. 997. Intransitive Predication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.<br />
Taylor, John. 999. Cognitive Semantics and Structural Semantics. Historical Semantics and<br />
Cognition ed. by Andreas Blank & Peter Koch, 7–48. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.<br />
Toon, Thomas E. 996. Old English dialects. The Cambridge history of <strong>the</strong> English language ed. by<br />
Richard Hogg, vol. , 409–450. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br />
Traugott, Elizabeth Cl. & Richard Dasher. 2002. Regularity in Semantic Change. Cambridge:<br />
Cambridge University Press.
48 Peter Petré & Hubert Cuyckens<br />
Visser, Frederic Th. 970 [ 963]. An Historical Syntax of <strong>the</strong> English language. Part one: Syntactical<br />
Units with one Verb. Leiden: E.J. Brill.<br />
Wischer, Ilse. 2006. Markers of Futurity in Old English and <strong>the</strong> Grammaticalization of Shall<br />
and Will’. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 42: 65– 78.<br />
Zieglschmid, A.J. Friedrich. 930. The Disappearance of Werdan in English. Philological Quarterly<br />
9: – 5.<br />
Corpora used<br />
Die Winteney-Version der Regula S. Benedicti Lateinische und Englisch mit Einleitung, Anmerkungen,<br />
Glossar und einem Facsimile zum erstenmale. 888. St. Benedict, Arnold Schröer, ed.<br />
Halle: M. Niemeyer. (Electronic edition <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> University of Michigan Library, url:<br />
http://name.umdl.umich.edu/AGV8488.000 .00 [06.07.2007]).<br />
HC: Helsinki Corpus of English Texts: Diachronic Part (ICAME, version 2). 999. Matti Rissanen<br />
et al. Helsinki: Department of English.<br />
The Paris psalter and <strong>the</strong> Meters of Boethius (The Anglo-Saxon poetic records, 5). 96 . George Ph.<br />
Krapp, ed. New York: Columbia University Press.<br />
PPCME2: Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Middle English, 2nd edition. Anthony Kroch. Pennsylvania:<br />
http://www.ling.upenn.edu/hist-corpora/ [06.07.2007].<br />
The Middle English Genesis and Exodus (Lund Studies in English, 36). Olof Arngart, ed. 968.<br />
Lund: Gleerup.<br />
YCOE: The York-Toronto-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Old English Prose. 2003. Ann Taylor et al.<br />
York: Department of Language and Linguistic Science.<br />
YPC: York-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Old English Poetry. 200 . Susan Pintzuk and Leendert Plug.<br />
York: Linguistics Department.
Verb types and word order in Old<br />
and Middle English non-coordinate<br />
and coordinate clauses<br />
Kristin Bech<br />
University of Oslo<br />
This paper focuses on <strong>the</strong> relation between word order, verb types and clause<br />
types in Old and Middle English, with reference to <strong>the</strong> change of English<br />
<strong>from</strong> a language with a verb-second constraint to a verb-medial language.<br />
The word order patterns dicussed are <strong>the</strong> XVS, SVX and XSV patterns, and<br />
<strong>the</strong> verb categories operated with are verbs with complement, verbs without<br />
complement, copulas and existential verbs. A distinction is made between<br />
coordinate clauses; i.e., clauses introduced by a coordinating conjunction, and<br />
non-coordinate clauses. The results show that <strong>the</strong>re is a difference between <strong>the</strong><br />
two clause types and between <strong>the</strong> word order patterns in <strong>the</strong> distribution of<br />
verbs. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, <strong>the</strong>re is a clear development <strong>from</strong> Old and Middle English<br />
as regards verb distribution in <strong>the</strong> clause types and word order patterns, and<br />
this development is especially noticeable in <strong>the</strong> XVS pattern. It may thus be<br />
deduced that word order is not only determined on <strong>the</strong> basis of syntactic rules,<br />
but is also related to <strong>the</strong> information content of <strong>the</strong> sentence. Consequently,<br />
studying word order and word order change <strong>from</strong> a functional perspective is<br />
highly relevant.<br />
1. Introduction<br />
The aim of this paper is to explore some verb types in Old and Middle English<br />
declarative main clauses with <strong>the</strong> word order XVS, SVX and XSV. 1 I distinguish<br />
between two types of main clauses: coordinate clauses (i.e., clauses introduced by<br />
a coordinating conjunction, in most cases and and to some extent but) and noncoordinate<br />
clauses. Through a study of <strong>the</strong> interrelation between <strong>the</strong> factors ‘type<br />
of verb’, ‘type of clause’ and ‘word order’, I will attempt to show that different word<br />
orders have different functions, that <strong>the</strong>se functions may have changed in <strong>the</strong><br />
1. This paper is based on a section <strong>from</strong> my doctoral dissertation (Bech 2001). I would like to<br />
thank <strong>the</strong> anonymous readers for this volume for relevant and helpful comments.
50 Kristin Bech<br />
course of time, and also how <strong>the</strong> differences between coordinate and non-<br />
coordinate clauses relate to word order. In o<strong>the</strong>r words, <strong>the</strong> focus here is on<br />
word order <strong>from</strong> a functional perspective.<br />
2. Material and method<br />
2.1 The corpus<br />
The corpus on which this work is based consists of 5,000 main clauses <strong>from</strong> Old<br />
and Middle English prose texts; 1,250 <strong>from</strong> each of <strong>the</strong> four periods: early Old<br />
English (870–950), late Old English (950–1150), early Middle English (1150–1350)<br />
and late Middle English (1350–1500). The clauses have been excerpted <strong>from</strong><br />
19 different texts, four <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> early OE period and five <strong>from</strong> each of <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r<br />
periods. 2 A list of <strong>the</strong> texts, including <strong>the</strong> number of clauses taken <strong>from</strong> each text,<br />
is given in <strong>the</strong> references, toge<strong>the</strong>r with <strong>the</strong>ir abbreviated reference forms.<br />
2.2 The word order patterns<br />
The word order patterns that will be discussed here are <strong>the</strong> XVS, SVX and XSV<br />
patterns. In <strong>the</strong> XVS word order, <strong>the</strong>re is one initial X element, followed immediately<br />
by <strong>the</strong> verb. The subject usually follows <strong>the</strong> verb, and it may in turn be<br />
followed by o<strong>the</strong>r clause elements. Clauses in which <strong>the</strong> verb is followed by one<br />
or more X elements, and with <strong>the</strong> subject in a later position, are also included<br />
in this pattern, i.e., XVXS order. If <strong>the</strong> verb phrase is complex, <strong>the</strong> finite and <strong>the</strong><br />
non-finite verb need not be contiguous; it is <strong>the</strong> finite verb that needs to occur in<br />
second position. In (1), <strong>the</strong> clause starts with <strong>the</strong> subject complement non richere,<br />
followed by <strong>the</strong> finite verb:<br />
(1) and non richere shal on man ben than anothir<br />
“and no richer shall one man be than ano<strong>the</strong>r” (Mandeville 97: 10)<br />
In SVX clauses <strong>the</strong> first clause element is <strong>the</strong> subject, followed immediately by <strong>the</strong><br />
verb, and usually by one or more X elements, which may be objects, adverbials,<br />
subject complements, and, occasionally, object complements. In this pattern are<br />
2. The texts were selected in a ‘quasi-random’ manner. I chose texts that represent different<br />
genres and different periods, but I did not check <strong>the</strong> texts for particular word order aspects<br />
before I started extracting <strong>the</strong> clauses. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, I did not always start <strong>the</strong> extraction of <strong>the</strong><br />
clauses at <strong>the</strong> very beginning of <strong>the</strong> text.
Verb types and word order 51<br />
also included clauses with just a subject and a verb, i.e., clauses where <strong>the</strong>re is no X<br />
element following <strong>the</strong> verb. 3 An example of an SVX clause is shown in (2):<br />
(2) wit geanbidiað þinre ondswore<br />
both-of-us await your answer<br />
“both of us await your answer” (Bo 19: 24)<br />
In XSV word order, <strong>the</strong>re is a single initial X element, followed by <strong>the</strong> subject, 4<br />
and <strong>the</strong> verb occupies third position. If <strong>the</strong> verb phrase is complex, <strong>the</strong> order of<br />
<strong>the</strong> verbs must be finite–non-finite, i.e., <strong>the</strong> finite verb must precede <strong>the</strong> non-finite<br />
verb immediately. There may of course be elements following <strong>the</strong> verb, as in (3),<br />
where <strong>the</strong>re is a clausal object.<br />
(3) Nu ge habbað gehered hu se hælend be him sylfum spræc<br />
Now you have heard how <strong>the</strong> Savior of him self spoke<br />
“Now you have heard how <strong>the</strong> Savior spoke of himself ” (ÆLS 10: 11)<br />
The distribution of XVS, SVX and XSV clauses is given in Table 1. In general, we<br />
see that <strong>the</strong> proportion of SVX and XSV clauses increases throughout <strong>the</strong> periods,<br />
and that <strong>the</strong>re is a decrease in XVS clauses, all of which is as expected in view of<br />
<strong>the</strong> fact that English changed <strong>from</strong> a language with a verb-second constraint into<br />
an SVX language.<br />
What is also interesting, however, is <strong>the</strong> development of <strong>the</strong> category I have<br />
called o<strong>the</strong>r, which means any o<strong>the</strong>r word order pattern, e.g., verb-initial, verb-final<br />
and verb-late word order. In early OE, 32.5% of <strong>the</strong> non-coordinate clauses and<br />
45.8% of <strong>the</strong> coordinate clauses have a word order o<strong>the</strong>r than XVS, SVX or XSV,<br />
but by late ME <strong>the</strong> proportion has decreased to 15.0% and 12.9%, respectively.<br />
This clearly illustrates <strong>the</strong> fact that OE word order was relatively free, which is<br />
why postulating clear-cut word order rules for this period is a risky undertaking.<br />
It also illustrates <strong>the</strong> word order change and <strong>the</strong> increasing restrictions that took<br />
place in <strong>the</strong> course of <strong>the</strong> ME period, to <strong>the</strong> effect that by late ME, a great majority<br />
of <strong>the</strong> main clauses had verb-medial word order, i.e., SVX or XSV. The present<br />
paper is concerned with verb types in <strong>the</strong> three main word order patterns, but <strong>the</strong><br />
general word order development of English should be kept in mind throughout<br />
<strong>the</strong> discussion.<br />
3. These are extremely infrequent: only seven occurrences in <strong>the</strong> entire corpus.<br />
4. The subject may be nominal or pronominal; i.e., I do not regard pronominal elements as<br />
clitics. Apart <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> fact that it is not really necessary to operate with clitics, <strong>the</strong>re are o<strong>the</strong>r<br />
good reasons for disregarding <strong>the</strong> concept of clitics in <strong>the</strong> study of <strong>the</strong> word order history of<br />
English, cf. Bech (2001: 79ff). This does not mean, however, that <strong>the</strong> distinction between nominal<br />
and pronominal elements is irrelevant.
52 Kristin Bech<br />
Table 1. Word order distribution in Old and Middle English non-coordinate and<br />
coordinate clauses<br />
Noncoord.<br />
clauses<br />
Coord.<br />
clauses<br />
Old English Middle English<br />
Word<br />
order<br />
Early OE Late OE Early ME Late ME<br />
patterns No. % No. % No. % No. %<br />
XVS 321 36.3 263 32.1 204 23.3 123 20.1<br />
SVX 175 19.8 230 28.0 336 38.4 249 40.6<br />
XSV 101 11.4 86 10.5 145 16.6 149 24.3<br />
O<strong>the</strong>r 288 32.5 241 29.4 190 21.7 92 15.0<br />
Total 885 100.0 820 100.0 875 100.0 613 100.0<br />
XVS 47 12.9 49 11.4 42 11.2 64 10.1<br />
SVX 92 25.2 130 30.2 127 33.9 224 35.2<br />
XSV 59 16.2 42 9.8 91 24.3 267 41.9<br />
O<strong>the</strong>r 167 45.8 209 48.6 115 30.7 82 12.9<br />
Total 365 100.1 430 100.0 375 100.1 637 100.1<br />
2.3 Verb types<br />
For <strong>the</strong> purposes of this study I distinguish between verbs with complement, verbs<br />
without complement (cf. Visser 1963), copulas and existential verbs. The reason<br />
why I do not use <strong>the</strong> terms ‘transitive’ and ‘intransitive’ is that, in Old English,<br />
<strong>the</strong> distinction is not between direct and indirect objects, but between accusative,<br />
genitive and dative objects (Mitchell 1985 I: 651). Besides, if a verb is classified as<br />
‘transitive’ and ‘intransitive’, it is <strong>the</strong> potential verb complementation that is meant,<br />
and some verbs may be inherently both transitive and intransitive. I am here interested<br />
in what is actually <strong>the</strong>re; what clause elements are overtly expressed.<br />
Verbs with complement are thus verbs that take accusative, genitive or dative<br />
objects, or an object clause, and in addition any adverbial elements. Verbs without<br />
complement occur in clauses with just a subject and a verb, or in clauses with<br />
subject, verb, and one or more adverbial elements. Visser classifies copulas as a<br />
subcategory of verbs with complement (1963: 189), but I have categorized <strong>the</strong>m as<br />
a separate group. However, clauses with a copular verb may have ano<strong>the</strong>r complement<br />
as well, and in <strong>the</strong>se cases <strong>the</strong> verb has been classified as both a copula and a<br />
verb with complement.<br />
‘Verbs of appearance or existence on <strong>the</strong> scene’, or existential verbs, is a category<br />
introduced by Firbas (1957, 1966, 1992), and covers verbs that “imply or even<br />
explicitly express ‘appearance – a kind of coming into existence – on <strong>the</strong> scene’<br />
(i.e., <strong>the</strong> scene created by <strong>the</strong> narrow, ad hoc context at <strong>the</strong> moment of utterance)<br />
or simply ‘existence’ on this scene” (Firbas 1966: 243). Existential verbs, of which
Verb types and word order 53<br />
typical examples are be, appear, come, belong in <strong>the</strong> category of verbs without<br />
complement, but in <strong>the</strong> tables below I have presented <strong>the</strong>m as a separate category,<br />
because existential constructions are particularly interesting in a historical perspective,<br />
as we shall see. In o<strong>the</strong>r words, <strong>the</strong> category ‘verbs without complement’<br />
comprises verbs without complement o<strong>the</strong>r than existential verbs.<br />
Clauses with passive verb phrases have been excluded, except for a few cases<br />
where <strong>the</strong> passive verb phrase has a copular function or existential meaning. In (4),<br />
<strong>the</strong> verb phrase wæs funden has existential meaning, and has been included in <strong>the</strong><br />
category of existential verbs, and (5) is an example of a passive copular verb:<br />
(4) 7 þær wæs ungemetlic micel licgende feoh funden on ðæm wicstowum<br />
and <strong>the</strong>re was immeasurable much ready money found at <strong>the</strong> camp<br />
“and immeasurably much ready money was found at <strong>the</strong> camp” (Or 69: 3)<br />
(5) and sir Baudewyn of Bretayne was made constable (Arthur 16: 33)<br />
The reason for operating with this mixture of syntactic and semantic categories is<br />
to be able to relate word order not only to syntax, but also to semantics and information<br />
structure, without having to operate with categories that are too small in<br />
relation to <strong>the</strong> size of <strong>the</strong> corpus.<br />
3. Analysis and discussion<br />
As mentioned in <strong>the</strong> introduction, <strong>the</strong> main aim of this paper is to compare noncoordinate<br />
and coordinate clauses with respect to <strong>the</strong> distribution of verb types in<br />
<strong>the</strong> different word order patterns in <strong>the</strong> four periods. Non-coordinate clauses and<br />
coordinate clauses, though both are main clauses, are presumably not functionally<br />
identical, and a study of <strong>the</strong> verbs may give us information about what characterizes<br />
<strong>the</strong>se two clause types. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, studying <strong>the</strong> verbs not only in relation to <strong>the</strong><br />
distinction between non-coordinate and coordinate clauses, but also in relation to<br />
<strong>the</strong> word order patterns within <strong>the</strong>se clause types, may throw some light on <strong>the</strong><br />
functional differences between <strong>the</strong> word orders. Finally, <strong>the</strong> diachronic data show<br />
<strong>the</strong> historical development of <strong>the</strong>se particular structures.<br />
The basic assumption is that coordinate clauses have an elaborating or modifying<br />
function (Traugott 1992: 277) and that <strong>the</strong>y may <strong>the</strong>refore relate to <strong>the</strong> immediate<br />
previous context in a more direct way than non-coordinate clauses. According to<br />
Quirk et al. (1985: 930ff.), <strong>the</strong> main function of <strong>the</strong> coordinate clause does not lie in<br />
establishing what <strong>the</strong> action is, but ra<strong>the</strong>r how it relates to <strong>the</strong> preceding sentence, by<br />
expressing e.g., contrast, explanation, consequence, result or addition. This does not<br />
mean that non-coordinate clauses do not relate to <strong>the</strong> previous context, but it is not a<br />
necessary condition; non-coordinate clauses may introduce a completely new topic.
54 Kristin Bech<br />
I <strong>the</strong>refore hypo<strong>the</strong>size that this difference between coordinate and non-coordinate<br />
clauses has consequences for what types of element may occur in <strong>the</strong> various word<br />
order patterns, and for what verb types are found.<br />
Tables 2–5 show <strong>the</strong> distribution of verb types in XVS, SVX and XSV noncoordinate<br />
and coordinate clauses in early and late OE, and early and late ME. 5<br />
This paper focuses on <strong>the</strong> following aspects of <strong>the</strong> tables (corresponding to <strong>the</strong><br />
boldface percentages):<br />
Table 2. Verb types in early OE non-coordinate and coordinate clauses<br />
Non-<br />
coord.<br />
cl.<br />
Coord.<br />
cl.<br />
Word<br />
order<br />
patterns<br />
With compl.<br />
Early Old English<br />
Without compl.<br />
except ex. verbs copula Existential verb<br />
No. % No. % No. % No. %<br />
XVS 127 39.6 72 22.4 32 10.0 64 19.9<br />
SVX 66 37.7 14 8.0 78 44.6 12 6.9<br />
XSV 61 60.4 20 19.8 13 12.9 4 4.0<br />
XVS 13 27.7 4 8.5 4 8.5 20 42.6<br />
SVX 36 39.1 12 13.0 29 31.5 10 10.9<br />
XSV 38 64.4 11 18.6 3 5.1 4 8.5<br />
Table 3. Verb types in late OE non-coordinate and coordinate clauses<br />
Non-<br />
coord.<br />
cl.<br />
Coord.<br />
cl.<br />
Word<br />
order<br />
patterns<br />
With compl.<br />
Late Old English<br />
Without compl.<br />
except ex. verbs copula Existential verb<br />
No. % No. % No. % No. %<br />
XVS 133 50.6 38 14.5 33 12.5 51 19.4<br />
SVX 94 40.9 26 11.3 89 38.7 15 6.5<br />
XSV 53 61.6 12 14.0 15 17.4 4 4.7<br />
XVS 12 24.5 7 14.3 11 22.4 16 32.7<br />
SVX 45 34.6 34 26.2 29 22.3 18 13.8<br />
XSV 25 59.5 8 19.1 6 14.3 3 7.1<br />
5. Note that <strong>the</strong> tables should be read horizontally, not vertically. The percentages have been<br />
calculated out of <strong>the</strong> total number of verbs (which equals <strong>the</strong> total number of clauses) in each<br />
word order pattern, cf. <strong>the</strong> figures in Table 1. Consequently, <strong>the</strong> sums of <strong>the</strong> percentages for each<br />
word order pattern in Tables 2–5 do not always add up to 100, since not all verbs, e.g., passives,<br />
could be classified in terms of <strong>the</strong> categories operated with here.
Table 4. Verb types in early ME non-coordinate and coordinate clauses<br />
Non-<br />
coord.<br />
cl.<br />
Coord.<br />
cl.<br />
Word<br />
order<br />
patterns<br />
With compl.<br />
Early Middle English<br />
Verb types and word order 55<br />
Without compl.<br />
except ex. verbs copula Existential verb<br />
No. % No. % No. % No. %<br />
XVS 79 38.7 40 19.6 28 13.7 45 22.1<br />
SVX 140 41.7 40 11.9 115 34.2 30 8.9<br />
XSV 81 55.9 24 16.6 19 13.1 9 6.2<br />
XVS 16 38.1 12 28.6 9 21.4 5 11.9<br />
SVX 55 43.3 22 17.3 29 22.8 18 14.2<br />
XSV 55 60.4 24 26.4 5 5.5 7 7.7<br />
Table 5. Verb types in late ME non-coordinate and coordinate clauses<br />
Non-<br />
coord.<br />
cl.<br />
Coord.<br />
cl.<br />
Word<br />
order<br />
patterns<br />
With compl.<br />
Late Middle English<br />
Without compl.<br />
except ex. verbs copula Existential verb<br />
No. % No. % No. % No. %<br />
XVS 17 13.8 12 9.8 6 4.9 74 60.2<br />
SVX 109 43.8 26 10.4 74 29.7 34 13.7<br />
XSV 68 45.6 33 22.2 17 11.4 18 12.1<br />
XVS 23 35.9 5 7.8 4 6.3 20 31.3<br />
SVX 90 40.2 33 14.7 61 27.2 24 10.7<br />
XSV 150 56.2 53 19.9 21 7.9 25 9.4<br />
• Existential verbs in <strong>the</strong> XVS pattern. OE XVS coordinate clauses have a higher<br />
proportion of existential verbs than non-coordinate clauses. In ME, <strong>the</strong> distribution<br />
is inverse (see 3.1).<br />
• Verbs with complement in <strong>the</strong> XVS pattern. In OE, XVS non-coordinate<br />
clauses have a higher proportion of verbs with complement than coordinate<br />
clauses. In early ME, <strong>the</strong> distribution is equal, whereas in late ME <strong>the</strong> highest<br />
proportion of XVS clauses with verbs with complement is found in <strong>the</strong> coordinate<br />
clause category (see 3.2).<br />
• Verbs with complement in <strong>the</strong> XSV pattern. There is a preponderance of verbs<br />
with complement in this pattern, both in non-coordinate and coordinate<br />
clauses, and in all four periods (see 3.3).<br />
• Copulas in <strong>the</strong> SVX pattern. The proportion of copulas is higher in SVX noncoordinate<br />
clauses than in coordinate clauses in <strong>the</strong> three first periods. In late<br />
ME, <strong>the</strong> proportion is approximately <strong>the</strong> same in <strong>the</strong> two clause types (see 3.4).
56 Kristin Bech<br />
3.1 Existential verbs in <strong>the</strong> XVS pattern<br />
The first feature to be discussed is <strong>the</strong> distribution of existential verbs in <strong>the</strong><br />
XVS non-coordinate clauses vs. coordinate clauses. As <strong>the</strong> tables show, in OE<br />
<strong>the</strong> coordinate clause category has a higher proportion of existential verbs than<br />
<strong>the</strong> non-coordinate clause category, whereas it is <strong>the</strong> opposite in ME, with an<br />
especially pronounced difference between <strong>the</strong> two clause types in late ME. In<br />
early OE and late ME <strong>the</strong> difference between non-coordinate and coordinate<br />
clauses is statistically significant, whereas in late OE and early ME it is not. 6<br />
If we take a closer look at <strong>the</strong> individual texts and start with <strong>the</strong> early OE<br />
period, it appears that one of <strong>the</strong> texts, Orosius, contains 16 out of <strong>the</strong> 20 existential<br />
coordinate clauses. They all occur in Book I, chapter I, which contains<br />
<strong>the</strong> tale of <strong>the</strong> voyages of Oh<strong>the</strong>re and Wulfstan, as well as a description of<br />
Greece and Italy. This text is thus descriptive, and in that way lends itself well<br />
to existential constructions, and it is descriptive in an enumerative way, which<br />
also explains <strong>the</strong> use of coordination. An example is given in (6):<br />
(6) 7 on suðhealfe 7 on wes<strong>the</strong>alfe þæs muðan sindon Mæsi, Creca leode – 7 be westan<br />
þære byrig sindon Traci<br />
and on <strong>the</strong>-south-side and on <strong>the</strong>-west-side of-<strong>the</strong>-mouth are <strong>the</strong>-Moesians,<br />
of-Greeks people – and on <strong>the</strong>-west of-<strong>the</strong> city are <strong>the</strong>-Thracians<br />
“and on <strong>the</strong> south and on <strong>the</strong> west side of <strong>the</strong> mouth are <strong>the</strong> Moesians, a Greek<br />
tribe, and on <strong>the</strong> west of <strong>the</strong> city are <strong>the</strong> Thracians” (Or 18: 9)<br />
In <strong>the</strong> late OE texts, it turns out that 10 out of <strong>the</strong> 16 existential coordinate<br />
clauses occur in Wulfstan’s Homilies, most of <strong>the</strong>m of <strong>the</strong> kind exemplified in (7):<br />
(7) 7 of þære mægðe com se mæra mann Abraham<br />
and <strong>from</strong> that tribe came <strong>the</strong> famous man Abraham<br />
“and <strong>from</strong> that tribe <strong>the</strong> famous man Abraham came” (WHom 148: 99)<br />
In Wulfstan, however, <strong>the</strong> existential clauses do not occur in one particular<br />
part of <strong>the</strong> text, but throughout <strong>the</strong> text, and we may note that <strong>the</strong>y occur in contexts<br />
where coordination is natural, since <strong>the</strong> initial adverbial refers anaphorically<br />
to a constituent in <strong>the</strong> previous discourse.<br />
As <strong>the</strong> examples <strong>from</strong> Orosius and Wulfstan demonstrate, certain textual,<br />
genre-specific features may have consequences for <strong>the</strong> distribution when <strong>the</strong><br />
number of tokens is relatively small. Hence, we cannot draw any firm conclusions<br />
about <strong>the</strong> general linguistic picture, but will have to content ourselves<br />
with postulating ‘tendencies’ and ‘indications’. One conclusion that may be<br />
drawn, however, is that in OE, <strong>the</strong> distribution of existential verbs in <strong>the</strong> XVS<br />
6. Late OE: chi-square value = 3.416, p ≈ 0.07; early ME: chi-square value = 1.74, p ≈ 0.19.
Verb types and word order 57<br />
pattern is related to <strong>the</strong> properties of typically descriptive texts, which often contain<br />
lists of features.<br />
In early ME, <strong>the</strong> proportion of existential verbs is larger in non-coordinate<br />
clauses than in coordinate clauses, which is <strong>the</strong> opposite <strong>from</strong> OE, but <strong>the</strong> difference<br />
is not statistically significant. However, as we shall soon see, in late ME <strong>the</strong><br />
difference is very definite, so perhaps <strong>the</strong> early ME distribution is a signal of what<br />
is to come. The main reason for <strong>the</strong> distributional differences between OE and<br />
early ME may be that in <strong>the</strong> early ME period, English had begun to change with<br />
respect to word order, though <strong>the</strong> results of this change cannot be seen clearly until<br />
<strong>the</strong> late ME period.<br />
In late ME, <strong>the</strong> great proportion of existential verbs in <strong>the</strong> XVS non-coordinate<br />
clauses clearly indicates that a restriction has taken place in <strong>the</strong> use of XVS word<br />
order, to <strong>the</strong> extent that it is now found primarily with this sentence type, because<br />
of <strong>the</strong> heavy (i.e., large and complex) and new subject that it contains, which resists<br />
clause-early position. It is interesting to look at <strong>the</strong> texts <strong>from</strong> this period, because<br />
two of <strong>the</strong>m, Mandeville and Mirrour, have higher proportions of XVS sentences<br />
in general, 7 and consequently also a higher proportion of existential clauses: 63<br />
out of 74, i.e., 85.1%, of <strong>the</strong> XVS non-coordinate existential clauses occur in <strong>the</strong>se<br />
two texts, both of which are descriptive texts. In o<strong>the</strong>r words, XVS order in noncoordinate<br />
clauses is now increasingly associated with existential verbs, and <strong>the</strong><br />
two texts are notable for a high frequency of both.<br />
As regards XVS coordinate clauses, <strong>the</strong> distribution is not as ‘extreme’ as in <strong>the</strong><br />
non-coordinate clause category. This must mean that XVS word order is not restricted<br />
to existential clauses to <strong>the</strong> same extent in <strong>the</strong> coordinate clause category;<br />
in particular, <strong>the</strong> proportion of verbs with complement is higher in XVS coordinate<br />
clauses than in non-coordinate clauses. An examination of <strong>the</strong> individual<br />
texts reveals that many (11 out of 23, i.e., 47.8%) of <strong>the</strong> coordinate clauses with<br />
a verb with complement have <strong>the</strong> initial element herfor/þerfore/<strong>the</strong>rfor/<strong>the</strong>rfore<br />
“<strong>the</strong>refore”, as in (8):<br />
(8) And <strong>the</strong>rfore wold he hym self create & make man [to <strong>the</strong> ende that …]<br />
(Mirrour 47: 17)<br />
Therefore is a conjunct, and as such has “<strong>the</strong> function of conjoining independent<br />
units ra<strong>the</strong>r than one of contributing ano<strong>the</strong>r facet of information to a single integrated<br />
unit” (Quirk et al. 1985: 631). It is no great surprise, <strong>the</strong>n, that it may be found<br />
at <strong>the</strong> beginning of a coordinate clause, after <strong>the</strong> coordinating conjunction, where<br />
7. For exact figures and frequencies, cf. Bech (2001: 78). In Mandeville and Mirrour, <strong>the</strong> overall<br />
proportion of XVS sentences is 20.7% and 26.0%, respectively, whereas it ranges <strong>from</strong> 6 –10%<br />
in <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r three texts.
58 Kristin Bech<br />
it provides information on <strong>the</strong> relationship between <strong>the</strong> coordinate clause and <strong>the</strong><br />
preceding clause. As regards <strong>the</strong> word order of clauses with initial <strong>the</strong>refore, it is not<br />
<strong>the</strong> case that <strong>the</strong>refore is obligatorily followed by <strong>the</strong> verb: in OE it is sometimes<br />
followed by <strong>the</strong> verb and sometimes by <strong>the</strong> subject, often depending on whe<strong>the</strong>r<br />
<strong>the</strong> subject is nominal or pronominal. The same pattern is found in ME. In o<strong>the</strong>r<br />
words, although <strong>the</strong> language is changing into a verb-medial language, verb-second<br />
(XVS) order is still possible in some contexts. It is thus conceivable that <strong>the</strong> process<br />
by which XVS word order largely becomes restricted to existential clauses first happens<br />
in non-coordinate clauses, and that it takes a little longer in coordinate clauses.<br />
The reason is that <strong>the</strong> function of coordinate clauses entails that an adverb such as<br />
<strong>the</strong>refore will occur naturally in <strong>the</strong> initial X position, and that <strong>the</strong> clauses in which<br />
<strong>the</strong>y occur sometimes have verb-second word order, on <strong>the</strong> pattern of OE.<br />
3.2 Verbs with complement in <strong>the</strong> XVS pattern<br />
Tables 2–5 also show <strong>the</strong> distribution of verbs with complement in <strong>the</strong> XVS<br />
pattern. In OE <strong>the</strong> proportion of verbs with complement is greater in <strong>the</strong> XVS<br />
non-coordinate clause pattern than in <strong>the</strong> coordinate clause pattern; 8 in early ME<br />
<strong>the</strong> proportions are equal in <strong>the</strong> two clause types, and in late ME <strong>the</strong> XVS coordinate<br />
clause category has a significantly higher proportion of verbs with complement<br />
than <strong>the</strong> non-coordinate clause category. In <strong>the</strong> OE period, XVS was still<br />
a productive word order, and we would <strong>the</strong>refore expect to find this word order<br />
used with different verb types. As we saw above, existential verbs account for only<br />
around 20% of <strong>the</strong> verb types in <strong>the</strong> XVS non-coordinate clauses in <strong>the</strong> first three<br />
periods.<br />
A closer study of <strong>the</strong> XVS non-coordinate clauses reveals that in OE, a majority<br />
(340 of 584, or 58.2%) of <strong>the</strong>m have initial þa or þonne. The adverbial þa, in addition<br />
to being an adverbial of time, may also imply sequence, that an event takes place<br />
after ano<strong>the</strong>r event. Enkvist (1972) suggests that þa is an ‘action marker’, and Pintzuk<br />
(1995) calls clauses with initial þa ‘narrative advancing clauses’. (9) is an example<br />
of a typical þa sequence:<br />
(9) ƿa com se dæg þe se dema gesætte . and wæron gegeorcode þa reðan wyta .<br />
and wurdon gefætte æt-foran þam deman . þa unscildigan cristenan … Đa cwæð .<br />
philippus . mid fullum graman . to eugenian his agenre dehter ‘…’ Đa cwæð<br />
eugenia . þæt …<br />
Then came <strong>the</strong> day that <strong>the</strong> judge set, and were prepared <strong>the</strong> cruel tortures, and<br />
were brought before <strong>the</strong> judge <strong>the</strong> innocent Christians … Then said Philip with<br />
8. In early OE, <strong>the</strong> difference is not statistically significant on <strong>the</strong> 0.05 level (chi-square value<br />
1.538, p ≈ 0.22), whereas <strong>the</strong> difference in late OE is significant.
Verb types and word order 59<br />
great anger to Eugenia his own daughter, ‘…’ Then said Eugenia that …<br />
“Then <strong>the</strong> day came that <strong>the</strong> judge had set, and <strong>the</strong> cruel tortures were prepared,<br />
and <strong>the</strong> innocent Christians were brought before <strong>the</strong> judge … Then Philip said,<br />
with great anger, to Eugenia, his own daughter, ‘…’ Then Eugenia said that …”<br />
(ÆLS 36: 195)<br />
As regards þonne, it is in XVS clauses primarily used as <strong>the</strong> second correlative<br />
in gif … þonne “if … <strong>the</strong>n” constructions, or þonne … þonne “when … <strong>the</strong>n”<br />
constructions. In my corpus I have analyzed <strong>the</strong> initial adverbial subclause as a<br />
left-dislocated element. Quirk et al. describe left-dislocation, or reinforcement,<br />
as follows:<br />
[A] reinforcing or recapitulatory pronoun is sometimes inserted within a clause<br />
where it stands ‘proxy’ for an initial noun phrase … [I]n each case a complete<br />
noun phrase is disjoined <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> grammar of <strong>the</strong> sentence, its role […] being<br />
grammatically performed by subsequent pronouns. (1985: 1416 –1417)<br />
Quirk et al. relate left-dislocation primarily to noun phrases, but <strong>the</strong>y also state that<br />
“some conjuncts can correlate with <strong>the</strong> subordinator of a preceding clause to reinforce<br />
<strong>the</strong> logical relationship between <strong>the</strong> parts of a sentence … [A] similar logical<br />
relationship is effected both by <strong>the</strong> subordinator and <strong>the</strong> conjunct” (1985: 644). Thus,<br />
<strong>the</strong> idea of reinforcement is used for correlative constructions, too. In my analysis<br />
of OE sentences, I <strong>the</strong>refore extended <strong>the</strong> definition of dislocation to include <strong>the</strong><br />
adverbial subclauses in correlative constructions as well. Thus, <strong>the</strong> word order of<br />
(10) is XVS, with þonne in <strong>the</strong> X position:<br />
(10) [Gif þu nu witan wilt hwonan hi cumað,] þonne meaht þu ongietan þæt hi cumað<br />
of woruldgidsunga<br />
[If you now know will whence <strong>the</strong>y come,] <strong>the</strong>n may you observe that <strong>the</strong>y<br />
come of covetousness<br />
“[If you wish to know whence <strong>the</strong>y come,] <strong>the</strong>n you may observe that <strong>the</strong>y<br />
come of covetousness” (Bo 15: 7)<br />
The reasons why in OE we find a greater proportion of verbs with complement<br />
in <strong>the</strong> non-coordinate clause category than in <strong>the</strong> coordinate clause category may<br />
thus be outlined as follows: non-coordinate clauses are more context independent<br />
than coordinate clauses. In non-coordinate clauses with <strong>the</strong> word order<br />
XVS, <strong>the</strong> initial X element is very often þa or þonne. þa is a sequential marker<br />
of action, which means that in <strong>the</strong> clause <strong>the</strong>re is an agent that carries out an<br />
action, and this action will often affect ano<strong>the</strong>r participant, or, with a verb of saying,<br />
thinking, feeling, etc., <strong>the</strong> object may be clausal. Hence, <strong>the</strong> purpose of such<br />
clauses is not primarily to relate <strong>the</strong> action to <strong>the</strong> previous clause, but to signal a<br />
new turn of events. þonne is often used in <strong>the</strong> X position of XVS clauses with a<br />
left-dislocated adverbial subclause, which means that <strong>the</strong> þonne clause will have
60 Kristin Bech<br />
anaphoric reference to <strong>the</strong> subclause, not <strong>the</strong> preceding main clause. In <strong>the</strong>se<br />
clauses as well, it is common to find a verb with complement. In coordinate clauses,<br />
on <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, it is quite rare to find initial þa or þonne, but what we see in<br />
coordinate XVS clauses with a verb with complement is that <strong>the</strong> initial element<br />
is often a pronominal object, 9 which means that in <strong>the</strong>se clauses, <strong>the</strong>re is, at <strong>the</strong><br />
beginning of <strong>the</strong> clause, direct reference to <strong>the</strong> previous clause, in accordance with<br />
<strong>the</strong> function of coordinate clauses. (11) is an example:<br />
(11) [ic sende eow swurd to] and eow sleað eowre fynd<br />
[I send you sword to] and you (O) slay your enemies (S)<br />
“[I will send <strong>the</strong> sword to you] and your enemies will slay you” (ÆLS 294: 170)<br />
Pronominal objects are, however, rare in <strong>the</strong> X position of XVS clauses, compared<br />
to þa and þonne. 10 Thus, we may say that in OE, XVS word order is to a great<br />
extent used for narrative-advancing purposes, and this entails non-coordination<br />
and a high proportion of verbs with complement. XVS word order in coordinate<br />
clauses does not have this function; <strong>the</strong>refore <strong>the</strong> proportion of verbs with complement<br />
is lower, whereas <strong>the</strong>re is a higher proportion of o<strong>the</strong>r verb types, e.g., existential<br />
verbs (cf. 3.1).<br />
Early ME is different <strong>from</strong> OE in <strong>the</strong> way that <strong>the</strong> proportion of verbs with<br />
complement in <strong>the</strong> XVS word order pattern is <strong>the</strong> same in non-coordinate clauses<br />
and coordinate clauses. This, I believe, has to do with <strong>the</strong> fact that in this period,<br />
<strong>the</strong> type of clause that took XVS order had begun to change. In general, <strong>the</strong> proportion<br />
of initial þa/þenne/þanne in this word order pattern is much lower in early<br />
ME than in OE; in early ME only a quarter (21 out of 79, i.e., 26.6%) of <strong>the</strong> XVS<br />
non-coordinate clauses with a verb with complement have this element initially,<br />
as opposed to 70.8% (184 out of 260) in OE. In addition to þa/þenne/þanne, we<br />
now typically find o<strong>the</strong>r short adverbials such as nu “now”, for ði “<strong>the</strong>refore”, or giet<br />
“yet” in initial position. Adverbial prepositional phrases and clauses also occur,<br />
and unmarked, non-topicalized objects, of <strong>the</strong> type illustrated in <strong>the</strong> OE example<br />
in (11), are still possible in initial position.<br />
It is possible that <strong>the</strong>re is a change in narrative style between OE and ME, to <strong>the</strong><br />
effect that <strong>the</strong> þa/þonne constructions become less used. In any case, <strong>the</strong> typical OE<br />
function of XVS word order of signaling sequence – perhaps we may call it a style<br />
associated with OE – is in early ME much less pronounced. With a change in <strong>the</strong><br />
narrative style, and thus a change in <strong>the</strong> function of <strong>the</strong> XVS word order, <strong>the</strong>re is<br />
no longer a particular reason why <strong>the</strong>re should be a larger proportion of verbs with<br />
9. Out of 25 Old English XVS coordinate clauses with a verb with complement, 13 (52%) have<br />
an object in <strong>the</strong> X position. Only four have initial þa or þonne.<br />
10. Out of altoge<strong>the</strong>r 680 OE XVS clauses (non-coordinate and coordinate combined), 350<br />
(51.5%) have initial þa/þonne, and 41 (6.0%) have an initial pronominal object.
Verb types and word order 61<br />
complement in <strong>the</strong> non-coordinate group of clauses than in <strong>the</strong> coordinate clause<br />
group in early ME. XVS coordinate clauses still occur with initial pronominal<br />
objects, and in <strong>the</strong> later part of <strong>the</strong> period with <strong>the</strong> adverbial þeruore “<strong>the</strong>refore”.<br />
If we compare Tables 4 and 5, we see that late ME is different <strong>from</strong> early ME.<br />
As regards verbs with complement, <strong>the</strong> proportion remains quite high in <strong>the</strong> coordinate<br />
clause category, but it is lower than ever in <strong>the</strong> non-coordinate clause group.<br />
This correlates with <strong>the</strong> fact that non-coordinate XVS clauses are now to a great<br />
extent existential clauses. Coordinate clauses, on <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, do not seem to<br />
be existential to <strong>the</strong> same extent as non-coordinate clauses, and <strong>the</strong> reason for this<br />
distribution was discussed in 3.1, in connection with <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>refore constructions.<br />
We may relate <strong>the</strong> proportion of verbs with complement in XVS clauses to <strong>the</strong><br />
occurrences of existential verbs, since <strong>the</strong>y seem to be inversely correlated: in OE<br />
XVS non-coordinate clauses, <strong>the</strong> proportion of verbs with complement is higher than<br />
<strong>the</strong> proportion of existential verbs, whereas <strong>the</strong> situation is <strong>the</strong> inverse in coordinate<br />
clauses. Thus, if we take a step back and look at <strong>the</strong> whole XVS word order picture, assuming<br />
now that <strong>the</strong> data are representative, we see a pattern in which <strong>the</strong> OE period<br />
is marked by <strong>the</strong> þa/þonne style, which is associated with non-coordinate clauses.<br />
Verbs with complement are represented to a greater extent in this clause type than in<br />
coordinate clauses. The proportion of existential verbs in XVS clauses, on <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r<br />
hand, is higher in coordinate clauses, particularly because of <strong>the</strong> features of descriptive<br />
narrative texts. Early ME may be said to be a transition period, whereas <strong>the</strong> late<br />
ME period is <strong>the</strong> opposite of <strong>the</strong> OE period. The great proportion of existential verbs<br />
and <strong>the</strong> low proportion of verbs with complement in <strong>the</strong> non-coordinate XVS pattern<br />
point to a narrowing down of <strong>the</strong> XVS word order option. In coordinate clauses, <strong>the</strong><br />
proportion of existential verbs is lower than in non-coordinate clauses, though still<br />
quite high, but coordinate clauses also have quite a few verbs with complement, due<br />
to <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>refore constructions, which keep XVS order, on <strong>the</strong> pattern of OE.<br />
3.3 Verbs with complement in <strong>the</strong> XSV pattern<br />
In <strong>the</strong> XSV pattern, <strong>the</strong>re seems to be a clear preference for verbs with complement,<br />
both in non-coordinate and coordinate clauses, in all <strong>the</strong> periods. 11 This is<br />
probably because: 1) in earlier stages of English, as in Modern English, <strong>the</strong> most<br />
common initial element was an adverbial, even though OE to a greater extent than<br />
Modern English allowed o<strong>the</strong>r elements in this position, e.g., objects (cf. Bech<br />
2001: 119ff.). Consequently, we would not expect to find many copular verbs in<br />
<strong>the</strong> XSV pattern, since <strong>the</strong> combination of an adverbial and a copula is not very<br />
common; after all, <strong>the</strong> attribution of a quality to a subject does not usually call for<br />
11. It is only in late ME non-coordinate XSV clauses that <strong>the</strong> percentage is under 50, vs. around<br />
60% in OE, but <strong>the</strong> difference between <strong>the</strong> periods is not statistically significant.
62 Kristin Bech<br />
additional information about time, place or manner. 2) In OE, both postverbal and<br />
preverbal position were possible for <strong>the</strong> subject. As a result of this situation, subject<br />
placement was partly determined by principles of information structure, to <strong>the</strong> effect<br />
that if <strong>the</strong> subject occurred before <strong>the</strong> verb, it was often light and/or given, whereas<br />
postverbal position could be filled by ei<strong>the</strong>r light/given subjects or heavy and/or<br />
new subjects, with existential clauses being a typical example of <strong>the</strong> latter. In XSV<br />
clauses, <strong>the</strong>n, <strong>the</strong> subject is usually given, and that, in combination with <strong>the</strong> likelihood<br />
of <strong>the</strong> initial X element being an adverbial, often one relating to <strong>the</strong> previous<br />
context, means that <strong>the</strong> verb would most likely be a verb with complement, because<br />
o<strong>the</strong>rwise <strong>the</strong> clause would be ra<strong>the</strong>r uninformative. Since sentences usually have<br />
to contain some new, salient information, it is very likely that <strong>the</strong> given subject, <strong>the</strong><br />
agent, carries out an action, and that this action will affect someone or something,<br />
which means that <strong>the</strong> verb will take a complement. The situation in late ME resembles<br />
<strong>the</strong> earlier periods: <strong>the</strong> majority of <strong>the</strong> verbs in <strong>the</strong> XSV pattern are still verbs<br />
with complement. Since English word order moved towards verb-medial syntax, we<br />
would not expect <strong>the</strong> verb distribution in this pattern to alter dramatically. 12<br />
3.4 Copulas in <strong>the</strong> SVX pattern<br />
The last feature to be discussed is <strong>the</strong> higher proportion of copulas in non-coordinate<br />
SVX clauses than in coordinate clauses in all but <strong>the</strong> last period. For late OE<br />
and early ME, <strong>the</strong> distributional difference is statistically significant on <strong>the</strong> 0.05<br />
level, whereas for early OE, p ≈ 0.11.<br />
As mentioned, coordinate clauses are presumably closely related to <strong>the</strong> previous<br />
clause or sentence, whereas non-coordinate clauses are more context independent.<br />
Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, a characteristic of SVX word order is that <strong>the</strong> X element(s) will in<br />
most cases be heavy and/or new, in accordance with general pragmatic principles.<br />
Finally, copular clauses are characterized by <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong> main focus is on attributing<br />
a quality to a subject, which means that <strong>the</strong> subject is likely to be known<br />
and <strong>the</strong> attributed quality will constitute <strong>the</strong> new information. If we consider<br />
<strong>the</strong>se three factors toge<strong>the</strong>r, it becomes clear why <strong>the</strong>re is a greater proportion<br />
of copular verbs in non-coordinate SVX clauses than in coordinate SVX clauses:<br />
since <strong>the</strong> focus of a copular clause is on attributing a quality to a subject, and not<br />
relating any action to <strong>the</strong> previous sentence, a copular clause is less likely to point<br />
back to <strong>the</strong> previous sentence than to stand on its own, or function as a frame or<br />
background for what follows, as exemplified in (12).<br />
12. What we would expect, however, is an increase in heavy and/or new subjects in <strong>the</strong> XSV<br />
pattern, since <strong>the</strong> loss of verb-second order meant that <strong>the</strong> option of choosing postverbal position<br />
for heavy subjects disappeared, and that is in fact what happens: in late ME, <strong>the</strong> proportion<br />
of nominal subjects in this pattern is much higher than in <strong>the</strong> earlier periods (Bech 2001: 97).
Verb types and word order 63<br />
(12) He wæs mid þæm fyrstum mannum on þæm lande; [næfde he þeah ma ðonne<br />
twentig hryðera, 7 twentig sceapa 7 twentig swyna]<br />
He was among <strong>the</strong> foremost men in that district; [not-had he however more<br />
than twenty cattle, and twenty sheep and twenty pigs]<br />
“He was among <strong>the</strong> foremost men in that district, [even though he did not have<br />
more than twenty cattle, and twenty sheep and twenty pigs]” (Or 15: 11)<br />
The above comments are meant to throw some light on <strong>the</strong> difference between<br />
non-coordinate and coordinate clauses as regards <strong>the</strong> distribution of verbs. However,<br />
in order to get information about word order in copular sentences in general,<br />
we may also read <strong>the</strong> tables vertically, instead of horizontally. As mentioned, in SVX<br />
word order, <strong>the</strong> X element(s) will in most cases be heavy and/or new, and in copular<br />
sentences, <strong>the</strong> main focus is on attributing a quality to a subject (presumably<br />
new information). Thus, SVX word order is to be expected if <strong>the</strong> verb is a copula;<br />
i.e., word order is seen as a consequence of <strong>the</strong> information content of <strong>the</strong> sentence.<br />
If <strong>the</strong> tables are read vertically, we see that SVX order is indeed preferred<br />
for copular clauses; in early OE, for example, 107 (67.3%) out of altoge<strong>the</strong>r 159<br />
copular sentences have SVX word order. 13<br />
It is, as <strong>the</strong> tables show, not <strong>the</strong> case that coordinate clauses are never copular<br />
clauses, but when a coordinate clause contains a copular verb, <strong>the</strong> preceding sentence<br />
is also often copular, so that <strong>the</strong> sequence becomes a listing of qualities, or a<br />
repetition of <strong>the</strong> same quality:<br />
(13) Se fæder is angin . and se sunu is angin . and se halga gast is angin . ac hi ne synd<br />
na þreo anginnu . ac hi ealle þry synden an angin<br />
The Fa<strong>the</strong>r is Beginning, and <strong>the</strong> Son is Beginning, and <strong>the</strong> Holy Ghost is Beginning,<br />
but <strong>the</strong>y not are not three Beginnings, but <strong>the</strong>y all three are one Beginning<br />
“The Fa<strong>the</strong>r is <strong>the</strong> Beginning, and <strong>the</strong> Son is <strong>the</strong> Beginning, and <strong>the</strong> Holy Ghost<br />
is <strong>the</strong> Beginning, but <strong>the</strong>y are not three Beginnings, but <strong>the</strong>y all three are one<br />
Beginning” (ÆLS 10: 14)<br />
In Table 5, we see that <strong>the</strong> late ME distribution differs <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> earlier three periods<br />
in having an approximately equal proportion of copulas in <strong>the</strong> non-coordinate<br />
and coordinate SVX patterns. A closer examination of <strong>the</strong> individual texts reveals<br />
13. Notice that what <strong>the</strong> tables show in terms of <strong>the</strong> percentages given is 1) <strong>the</strong> proportion of<br />
copulas in <strong>the</strong> SVX non-coordinate clause category vs. <strong>the</strong> SVX coordinate clause category,<br />
and 2) <strong>the</strong> proportion of copulas in <strong>the</strong> SVX pattern in relation to o<strong>the</strong>r verbs in <strong>the</strong> same pattern.<br />
The percentages do not tell us that SVX copular sentences are more often non-coordinate<br />
clauses than coordinate clauses or that <strong>the</strong> SVX pattern contains more copulas than <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r<br />
patterns. However, information about <strong>the</strong>se features may also be drawn <strong>from</strong> (<strong>the</strong> raw data of)<br />
<strong>the</strong> tables if, as mentioned above, <strong>the</strong>y are read vertically instead of horizontally.
64 Kristin Bech<br />
that Arthur deviates <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r texts in having twice as many copular coordinate<br />
clauses as non-coordinate clauses (21 out of 33 SVX copular clauses in Arthur are<br />
coordinate clauses). Or, to put it ano<strong>the</strong>r way, in Arthur, <strong>the</strong> SVX non-coordinate<br />
clause category contains a lower proportion of copulas than <strong>the</strong> SVX coordinate<br />
clause category does, and in this it differs <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r texts <strong>from</strong> that period.<br />
If we disregard <strong>the</strong> Arthur data, <strong>the</strong> difference between coordinate and noncoordinate<br />
clauses does not become statistically significant, but <strong>the</strong> tendency<br />
becomes approximately <strong>the</strong> same as in early OE (p ≈ 0.14). The reason for <strong>the</strong><br />
distribution in Arthur probably has to do with style. In addition to several instances<br />
of <strong>the</strong> kind of repetitive sequence exemplified in (13), Arthur also uses<br />
coordination when it is not strictly speaking necessary. In (14), for example, <strong>the</strong><br />
coordinating conjunction in and his name is sir Ector seems superfluous; <strong>the</strong><br />
sentence could just as well have read His name is sir Ector without any loss of<br />
meaning. Likewise, in (15), <strong>the</strong> second clause could have started with Syr Kay<br />
was made … instead of with <strong>the</strong> coordinating conjunction.<br />
(14) ‘Wel’, said Merlyn, ‘I knowe a lord of yours in this land that is a passyng true man<br />
and a feithful, and he shal have <strong>the</strong> nourysshyng of your child; and his name is<br />
sir Ector, and he is a lord of fair lyvelode in many partyes in Englond and Walys.’<br />
(Arthur 10: 36)<br />
(15) … and with hym rode syr Kaynus, his sone, and yong Arthur that was hys nourisshed<br />
broder; and syr Kay was made knyght at Alhalowmas afore (Arthur 13: 21)<br />
Again, what we see here is how <strong>the</strong> characteristics of individual texts also play<br />
a role with regard to distributional features. 14 In a relatively detailed classification<br />
of <strong>the</strong> data, as in Tables 2–5, <strong>the</strong> number of occurrences becomes quite small for<br />
each category, even though <strong>the</strong> corpus as a whole is quite large. Consequently, it<br />
becomes important to keep an eye on <strong>the</strong> particular features of <strong>the</strong> individual texts,<br />
as <strong>the</strong>se might have a bearing on <strong>the</strong> statistics. In <strong>the</strong> case of <strong>the</strong> late ME distribution<br />
of copulas in non-coordinate vs. coordinate clauses, more data are needed<br />
in order to be able to draw conclusions. For <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r periods it seems that <strong>the</strong>re<br />
is a clear difference between non-coordinate and coordinate clauses with respect<br />
to copulas, and that this can be seen in light of <strong>the</strong> functional characteristics of<br />
14. Since <strong>the</strong> number of clauses collected <strong>from</strong> each text varies (cf. References), and this may<br />
affect <strong>the</strong> statistics if <strong>the</strong> features of individual texts play a role, I also did an experiment where I<br />
‘normalized’ <strong>the</strong> data, in <strong>the</strong> sense that I analyzed an equal number of clauses <strong>from</strong> each text, for<br />
all <strong>the</strong> features discussed in this paper. For <strong>the</strong> late OE, early ME and late ME periods I analyzed<br />
150 clauses <strong>from</strong> each text, and for <strong>the</strong> early OE period 187/188 clauses <strong>from</strong> each text, since <strong>the</strong><br />
corpus only contains four texts <strong>from</strong> that period, and I needed an equal number of clauses <strong>from</strong><br />
each period. The corpus thus consisted of 3,000 clauses, 750 <strong>from</strong> each period. The results were<br />
interesting and reassuring, since <strong>the</strong> distribution of verb types was very similar to <strong>the</strong> data in
Verb types and word order 65<br />
non-coordinate vs. coordinate clauses in relation to <strong>the</strong> pragmatic features of SVX<br />
word order and <strong>the</strong> communicative function of copular clauses. It is likely that this<br />
also applies to late ME, and to Modern English.<br />
4. conclusion<br />
In this paper I have attempted to show <strong>the</strong> relation between non-coordinate and coordinate<br />
clauses, some verb types and word order in Old and Middle English. In spite<br />
of certain problematic aspects, such as <strong>the</strong> question of different text types and <strong>the</strong>ir<br />
possible idiosyncratic features, and a low number of tokens in some instances, some<br />
conclusions may be attempted. Since <strong>the</strong>re is a difference between non-coordinate<br />
and coordinate clauses with respect to <strong>the</strong> distribution of certain verbs within some<br />
of <strong>the</strong> word order patterns, we may assume that <strong>the</strong>se two clause types have different<br />
functions. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, since verbs say something about what kind of information<br />
a sentence contains, and since <strong>the</strong>re is a difference between <strong>the</strong> word order patterns<br />
as regards <strong>the</strong> verb distribution, we may assume that a functional perspective on<br />
word order is not irrelevant, i.e., word order is related to <strong>the</strong> information content of<br />
<strong>the</strong> sentence. Lastly, <strong>the</strong> diachronic data show <strong>the</strong> development of <strong>the</strong> verb distribution<br />
within <strong>the</strong> different word orders in non-coordinate and coordinate clauses. The<br />
most conspicuous development takes place in <strong>the</strong> XVS pattern, and can be related to<br />
<strong>the</strong> fact that English changed into a verb-medial language.<br />
References<br />
A. List of source material consulted<br />
For Early Old English<br />
Bede’s Ecclesiastical History of <strong>the</strong> English People (Bede, 250 clauses)<br />
King Alfred’s West-Saxon Version of Gregory’s Pastoral Care (Cura, 250 clauses)<br />
The Old English Orosius (Or, 500 clauses)<br />
King Alfred’s Old English Version of Boethius De Consolatione Philosophiae (Bo, 250 clauses)<br />
Tables 2–5, percentagewise. This means that <strong>the</strong> features I have discussed occur independently<br />
of <strong>the</strong> number of clauses extracted <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> texts. However, what did happen was that some of<br />
<strong>the</strong> results were no longer statistically significant. For example, in my original data, <strong>the</strong> proportion<br />
of copulas in early ME SVX non-coordinate and coordinate clauses was 34.2% and 22.8%,<br />
respectively (cf. Table 4), and <strong>the</strong> chi-square test showed statistical significance on <strong>the</strong> 0.05 level.<br />
In <strong>the</strong> ‘normalized’ data, <strong>the</strong> corresponding proportions were 32.8% and 21.6%, i.e., almost<br />
identical to <strong>the</strong> original data, but <strong>the</strong> difference was no longer statistically significant (p ≈ 0.14).<br />
This just illustrates that <strong>the</strong> smaller <strong>the</strong> corpus, <strong>the</strong> less certain <strong>the</strong> results.
66 Kristin Bech<br />
For Late Old English<br />
The Blickling Homilies (BlHom, 200 clauses)<br />
Ælfric’s Lives of Saints (ÆLS, 500 clauses)<br />
The Anglo-Saxon Version of <strong>the</strong> Story of Apollonius of Tyre (ApT, 200 clauses)<br />
The Homilies of Wulfstan (WHom, 200 clauses)<br />
The Peterborough Chronicle (OE Peterb, 150 clauses)<br />
For Early Middle English<br />
The Peterborough Chronicle (ME Peterb, 250 clauses)<br />
Old English Homilies (Homilies, 200 clauses)<br />
Vices and Virtues (Vices & Virtues, 250 clauses)<br />
Sawles Warde (Sawles W, 200 clauses)<br />
Dan Michel’s Ayenbite of Inwyt (Ayenbite, 350 clauses)<br />
For Late Middle English<br />
The English Works of Wyclif (Wyclif, 250 clauses)<br />
Middle English Sermons (ME Sermons, 150 clauses)<br />
The Bodley Version of Mandeville’s Travels (Mandeville, 300 clauses)<br />
The Works of Sir Thomas Malory: The Tale of King Arthur (Arthur, 300 clauses)<br />
Caxton’s Mirrour of <strong>the</strong> World (Mirrour, 250 clauses)<br />
B. Printed primary sources<br />
For Old English<br />
Bately, Janet, ed. 1980. The Old English Orosius. EETS s.s. 6. London: Oxford University Press.<br />
Bethurum, Dorothy, ed. 1957. The Homilies of Wulfstan. Oxford: Clarendon Press.<br />
Clark, Cecily, ed. 1958. The Peterborough Chronicle 1070–1154. London: Oxford University<br />
Press.<br />
Garmonsway, G.N., ed. 1967 [1954]. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. 2nd ed. London: Dent;<br />
New York: Dutton.<br />
Giles, T.A., ed. 1969 [1858]. The Whole Works of King Alfred <strong>the</strong> Great. Vol. II. New York: AMS<br />
Press.<br />
Goolden, Peter, ed. 1958. The Old English Apollonius of Tyre. London: Oxford University<br />
Press.<br />
Miller, Thomas, ed. 1890. The Old English Version of Bede’s Ecclesiastical History of <strong>the</strong> English<br />
People. EETS o.s. 95, 96. London: Trübner & Co.<br />
Morris, Richard, ed. 1874–1880. The Blickling Homilies. EETS o.s. 58, 63, 73. London: Oxford<br />
University Press. [Reprinted as one volume in 1967.]<br />
Sedgefield, Walter J., ed. 1968 [1899]. King Alfred’s Old English Version of Boethius De Consolatione<br />
Philosophiae. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.<br />
Sedgefield, Walter J. 1900. King Alfred’s Version of <strong>the</strong> Consolations of Boethius. London: Henry<br />
Frowde.<br />
Skeat, Walter W., ed. 1881–1885. Ælfric’s Lives of Saints, Vol. I, i & ii. EETS o.s. 76, 82. London:<br />
Trübner & Co.<br />
Skeat, Walter W. 1890–1900. Ælfric’s Lives of Saints. Vol. II, i & ii. EETS o.s. 94, 114. London:<br />
Oxford University Press. [Reprinted as one volume in 1966.]
Verb types and word order 67<br />
Sweet, Henry, ed. 1909 [1871]. King Alfred’s West-Saxon Version of Gregory’s Pastoral Care. EETS<br />
o.s. 45. London: Trübner & Co. and Oxford University Press.<br />
Thorpe, Benjamin, ed. 1834. The Anglo-Saxon Version of <strong>the</strong> Story of Apollonius of Tyre. London:<br />
John & Arthur Arch.<br />
For Middle English<br />
Gradon, Pamela. 1979. Dan Michel’s Ayenbite of Inwyt. Vol. II. EETS. Oxford: Oxford University<br />
Press.<br />
Holthausen, Ferdinand, ed. 1888. Vices and Virtues. Part I. EETS o.s. 89. London: Trübner & Co.<br />
Mat<strong>the</strong>w, F.D., ed. 1880. The English Works of Wyclif Hi<strong>the</strong>rto Unprinted. EETS o.s. 74. London:<br />
Trübner & Co.<br />
Millett, Bella & Jocelyn Wogan-Browne, eds. 1990. Medieval English Prose for Women. Selections<br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Ka<strong>the</strong>rine Group and Ancrene Wisse. Oxford: Clarendon Press.<br />
Morris, Richard & Pamela Gradon, eds. 1965 [1866]. Dan Michel’s Ayenbite of Inwyt or Remorse<br />
of Conscience. Vol I. EETS o.s. 23. London: Oxford University Press.<br />
Morris, Richard, ed. 1969 [1868]. Old English Homilies and Homiletic Treatises of <strong>the</strong> Twelfth and<br />
Thirteenth Centuries. EETS o.s. 29, 34. New York: Greenwood Press.<br />
Prior, Oliver H., ed. 1966 [1913]. Caxton’s Mirrour of <strong>the</strong> World. EETS e.s. 110. London: Oxford<br />
University Press.<br />
Ross, Woodburn O., ed. 1960 [1940]. Middle English Sermons. Edited <strong>from</strong> British Museum MS.<br />
Royal 18 B. xxiii. EETS o.s. 209. London: Oxford University Press.<br />
Seymour, M.C., ed. 1963. The Bodley Version of Mandeville’s Travels. EETS 253. London: Oxford<br />
University Press.<br />
Vinaver, Eugène, ed. 1947. The Works of Sir Thomas Malory. Vol. I. Oxford: Clarendon Press.<br />
C. Secondary sources<br />
Bech, Kristin. 2001. Word Order Patterns in Old and Middle English: A syntactic and pragmatic<br />
study. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Bergen.<br />
Enkvist, Nils Erik. 1972. Old English Adverbial þa – An action marker?. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen<br />
73: 90–96.<br />
Firbas, Jan. 1957. Some Thoughts on <strong>the</strong> Function of Word-order in Old English and Modern<br />
English. Sborník Prací filosofické fakulty Brnûnské university A5. 72–100.<br />
Firbas, Jan. 1966. Non-<strong>the</strong>matic Subjects in Contemporary English. Travaux linguistiques de<br />
Prague 2.239–256.<br />
Firbas, Jan. 1992. Functional Sentence Perspective in Written and Spoken Communication.<br />
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br />
Mitchell, Bruce. 1985. Old English Syntax. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press.<br />
Pintzuk, Susan. 1996 [1995]. Variation and Change in Old English Clause Structure. Language<br />
Variation and Change 7 ed. by David Sankoff, William Labov & Anthony Kroch, 229–260.<br />
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br />
Quirk, Randolph, Sidney Greenbaum, Geoffrey Leech & Jan Svartvik. 1985. A Comprehensive<br />
Grammar of <strong>the</strong> English Language. London: Longman.<br />
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1992. Syntax. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of <strong>the</strong> English Language ed.<br />
by Richard M. Hogg, vol. I, 168–289. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br />
Visser, F. Th. 1963. An Historical Syntax of <strong>the</strong> English Language. Vol. I. Leiden: E.J. Brill.
From locative to durative to focalized?<br />
The English progressive and ‘PROG<br />
imperfective drift’ 1<br />
Kristin Killie<br />
Faculty of Humanities, University of Tromsoe<br />
In <strong>the</strong> present paper I test <strong>the</strong> claim of Bertinetto et al. (2000) that <strong>the</strong> English<br />
progressive has undergone ‘PROG imperfective drift’, originating as a locative<br />
construction, to develop into a durative progressive and subsequently also into a<br />
focalized progressive. I argue that it is doubtful whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> English progressive<br />
has evolved along <strong>the</strong>se lines. While <strong>the</strong> construction has clearly become much<br />
more focalized, and less durative, <strong>the</strong>re is no evidence of a predominantly<br />
durative stage. Instead, <strong>the</strong> English progressive shows a variety of functions all<br />
through <strong>the</strong> period under study, and <strong>the</strong> durative type is not among <strong>the</strong> most<br />
frequent types in any one period. As for origins, <strong>the</strong> many meanings or functions<br />
of <strong>the</strong> progressive in <strong>the</strong> earliest records may seem to suggest multiple origins<br />
ra<strong>the</strong>r than a single, locative source.<br />
1. Aims and organization<br />
Although a large number of monographs and articles have been written on <strong>the</strong><br />
history of <strong>the</strong> English progressive, <strong>the</strong> problems surrounding its origins and<br />
semantic development remain unsolved. As for origins, a number of hypo<strong>the</strong>ses<br />
have been proposed. Poppe (2003: 16) sums up <strong>the</strong> status quo in <strong>the</strong> following<br />
manner:<br />
Historical linguists seem to have reached no definitive agreement on <strong>the</strong> origin of <strong>the</strong><br />
English progressive, i.e., on <strong>the</strong> construction which formed <strong>the</strong> basis for Modern<br />
English ‘be’ plus V-ing. The main candidates are Old English ‘wesan/beon’<br />
plus present participle in -ende, or Old/Middle English ‘be’ plus preposition (later<br />
reduced > a > zero) plus a nominal form in -ing/-ung, or possibly a blend of <strong>the</strong><br />
two constructions, with or without fur<strong>the</strong>r external (Latin, French and Brythonic<br />
Celtic) influences.<br />
1. I thank Åsta Haukås, Tore Nesset, and Toril Swan for reading and commenting on an early<br />
draft of this paper. I also thank two anonymous readers.
70 Kristin Killie<br />
Opinions concerning <strong>the</strong> meaning or function of <strong>the</strong> progressive are also<br />
divided. Terms used to characterize <strong>the</strong> Old English progressive include <strong>the</strong> following:<br />
durative, frame time/simultaneity, terminate, bounded, intensive, emphatic,<br />
futurity, repetition, characterizing, qualifying, descriptive, expression of<br />
emotions, etc. (see Denison 1993 & Núñez-Pertejo 2004 for accounts). 2 A surprisingly<br />
similar set of terms has been used to describe <strong>the</strong> English progressive<br />
in more recent periods, even including Present-day English (cf. <strong>the</strong> overviews<br />
and discussions in Núñez-Pertejo 2004); yet, it is clear that <strong>the</strong> progressive has<br />
gone through some major changes. To date <strong>the</strong>re are only a few principled accounts<br />
of what path <strong>the</strong> progressive has developed along and why. In <strong>the</strong> present<br />
paper I test one of <strong>the</strong>se hypo<strong>the</strong>ses, viz. <strong>the</strong> claim of Bertinetto et al. (2000)<br />
that <strong>the</strong> English progressive has undergone ‘PROG imperfective drift’, originating<br />
as a locative construction, to develop into a durative progressive and subsequently<br />
also into a focalized progressive. I argue that <strong>the</strong> English progressive<br />
has clearly become more focalized through time. However, if <strong>the</strong>re was ever<br />
a stage at which durative uses predominated, this stage goes so far back that<br />
it cannot be traced even in <strong>the</strong> earliest written records. As for <strong>the</strong> origin of<br />
<strong>the</strong> English progressive, <strong>the</strong> earliest data do not lend support to <strong>the</strong> ‘locative<br />
hypo<strong>the</strong>sis’.<br />
The organization of <strong>the</strong> paper is as follows. In Section 2 I explain <strong>the</strong> concept<br />
of PROG imperfective drift in some more detail. In Section 3 I discuss some<br />
methodological issues, while Section 4 contains <strong>the</strong> data and analysis. Section 5<br />
provides a summary and discussion.<br />
2. Background: locative, durative and focalized progressives<br />
and PROG imperfective drift<br />
As mentioned above, Bertinetto et al. claim that <strong>the</strong> English progressive has<br />
developed <strong>from</strong> being a locative, to becoming a durative and <strong>the</strong>n increasingly a<br />
focalized construction. To understand this hypo<strong>the</strong>sis, we need to understand how<br />
Bertinetto et al. define terms such as ‘locative’, ‘durative’ and ‘focalized’. I <strong>the</strong>refore<br />
start by explaining <strong>the</strong> relevant terms.<br />
According to Bertinetto et al. (2000: 539), ‘locative’ implies that <strong>the</strong> meaning<br />
of <strong>the</strong> progressive was originally that of “being (i.e., finding oneself/itself) in a<br />
state”. The locative element may be of various types:<br />
2. Scholars that list a number of functions for <strong>the</strong> progressive seem to agree that of those functions<br />
some are somehow basic, while o<strong>the</strong>rs are derived or secondary; however, <strong>the</strong>re is no consensus<br />
as to which functions are basic and which derived.
The English progressive 71<br />
PROG constructions include, in one way or ano<strong>the</strong>r, a locative morpheme. This<br />
may consist for instance of an auxiliary verb indicating existence or position<br />
(as in virtually every European PROG device), of an explicit marker of locativity<br />
(like <strong>the</strong> inessive case in Finnish PROG), or of a combination of more than one<br />
such morphemes (as again in Finnish PROG, which combines both of <strong>the</strong> above<br />
features). (Bertinetto et al. 2000: 532)<br />
Bertinetto et al. give no concrete examples of locative source constructions,<br />
but I give some examples in (1) below of constructions which are normally assumed<br />
to be locative. The examples here all involve a locative preposition. This is a<br />
construction type which is said by Comrie (1976: 98–103) to be very common.<br />
(1) a. German:<br />
Der Mann ist am/beim Lesen.<br />
<strong>the</strong> man is at-<strong>the</strong> reading<br />
b. Dutch:<br />
De man is aan het lezen.<br />
<strong>the</strong> man is at <strong>the</strong> reading<br />
“The man is reading.”<br />
c. Middle English:<br />
‘Palmer’, a sede, ‘whar is þe king?’<br />
‘Sire!’ a seide, ‘an honting Wiþ kinges fifteen.’<br />
(The Romance of Sir Beues of Hamtoun;<br />
cf. de Groot 2007 for publication data.)<br />
The example in (1c) is an example of <strong>the</strong> well-known be on hunting construction.<br />
It is this construction which is normally taken to be <strong>the</strong> source construction<br />
in accounts that argue in favour of a locative origin for <strong>the</strong> English progressive<br />
(e.g., Jespersen 1924: 278; Dal 1952; Braaten 1967, and o<strong>the</strong>rs; see <strong>the</strong> discussion<br />
in Núñez-Pertejo 2004: 113–118). 3 However, Bertinetto et al. apparently assume<br />
that <strong>the</strong> beon/wesan + Vende construction was originally locative, as we will see in<br />
section 4.2.<br />
Durative progressives are defined in <strong>the</strong> following way:<br />
‘Durative’ progressive constructions [. . .], i.e., those that are evaluated relative to<br />
a larger interval of time. [. . .] <strong>the</strong> actual duration of <strong>the</strong> event remains indeterminate.<br />
Even when a durative temporal adverbial is present, this does not delimit <strong>the</strong><br />
event but merely yields a vantage point <strong>from</strong> which <strong>the</strong> situation is observed.<br />
(Bertinetto et al. 2000: 527)<br />
3. De Groot (2007) also assumes that <strong>the</strong> English progressive goes back to <strong>the</strong> be on hunting<br />
construction. However, he regards <strong>the</strong> original construction as an absentive construction, which<br />
developed into a progressive construction because <strong>the</strong> absentive and <strong>the</strong> progressive partially<br />
overlap semantically.
72 Kristin Killie<br />
Examples of <strong>the</strong> durative progressive are provided by <strong>the</strong> parallel examples in (2):<br />
(2) a. English:<br />
[Yesterday, during my sleep], Ann was playing for two hours all by herself.<br />
b. Catalan: . . .<br />
l’Anna va estar jugant tota sola durant dues hore.<br />
c. Portugese:<br />
. . . A Ana esteve a jogar sozina durante dos horas.<br />
(<strong>from</strong> Bertinetto 2000: 571)<br />
Focalized progressives are defined as follows:<br />
‘Focalized’ progressive constructions [. . .], i.e., those expressing <strong>the</strong> notion of an<br />
event viewed as going on at a single point in time, here called ‘focalization point’.<br />
The focalization point may be overtly expressed in <strong>the</strong> sentence, or else it may be<br />
recovered <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> context, being <strong>the</strong> object of a presupposition. Needless to say,<br />
<strong>the</strong> focalization point does not exhaustively localize <strong>the</strong> event; it simply indicates<br />
a point in time overlapping <strong>the</strong> progressive event, while <strong>the</strong> actual duration of <strong>the</strong><br />
latter remains indeterminate. (Bertinetto et al. 2000: 527)<br />
One type of focalized progressive is <strong>the</strong> ‘frame construction’, in which <strong>the</strong><br />
event denoted by <strong>the</strong> progressive verb functions as a background event to an event<br />
expressed by a non-progressive verb form (Bertinetto 2000: 565). Examples are<br />
given in <strong>the</strong> parallel examples in (3).<br />
(3) a. English:<br />
when John came, Ann was still working.<br />
b. Catalan:<br />
quan en Joan va venir, l’Anna encara estava treballant.<br />
c. Portugese:<br />
quando o João chegou, a Ana ainda estava a trabalhar.<br />
(<strong>from</strong> Bertinetto 2000: 564–565)<br />
According to Jespersen (1909–1949: 178–180), <strong>the</strong> frame construction represents<br />
<strong>the</strong> prototypical use of <strong>the</strong> progressive in Modern English. Below we will see<br />
that this use of <strong>the</strong> progressive was not very frequent in earlier English.<br />
What durative and focalized progressives have in common is that <strong>the</strong>y both<br />
view events as unbounded, i.e., it is <strong>the</strong> middle of <strong>the</strong> event which is in focus, while<br />
<strong>the</strong> beginning and end of <strong>the</strong> event are not; in o<strong>the</strong>r words, <strong>the</strong> temporal boundaries<br />
of <strong>the</strong> event are blurred. By contrast, a bounded event is an event which is<br />
perceived as a whole, i.e., including temporal boundaries. As we will see below,<br />
earlier English made extensive use of <strong>the</strong> progressive in contexts in which Modern<br />
English requires a non-progressive form because <strong>the</strong> event in question is perceived<br />
as clearly bounded.
The English progressive 73<br />
Bertinetto et al. refer to <strong>the</strong> development <strong>from</strong> locative to durative to focalized<br />
(and finally also possibly to imperfective) as ‘PROG imperfective drift’. 4 The<br />
process involves <strong>the</strong> following stages:<br />
i. pure locativity = stative, durative<br />
ii. progressivity I = residually locative, durative<br />
iii. progressivity II = durative<br />
iv. progressivity III = focalized, strictly imperfective<br />
v. pure imperfectivity = loss of <strong>the</strong> progressive character<br />
Figure 1. ‘PROG imperfective drift’ (Bertinetto et al. 2000: 540)<br />
As can be seen in Fig. 1, it is assumed that progressives typically originate as<br />
locative constructions. 5 These are said to express stative or durative meaning. In<br />
<strong>the</strong> original construction, <strong>the</strong> locative verb does not function as an auxiliary, but<br />
as a full lexical verb, which is followed by an independent non-verbal element<br />
(predicative or adjunct). What happens in PROG imperfective drift is that <strong>the</strong><br />
verb and <strong>the</strong> predicative or adjunctive element in <strong>the</strong> source construction are<br />
reanalysed as constituting a complex VP; thus, <strong>the</strong> main verb is reanalysed (and<br />
bleached) into an auxiliary, while <strong>the</strong> predicative/adjunctive element acquires <strong>the</strong><br />
status of main verb. Stage (ii) represents <strong>the</strong> initial stage of grammaticalization.<br />
Here <strong>the</strong> locative or postural verb begins to develop into an auxiliary. The construction<br />
now expresses durative meaning, but this meaning co-exists with <strong>the</strong><br />
older locative meaning. (Such overlapping of meanings and functions is, of<br />
course, common in grammaticalization processes.) At stage (iii), <strong>the</strong> locative<br />
verb is fully grammaticalized into an auxiliary, and <strong>the</strong> construction sheds its<br />
4. I do not think <strong>the</strong> term ‘drift’ here is meant to imply that <strong>the</strong> development in question is an<br />
example of language changing by itself. The term is probably meant simply to refer to <strong>the</strong> fact<br />
that <strong>the</strong> development of certain constructions tends to follow specific stages and paths, and that<br />
<strong>the</strong> change tends to be in a certain direction.<br />
5. The view that progressive devices typically go back to locative constructions has become<br />
almost standard by now (cf. e.g., Comrie 1976: 98–103; Bybee et al. 1994: 136; Torres Cacoullos<br />
2000: 121 and Heine 2003: 594), and it is based on ample evidence. Thus, Heine & Hünneyer.<br />
(1991) found more than a hundred African languages which had progressives based on locative<br />
sources, and Bybee et al. (1994: 128–129) also provide numerous examples <strong>from</strong> languages of<br />
diverse types.
74 Kristin Killie<br />
locative meaning, being now exclusively durative. During stage (iv), <strong>the</strong> construction<br />
acquires a focalized meaning, while finally, at stage (v), <strong>the</strong> progressive<br />
meaning is lost, being replaced by a pure imperfectivity meaning. The latter<br />
stage is only attested in a few languages (Comrie 1976: 100, 101; Bertinetto,<br />
et al. 2000: 540 and Johanson 2000: 99–100), and will not be discussed any<br />
fur<strong>the</strong>r here. While some progressive constructions perform only one of <strong>the</strong> functions<br />
shown in Fig. 1, o<strong>the</strong>rs cover more than one stage. For example, <strong>the</strong> Italian<br />
stare + gerund progressive is exclusively focalized, and thus belongs to stage (iv),<br />
whereas <strong>the</strong> Estonian progressive is said to cover three stages, viz. (ii)–(iv). The<br />
English and <strong>the</strong> Ibero-Romance languages have progressives which cover stages<br />
(iii) and (iv). 6<br />
The categorizations made by Bertinetto et al. are somewhat difficult to relate<br />
to those made in o<strong>the</strong>r studies of <strong>the</strong> English progressive. For example, it is not<br />
common to divide progressives into a durative and a focalized type. However, <strong>the</strong><br />
distinction may be important. While it may be argued that <strong>the</strong> development <strong>from</strong><br />
durative to focalized (as defined by Bertinetto et al.) is trivial, simply reflecting<br />
a shift in preferences, style etc, this does not seem to be <strong>the</strong> case. That <strong>the</strong>re are<br />
grammatical issues involved is shown by <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong> Italian stare progressive<br />
can no longer be used as a durative device, while it was used as such in its Latin past<br />
(Bertinetto 2000: 563). However, this does not necessarily mean that this distinction<br />
is relevant for <strong>the</strong> English progressive.<br />
Unfortunately, Bertinetto et al. do not try to explain what factor(s) may have<br />
motivated <strong>the</strong> development <strong>from</strong> durative to focalized; nei<strong>the</strong>r do <strong>the</strong>y try to account<br />
for <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r steps sketched in Fig. 1. However, Comrie (1976), who also claims<br />
that progressives (including both durative and focalized ones, apparently) typically<br />
develop out of locative constructions, argues that <strong>the</strong> process of metaphor is crucial<br />
in this development (cf. also de Groot for an interesting account):<br />
Some attention must now be given to possible reasons for this relation between<br />
locative and progressive. The clue to <strong>the</strong> relation is perhaps in English expressions<br />
like to be in <strong>the</strong> process of doing something or to be in progress, in which we<br />
see that we can refer to some instance of a process by viewing <strong>the</strong> whole of <strong>the</strong><br />
6. Bybee et al. (1994: 142) also assume a development <strong>from</strong> locative to progressive to imperfective;<br />
however, <strong>the</strong>ir trajectories do not include a durative stage. Comrie (1976: 103) claims that “of<br />
<strong>the</strong> languages examined where habitual meaning is expressed by means of a locative, it is always<br />
<strong>the</strong> case that progressive meaning is also expressed as a locative, indeed it is usually <strong>the</strong> case<br />
that <strong>the</strong> same locative construction is used for both meanings. Thus one can establish a certain<br />
implicational relation between locative expression of progressive and of habitual meaning: <strong>the</strong><br />
locative expression of progressive meaning is basic, and only if a language has this possibility can<br />
it fur<strong>the</strong>r extend <strong>the</strong> same form to habitual meaning, and this extension is ra<strong>the</strong>r an extension of<br />
<strong>the</strong> earlier progressive to become <strong>the</strong> only imperfective form”.
The English progressive 75<br />
situation as if it were spatial, when it is quite natural to refer to some specific<br />
point of <strong>the</strong> situation as being ‘in’ that situation. Thus really, <strong>the</strong> only requirement<br />
is that we should be able to transpose <strong>from</strong> space to time, and languages do<br />
this quite readily already in <strong>the</strong> use of originally locative prepositions, etc., as<br />
temporal, e.g., on <strong>the</strong> table, on Friday. (Comrie 1976: 102–103)<br />
The development sketched in Fig. 1 is based mainly on studies of progressive<br />
constructions in <strong>the</strong> Romance languages, but it is claimed that progressive devices<br />
in o<strong>the</strong>r languages have followed <strong>the</strong> same course, and this includes <strong>the</strong> English<br />
progressive (Bertinetto et al. 2000: 540 and Johanson 2000: 99–100). However,<br />
Bertinetto et al. present no evidence for <strong>the</strong>ir claim that <strong>the</strong> English progressive<br />
has developed along <strong>the</strong>se lines. The present paper aims to test <strong>the</strong> relevant<br />
hypo<strong>the</strong>sis by providing <strong>the</strong> necessary quantitative data, but before I discuss <strong>the</strong><br />
data, a few methodological comments are in order.<br />
3. Corpus and methodology<br />
If <strong>the</strong> English progressive has gone through PROG imperfective drift, this should<br />
be reflected in a shift in <strong>the</strong> relative proportions of <strong>the</strong> various types of progressives.<br />
I <strong>the</strong>refore present evidence showing <strong>the</strong> proportions of <strong>the</strong> relevant types in different<br />
periods of English. The periods covered are Old English (> 1150), Middle English<br />
(1150–1500), and Early Modern English (1500–1710). The data come <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
historical part of <strong>the</strong> Helsinki Corpus. I have also used six additional Middle English<br />
texts (see section 4.1 and <strong>the</strong> references). Note that <strong>the</strong> data and discussion focus on<br />
<strong>the</strong> possible shift <strong>from</strong> a prototypically durative to a prototypically focalized construction.<br />
I never<strong>the</strong>less briefly discuss <strong>the</strong> question of origins in section 4.2.<br />
Although <strong>the</strong> study focuses on <strong>the</strong> shift <strong>from</strong> a prototypically durative to a prototypically<br />
focalized progressive, <strong>the</strong> data include progressives with o<strong>the</strong>r meanings<br />
or functions as well, notably ‘narrative’ and ‘stative’ progressives, which are<br />
clearly non-aspectual (cf. <strong>the</strong> discussion in section 4). Such uses are not included<br />
in Bertinetto et al.’s diachronic sketch of progressives; however, <strong>the</strong>y should have a<br />
place in our discussion as <strong>the</strong>y represent a common use of <strong>the</strong> English progressive<br />
historically and are <strong>the</strong>refore a part of <strong>the</strong> total picture. 7 The tables in Section 4<br />
<strong>the</strong>refore include such uses of <strong>the</strong> progressive as well.<br />
In this study <strong>the</strong> term ‘progressive’ refers to any verbal use of be + Vende/ing in<br />
which <strong>the</strong> first and second element form a verbal periphrasis, regardless of <strong>the</strong> mean-<br />
7. They also feature quite prominently in <strong>the</strong> history of many o<strong>the</strong>r European progressive constructions<br />
(cf. <strong>the</strong> discussion in Poppe 2003), and should <strong>the</strong>refore, in my view, somehow have<br />
been included in Bertinetto et al.’s diagram.
76 Kristin Killie<br />
ing of this periphrasis. Although Bertinetto et al. assume that <strong>the</strong> Present-day English<br />
progressive goes back to <strong>the</strong> beon/wesan + Vende construction, I have also included<br />
syntagms such as be in milking, be a-milking, and be milking of, which are considered<br />
to be variants of <strong>the</strong> be + prep + Ving pattern since <strong>the</strong>se appear to have a progressive<br />
meaning. The fact that <strong>the</strong>re are hybrid forms which apparently have elements of both<br />
be on hunting and beon/wesan/be + Vende/ing, i.e., represent a mixture of verbal and<br />
nominal elements (e.g., on feohtende wæron, cf. Elsness 1994: 23–24, n. 4), suggests<br />
that <strong>the</strong> two constructions may have merged at some stage. There are only twenty-two<br />
examples of <strong>the</strong> be on hunting construction in <strong>the</strong> Helsinki data. With one exception<br />
(a late Middle English example), <strong>the</strong>se uses are all <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Early Modern period.<br />
They mostly have a focalized function, just like <strong>the</strong> majority of <strong>the</strong> be + prep + Ving<br />
uses at this time. I have not kept <strong>the</strong>se uses separate <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> non-prepositional uses<br />
as <strong>the</strong>ir impact on <strong>the</strong> statistics is negligible. The number of be + prep + Ving periphrases<br />
in <strong>the</strong> supplementary Middle English corpus is also very small. There are six<br />
occurrences: one <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 12th, one <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 14th and four <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 15th century.<br />
The most useful diagnostics in distinguishing between durative and focalized<br />
progressives have been adverbial collocates. Durative and focalized progressives<br />
differ with respect to what adverbial collocates <strong>the</strong>y take. Some examples of durative<br />
adverbials are found in (2); o<strong>the</strong>rs are e.g., since early this morning, until midnight,<br />
during <strong>the</strong> uprising, gradually, etc. Focalized progressives may occur within a frame<br />
construction (typically a when or as clause), as in (3). They may also collocate with<br />
adverbials such as at <strong>the</strong> moment, now, still, etc. Time adverbials have been useful<br />
in interpreting <strong>the</strong> function of many progressives; however, given that as many as<br />
fifty-eight percent of <strong>the</strong> corpus progressives do not involve a time adverbial at all,<br />
it follows that <strong>the</strong> context has often been all-important. 8<br />
4. Analysis<br />
4.1 Durative, focalized and o<strong>the</strong>r progressives in Old to Early<br />
Modern English<br />
It is clear that both durative and focalized progressives are found in all historical<br />
periods of English. The sentences in (4)–(6) below are examples of durative<br />
progressives taken <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Old English subcorpus.<br />
8. Cf. Freckmann (1995) for a discussion of <strong>the</strong> adverbial collocates of progressives. Bertinetto<br />
et al. also suggest o<strong>the</strong>r diagnostics for determining <strong>the</strong> function of progressives, but <strong>the</strong>se have<br />
not been very useful in <strong>the</strong> present study. For example, it is claimed that durative progressives<br />
are more likely than focalized progressives to occur with <strong>the</strong> perfect, but given <strong>the</strong> scarcity of<br />
perfect progressives in <strong>the</strong> periods under study, this diagnostic has not been of much help.
The English progressive 77<br />
(4) þa þæt þa Porsenna gehierde, he ðæt setl & þæt gewin<br />
when that <strong>the</strong>n Porsenna heard he that siege and that battle<br />
mid ealle forlet, þe he ær þreo winter dreogende wæs<br />
with all left which he already three winters fighting was<br />
“When Porsenna heard that, he gave up <strong>the</strong> siege and battle against everybody,<br />
which he had been fighting for three winters already.”<br />
(Alfred’s Orosius; HCO2)<br />
(5) & hie alle on þone Cyning wærun feohtende oð þæt hie<br />
and <strong>the</strong>y all against that king were fighting until that <strong>the</strong>y<br />
hine ofslægenne hæfdon<br />
him slain had<br />
“And <strong>the</strong>y all fought (?were all fighting) against <strong>the</strong> king until <strong>the</strong>y had<br />
slain/killed him.”<br />
(Chronicle ms A early; HCO2)<br />
(6) & he wæs endebyrdlice settende bi muneca life & bi<br />
and he was little by little settling by monestic life and by<br />
heora stilnesse<br />
its stillness<br />
“and little by little he settled (?was settling) down to monastic life and to its<br />
stillness”<br />
(Bede’s Ecclasiastical history; HCO2)<br />
In <strong>the</strong>se sentences, <strong>the</strong> adverbials clearly give away <strong>the</strong> durative nature of <strong>the</strong><br />
progressive. Thus, þreo winter specifies a time span during which <strong>the</strong> activity took<br />
place, oð þæt hie hine ofslægenne hæfdon defines <strong>the</strong> endpoint of <strong>the</strong> situation<br />
referred to, while endebyrdlice denotes an indefinite time span.<br />
The sentences in (7)–(9) contain focalized uses of <strong>the</strong> Old English<br />
progressive.<br />
(7) Mid þi þe he þas þing wæs sprecende to him silfum, þa<br />
while he that thing was speaking to himself <strong>the</strong>n<br />
færinga geseah he sumne fiscere gan<br />
suddenly saw he some fishermen go<br />
“while he was speaking about that subject to himself, suddenly he saw some<br />
fishermen leave”<br />
(The Old English Apollonius of Tyre; HCO3)<br />
(8) & eode on ærne merien in to ðam getelde, & efne<br />
and went into house next morning into <strong>the</strong> tent and precisely
78 Kristin Killie<br />
ða wæs growende Aarones gyrd on blostmum & on leafum on<br />
<strong>the</strong>n was growing Aron’s twig into flowers and into leaves in<br />
hnutbeames wisan<br />
nut tree’s manner<br />
“and he went into <strong>the</strong> cottage/house and <strong>the</strong> next morning into <strong>the</strong> tent, and<br />
precisely <strong>the</strong>n Aron’s twig was growing into flowers and leaves in <strong>the</strong> manner of<br />
a nut tree” (The Old Testament; HCO3)<br />
(9) Saga me for hwam stanas ne synt berende?<br />
tell me wherefore stones not are carrying<br />
“Tell me, why are you not carrying stones?” 9 (Solomon & Saturn; HCO4)<br />
While (7) and (8) have focalization points which are overtly expressed by adverbials,<br />
respectively mid þi þe and efne ða, <strong>the</strong> focalization point in (9) is an implicit<br />
‘now’. The sentence in (7) is one of <strong>the</strong> few examples of <strong>the</strong> frame construction found<br />
in <strong>the</strong> Old English data, while <strong>the</strong> sentence in (8) ra<strong>the</strong>r seems like <strong>the</strong> opposite: <strong>the</strong><br />
non-progressive form functions as <strong>the</strong> background to <strong>the</strong> progressive form.<br />
The question, <strong>the</strong>n, is to what extent durative and focalized progressives are<br />
used in <strong>the</strong> various periods. The PROG imperfective drift hypo<strong>the</strong>sis predicts that<br />
durative progressives should represent <strong>the</strong> prototypical use in <strong>the</strong> early data,<br />
while focalized progressives gradually take over this role. The data in Table 1<br />
show <strong>the</strong> distribution of durative and focalized progressives in <strong>the</strong> Helsinki Corpus<br />
(where OE, ME and EModE refer to <strong>the</strong> Old English, Middle English and Early<br />
Modern English subperiods, respectively). The figures are given in absolute frequencies,<br />
in percentages (in paren<strong>the</strong>ses), and in frequencies per 10,000 words.<br />
The figures in square brackets in <strong>the</strong> column for focalized progressives give <strong>the</strong><br />
number and percentage of frame constructions in each period.<br />
Table 1. Functions of <strong>the</strong> progressive in <strong>the</strong> Helsinki Corpus<br />
Durative Focalized O<strong>the</strong>r/indet. Total<br />
OE 37 (15%) 0.9 71 (28%) 1.7 144 (57%) 3.5 252/6.1<br />
[5 = 2%]<br />
ME 8 (9%) 0.1 17 (19%) 0.3 63 (72%) 1.0 88/1.4<br />
[3 = 3%]<br />
EModE 13 (7%) 0.2 111 (61%) 2.0 57 (32%) 1.0 181/3.3<br />
[32 = 18%]<br />
Total 58 199 264 521<br />
9. This is an early example of <strong>the</strong> passival construction, i.e., a progressive with active form but<br />
passive meaning (cf. Denison 1993: 389–393).
The English progressive 79<br />
We see that focalized progressives are more frequent than durative ones in<br />
all <strong>the</strong> three subperiods under study. It is never<strong>the</strong>less clear that <strong>the</strong> difference<br />
in frequency between <strong>the</strong> two types increases over time. Thus, while <strong>the</strong> ratio<br />
of durative to focalized progressives is approximately one to two in <strong>the</strong> Old<br />
and Middle English data, <strong>the</strong> corresponding Early Modern rate is one to nine.<br />
The data are thus compatible with <strong>the</strong> hypo<strong>the</strong>sis that <strong>the</strong> English progressive<br />
used to be more durative, but has over time developed into a prototypically<br />
focalized construction. However, given <strong>the</strong> ra<strong>the</strong>r low frequency of durative<br />
progressives even in <strong>the</strong> earliest data, a development <strong>from</strong> prototypically durative<br />
to prototypically focalized presupposes that <strong>the</strong> first stages of this development<br />
took place before <strong>the</strong> time of <strong>the</strong> written records. On <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, it is<br />
also possible that <strong>the</strong> English progressive was never a predominantly durative<br />
construction. In any event, <strong>the</strong>re is no doubt that <strong>the</strong> construction has become<br />
much more focalized with time. There has also been a clear increase in <strong>the</strong> use<br />
of <strong>the</strong> frame construction during <strong>the</strong> time span under study. Frame uses are<br />
highly infrequent in Old and Middle English, while <strong>the</strong>y constitute almost eighteen<br />
percent of <strong>the</strong> tokens in <strong>the</strong> Early Modern period. However, such uses are<br />
hardly frequent enough to be referred to as prototypical, at this stage at least.<br />
Thus, if Jespersen is at all right in claiming that <strong>the</strong> frame construction represents<br />
<strong>the</strong> prototypical use of <strong>the</strong> English progressive, this must be a relatively<br />
recent development.<br />
The rise in <strong>the</strong> use of focalized progressives and <strong>the</strong> decrease in <strong>the</strong> use of<br />
durative progressives may be seen as a result of <strong>the</strong> increased grammaticalization<br />
of <strong>the</strong> English progressive as an aspectual, focalizing device. The sharp decrease<br />
in <strong>the</strong> use of <strong>the</strong> progressive in o<strong>the</strong>r functions is of course ano<strong>the</strong>r important<br />
aspect of this process; <strong>the</strong> more <strong>the</strong> progressive was conceived of as an aspectual<br />
device, <strong>the</strong> less likely it was to be used as a non-aspectual device. However, judging<br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> data in Table 1, <strong>the</strong> grammaticalization of <strong>the</strong> English progressive<br />
was not a tidy and linear development. In particular, <strong>the</strong>re is a puzzling fall in <strong>the</strong><br />
use of focalized progressives between Old and Middle English, <strong>from</strong> twenty-eight<br />
to nineteen percent, and <strong>from</strong> 1.7 to 0.3 occurrences per 10,000 words. This decrease<br />
is not due to a rise in <strong>the</strong> use of durative constructions in Middle English;<br />
instead, <strong>the</strong> data show an increase in <strong>the</strong> category ‘o<strong>the</strong>r’. In order to determine<br />
whe<strong>the</strong>r this rise was caused by a specific type of use, which came to be favoured<br />
by Middle English writers, I decided to carry out a more fine-grained analysis of<br />
<strong>the</strong> progressives in this category. Ano<strong>the</strong>r good reason for doing this is <strong>the</strong> fact<br />
that <strong>the</strong> ‘o<strong>the</strong>r/indeterminate’ category is by far <strong>the</strong> largest category in <strong>the</strong> Old and<br />
Middle English data, so a fur<strong>the</strong>r subdivision of <strong>the</strong> relevant progressives seemed<br />
pertinent in order to better understand <strong>the</strong> history of <strong>the</strong> progressive. The result of<br />
<strong>the</strong> analysis is displayed in Table 2.
80 Kristin Killie<br />
Table 2. Functions of <strong>the</strong> progressive in <strong>the</strong> Helsinki Corpus, more fine-grained analysis<br />
Durative Focalized Narrative Stative O<strong>the</strong>r Total<br />
OE 37 (15%) 71 (28%) 53 (21%) 55 (22%) 36 (14%) 252<br />
ME 8 (9%) 17 (19%) 3 (3%) 49 (56%) 11 (13%) 88<br />
EModE 13 (7%) 111 (61%) 4 (2%) 34 (19%) 19 (10%) 181<br />
Total 58 199 60 138 66 521<br />
In Table 2, ‘narrative progressives’ and ‘stative progressives’ are treated as separate<br />
categories, due to <strong>the</strong>ir high frequencies. Less frequent types have been put in <strong>the</strong><br />
‘o<strong>the</strong>r’ category. 10<br />
‘Narrative progressives’ are progressives which occur in dynamic predicates,<br />
but which do not serve to express progressivity or ongoingness. They are bounded,<br />
i.e., view <strong>the</strong> event as a whole. According to Fitzmaurice (1998), such progressives<br />
have a textual function. They serve to mark peaks in a narrative; hence <strong>the</strong> term<br />
‘narrative progressive’. Examples are given in (10) and (11).<br />
(10) þa somninga se min latteow gestod & butan eldenne<br />
<strong>the</strong>n suddenly this my travel-servant stood and without hesitate<br />
wæs eft his gong cerrende: & me eft lædde ðy selfan<br />
was <strong>the</strong>n his path turning and me <strong>the</strong>n led <strong>the</strong> same<br />
wæge, ðe wit ær coman<br />
way that we-two earlier came<br />
“<strong>the</strong>n suddenly my travel-servant stood still and <strong>the</strong>n, without hesitating,<br />
turned around and led me along <strong>the</strong> same road that <strong>the</strong> two of us had come<br />
earlier” (Bede’s Ecclasiastical history; HCO2)<br />
(11) Her cuom micel sciphere on West Walas, & hie<br />
In this year came big ship-army into West-Wales and <strong>the</strong>y<br />
to anum gecierdon & wiþ Ecgbryht West Seaxna cyning<br />
to each turned and with Ecgbryht West Saxon king<br />
winnende wæron<br />
fighting were<br />
“In this year a large (Viking) army arrived in western Wales and <strong>the</strong>y turned<br />
to each and every one and fought with Egbert, <strong>the</strong> West-Saxon king”<br />
(Anglo-Saxon Chronicle; HCO2)<br />
These examples illustrate one interesting aspect of narrative progressives, viz.<br />
<strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong>y often occur within a sequence of verb forms, where <strong>the</strong> neighbouring<br />
verb forms are non-progressive. The function of <strong>the</strong> longer progressive<br />
10. The new ‘o<strong>the</strong>r’ category contains a few habitual progressives (fourteen occurrences),<br />
hyperbolic always progressives (five occurrences), interpretative uses (thirteen examples) and<br />
‘hypo<strong>the</strong>tical’ uses (e.g., Ac ic wolde beon ȝyrnende ȝif hit godes willæ wære ‘But I would yearn/be<br />
yearning if it God’s will were’; sixteen examples), in addition to ambiguous and o<strong>the</strong>rwise<br />
indeterminate uses.
The English progressive 81<br />
form is probably to draw attention to one specific verb phrase, making it stand<br />
out <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> surrounding verb phrases. Such uses may <strong>the</strong>refore be characterized<br />
as emphatic. As shown in Table 2, narrative progressives are quite common in Old<br />
English, while <strong>the</strong>y represent a peripheral phenomenon in more recent periods.<br />
Table 2 shows that <strong>the</strong> increase in <strong>the</strong> category ‘o<strong>the</strong>r’ in Middle English is<br />
due to a rise in <strong>the</strong> proportion of ‘stative progressives’. Stative progressives, as <strong>the</strong>ir<br />
name implies, do not involve dynamic situations at all, but refer to facts or unchanging<br />
relations such as belonging, feelings, eternal truths, habits, etc. Also in this use,<br />
<strong>the</strong> progressive most probably provides emphasis. Examples of stative progressives<br />
are given in (12) and (13).<br />
(12) & ymbutan þone weall is se mæsta dic, on þæm is iernende<br />
and around that wall is <strong>the</strong> greatest ditch in which is running<br />
se ungefoglecesta stream<br />
<strong>the</strong> most enormous river<br />
“and around that wall is <strong>the</strong> greatest ditch, in which <strong>the</strong> most enormous river<br />
runs” (Alfred’s Orosius; HCO2)<br />
(13) Arestotill sais þat þe bees are feghtande agaynes hym þat will<br />
Aristotle says that <strong>the</strong> bees are fighting against him that will<br />
drawe þaire hony fra thaym.<br />
steal <strong>the</strong>ir honey <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong>m<br />
“Aristotle says that bees fight against those who try to steal <strong>the</strong>ir honey <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong>m.”<br />
(The bee and <strong>the</strong> stork; HCM4)<br />
More than half of <strong>the</strong> Middle English progressives in <strong>the</strong> Helsinki Corpus are<br />
of <strong>the</strong> stative type. This fact sets <strong>the</strong> Middle English period off <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r periods.<br />
There is a corresponding difference between <strong>the</strong> verb types or meanings<br />
found in <strong>the</strong> progressive in this subcorpus, and <strong>the</strong> verb types found in <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r<br />
subcorpora, in <strong>the</strong> sense that certain ‘stative meanings’ are particularly well represented<br />
in <strong>the</strong> Middle English subcorpus. In particular, <strong>the</strong> most frequent verbs<br />
are those with meanings such as “live, remain” (viz. wunien, eardien): seventeen<br />
of <strong>the</strong> eighty-eight occurrences, viz. nineteen percent, involve <strong>the</strong>se verbs. 11 The<br />
next most frequent verb is also a highly stative verb, viz. ʓeornen “yearn, desire”.<br />
This verb occurs six times in <strong>the</strong> data, constituting approximately seven percent<br />
of <strong>the</strong> Middle English tokens. Thus, wunien, eardien and ʓeornen alone make up<br />
one fourth of <strong>the</strong> Middle English uses. By comparison, only eight percent (twenty<br />
tokens) of <strong>the</strong> Old English progressives involve “live, remain” verbs, while “yearn”<br />
is not represented at all. Some examples of “yearn, desire” and “live, remain” progressives<br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Middle English corpus are given in (14)–(16).<br />
11. Live is, of course, not infrequent in <strong>the</strong> progressive in Present-day English. However<br />
progressive live does not normally refer to a permanent situation in Present-day English, as it<br />
does in earlier English.
82 Kristin Killie<br />
(14) Ða dyde þe cniht swa moyses him bead þa he hit al isceawæd<br />
<strong>the</strong>n did <strong>the</strong> knight as Moses him bade when he it all seen<br />
hæfde; þa cwæð he þt he nan þare ðingæ ʓyrnende nære<br />
had <strong>the</strong>n said he that he none of-<strong>the</strong> things yearning not-was<br />
ðe he ðær iseah.<br />
that he <strong>the</strong>re saw<br />
“Then, when he had seen it all, <strong>the</strong> knight did as Moses told him to. Then he<br />
said that he did not yearn for any of <strong>the</strong> things that he saw <strong>the</strong>re.”<br />
(History of <strong>the</strong> Holy Rood-Tree; HCM1)<br />
(15) & þider ʓe beoð ibrohte mid muriʓe lofsongum, & þær<br />
and thi<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong>y are brought with merry praise and <strong>the</strong>re<br />
ʓe beoð mid me wuniende on heofene rice<br />
<strong>the</strong>y are with me living in heaven’s kingdom<br />
“and <strong>the</strong>re <strong>the</strong>y are taken with merry praise, and <strong>the</strong>re <strong>the</strong>y will live with me in<br />
heaven’s kingdom” (Bodley homilies; HCM1)<br />
(16) Elmesʓeorn nes heo nefre. ah prud heo wes swiðe and<br />
charitable not-was she never and proud she was very and<br />
modi. and liʓere and swikel. and wreðful and ontful.<br />
moody and deceitful and treacherous and angry and evil<br />
and forði heo bið wuniende inne þisse pine.<br />
and <strong>the</strong>refore she is remaining in this pain<br />
“She was never charitable. She was very proud and moody, and deceitful and<br />
treacherous, and angry and evil. And <strong>the</strong>refore she remains in this pain.”<br />
(Lambeth Homilies; HCM1)<br />
The Old English progressives involve a whole range of verbs. The most frequent<br />
verb meanings are “fight” (feohtan, winnan; twenty-two occurrences); “live, remain”<br />
(wunian, wesan; twenty occurrences), “go, travel” (faran, gan; seventeen<br />
occurrences), and “speak” (sprecan; seventeen occurrences). Three of <strong>the</strong>se are<br />
dynamic meanings. The relevant meanings are poorly represented in <strong>the</strong> Middle<br />
English data: “fight” and “go, travel” occur only two times each, while “speak” is<br />
not represented at all.<br />
It is clear, <strong>the</strong>n, that <strong>the</strong>re are some puzzling differences between <strong>the</strong> Old<br />
English and Middle English subcorpora with regard to both <strong>the</strong> function of <strong>the</strong><br />
progressive and <strong>the</strong> verbs involved. Since <strong>the</strong> Middle English data show a somewhat<br />
unexpected development, I decided to look more closely at <strong>the</strong> distribution<br />
of <strong>the</strong> progressive across <strong>the</strong> various texts. What I found was that certain texts are<br />
overrepresented in <strong>the</strong> data. More specifically, out of <strong>the</strong> eighty-eight Middle English<br />
progressives, eleven are found in The history of <strong>the</strong> holy rood tree, nine in The earliest<br />
complete English prose psalter, and eight in Vices and Virtues. Thus, <strong>the</strong> progressives<br />
in <strong>the</strong>se three texts alone constitute almost a third of <strong>the</strong> Middle English tokens.
The English progressive 83<br />
Such a distribution is, of course, unfortunate if we wish to discover general trends<br />
in <strong>the</strong> use of a construction. As almost all <strong>the</strong> progressives in <strong>the</strong> abovementioned<br />
texts ei<strong>the</strong>r involve a verb meaning “live, remain” or “yearn” (fourteen examples),<br />
or some o<strong>the</strong>r completely stative verb or predicate, it seemed possible that <strong>the</strong> high<br />
incidence of stative progressives could be due to idiosyncratic usage, or in o<strong>the</strong>r<br />
words, that <strong>the</strong> Middle English totals could be skewed by <strong>the</strong>se idiosyncratic uses.<br />
For this reason I decided to study <strong>the</strong> use of <strong>the</strong> progressive in some o<strong>the</strong>r Middle<br />
English texts as well. I studied six additional texts, viz. The English conquest of Ireland;<br />
The buke of John Mandeuill; The Alphabet of Tales; An English Chronicle; The<br />
Lyf of <strong>the</strong> noble and Crysten prynce, Charles <strong>the</strong> Grete; and The right plesaunt and<br />
goodly historie of <strong>the</strong> foure sonnes of Aymon (see References for publication details).<br />
The relevant data are provided in Table 3. (The reason why <strong>the</strong>re is no separate column<br />
for narrative progressives is that <strong>the</strong> category is almost non-existent in <strong>the</strong>se<br />
texts; <strong>the</strong>re are only three examples of such uses, and <strong>the</strong>y have <strong>the</strong>refore been put<br />
into <strong>the</strong> ‘o<strong>the</strong>r’ category.)<br />
Table 3. The use of <strong>the</strong> progressive in six Middle English texts<br />
Durative Focalized Stative O<strong>the</strong>r Total<br />
English Conquest 2 9 2 – 13<br />
Mandeville 1 2 32 2 37<br />
Alphabet – 13 1 3 17<br />
English Chronicle – 3 4 – 7<br />
Lyf Noble – – 3 1 4<br />
Right plesaunt 1 20 1 3 25<br />
Total 4 (4%) 47 (46%) 43 (42%) 9 (9%) 103<br />
Although <strong>the</strong> figures in Table 3 are not large, <strong>the</strong>y never<strong>the</strong>less throw interesting<br />
light on <strong>the</strong> use of <strong>the</strong> progressive in Middle English. Most importantly, <strong>the</strong><br />
data tell us that <strong>the</strong> use of <strong>the</strong> progressive was very variable at this stage, not only<br />
in terms of number, but also in terms of <strong>the</strong> way <strong>the</strong> construction was used. We<br />
have seen that in The history of <strong>the</strong> holy rood tree, The earliest complete English prose<br />
psalter, and Vices and Virtues, <strong>the</strong> progressive was first and foremost used with<br />
stative predicates, probably as an emphatic marker. If we look at Table 3, we find<br />
that <strong>the</strong> same goes for Mandeville’s travels. 12 By contrast, focalized progressives<br />
predominate in The English Conquest of Ireland, The Alphabet of Tales and The<br />
Right Plesaunt and Goodly Historie of <strong>the</strong> Foure Sonnes of Aymon. Such variation<br />
12. Of <strong>the</strong> thirty-seven progressives in this text, be dwelland occurs eighteen times and be<br />
liffand once; hence, half of <strong>the</strong> recorded examples involve “live, remain” verbs.
84 Kristin Killie<br />
is, of course, not unusual when a construction is undergoing grammaticalization,<br />
which <strong>the</strong> progressive was clearly doing in Middle English. The totals for focalized<br />
and stative progressives in Table 3 diverge sharply <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> corresponding Middle<br />
English figures in Table 2, with focalized and stative progressives emerging as equally<br />
frequent in Table 3. The data in Table 3 probably give us a more representative<br />
picture of <strong>the</strong> use of <strong>the</strong> progressive in Middle English. They indicate that <strong>the</strong> progressive<br />
was becoming steadily more focalized between Old and Early Modern<br />
English. By contrast, <strong>the</strong> figures in Table 1 and 2 seem to suggest that this development<br />
was reversed in <strong>the</strong> Middle English period. What all <strong>the</strong> texts in Table 3 have<br />
in common is a low incidence of durative progressives. As we have seen, this is a<br />
feature <strong>the</strong>y share with <strong>the</strong> Middle English texts in <strong>the</strong> Helsinki Corpus.<br />
4.2 The origin of <strong>the</strong> progressive<br />
As we have seen, not only Bertinetto et al., but also a number of o<strong>the</strong>r scholars<br />
believe that <strong>the</strong> English progressive has developed out of a locative construction.<br />
The majority of <strong>the</strong>se scholars identify this locative construction as <strong>the</strong> be on hunting<br />
construction. Bertinetto et al., by contrast, claim that <strong>the</strong> beon/wesan + Vende<br />
periphrasis itself was originally locative. They do not discuss this issue in any detail,<br />
however, and <strong>the</strong> scope of this paper prevents me <strong>from</strong> embarking on such a<br />
discussion. Suffice it to say here that in my view, <strong>the</strong> very varied semantics of <strong>the</strong><br />
progressive in <strong>the</strong> Old English subcorpus indicates that <strong>the</strong> English progressive<br />
does not have a locative origin, or at least its origin could not have been exclusively<br />
locative. As noted by Ziegeler (1999), <strong>the</strong> locative hypo<strong>the</strong>sis presupposes that <strong>the</strong><br />
progressive was first used with activity/agentive verbs only and <strong>the</strong>n later spread to<br />
o<strong>the</strong>r types of contexts, including stative ones. Such a hypo<strong>the</strong>sis <strong>the</strong>refore cannot<br />
explain <strong>the</strong> large number of stative progressives in Old English. If we assume that<br />
locative uses were reanalysed into aspectual progressives, as seems to be <strong>the</strong> standard<br />
assumption, <strong>the</strong> locative hypo<strong>the</strong>sis does not seem to account for <strong>the</strong> large<br />
number of narrative progressives in Old English ei<strong>the</strong>r. The multi-facetedness of<br />
<strong>the</strong> progressive may be at least partly due to <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong> construction represents<br />
a blend of (at least) two sources, viz. <strong>the</strong> subjective/expressive beon/wesan +<br />
Vende, which was a textual or expressive device, and which was only used in writing,<br />
and <strong>the</strong> aspectual be on hunting, which was used in speech (Hübler 1998: 90;<br />
cf. <strong>the</strong> discussion in Smitterberg 2005: 59–60). This hypo<strong>the</strong>sis is compatible with<br />
<strong>the</strong> analysis of <strong>the</strong> progressive proposed by Rydén (1997). According to Rydén, <strong>the</strong><br />
basic meaning of <strong>the</strong> progressive is that of ‘dynamic process’. This meaning has two<br />
‘facets’ – one ‘action-focussed’ and one ‘attitude-focussed’, <strong>the</strong> former corresponding<br />
to <strong>the</strong> actional and aspectual uses of <strong>the</strong> progressive, <strong>the</strong> latter “subsuming<br />
‘evaluation’, ‘interpretation’, ‘tentativeness’, or o<strong>the</strong>r ‘modal’ aspects” (1997: 421).
The English progressive 85<br />
If we assume that <strong>the</strong> ‘attitude-focussed’ uses of <strong>the</strong> progressive go back to <strong>the</strong><br />
beon/wesan + Vende construction, this accords well with <strong>the</strong> fact that narrative<br />
and stative progressives are so well represented in <strong>the</strong> Old English data, i.e., in <strong>the</strong><br />
period when <strong>the</strong> beon/wesan + Vende periphrasis was prevalent.<br />
It may seem, <strong>the</strong>n, that <strong>the</strong> English progressive has not undergone PROG<br />
imperfective drift, at least not on <strong>the</strong> above definition of <strong>the</strong> phenomenon. However,<br />
Bertinetto et al. present an alternative version of PROG imperfective drift as<br />
well. Their secondary hypo<strong>the</strong>sis is expressed in <strong>the</strong>ir discussion of <strong>the</strong> following<br />
well-known sentence <strong>from</strong> Old English:<br />
(18) Sume syndan creopende on eorða mid eallum lichoman, swa swa<br />
some are creeping on <strong>the</strong> earth with all body such as<br />
wurmas doð. Sume gað on twam fotum, sume on feower fotum, sume<br />
worms do some walk on two feet some on four feet some<br />
fleoð mid fyðerum.<br />
fly with wings<br />
“some creep on <strong>the</strong> earth with <strong>the</strong>ir whole body, just as worms do. Some walk<br />
on two feet, some on four feet, some fly with wings”<br />
(Ælfric’s Lives of Saints, I, 11.52–55)<br />
This sentence is given a peculiar treatment by Bertinetto et al. The whole idea<br />
that <strong>the</strong> English progressive was originally locative seems to rest on this very sentence<br />
as it is <strong>the</strong> only example <strong>the</strong>y give <strong>from</strong> Old English. Then later on – in a<br />
footnote! – it is admitted that <strong>the</strong> relevant sentence is in fact a dubious example of<br />
a locative construction and <strong>the</strong>refore throws doubt on <strong>the</strong> hypo<strong>the</strong>sis in Fig. 1. The<br />
relevant passage is given below:<br />
Note, however, that <strong>the</strong> permanent stative (or individual-level) interpretation<br />
of example (25b) [my example 18, KK] presupposes an equative, ra<strong>the</strong>r than<br />
a locative meaning of <strong>the</strong> copula. Thus, <strong>the</strong>re are grounds to believe that <strong>the</strong>re<br />
are in fact two possible sources for progressive periphrases, incorporating an existential-locative<br />
meaning or an existential-equative meaning respectively, with<br />
<strong>the</strong> latter converging with <strong>the</strong> former at some stage.<br />
Ano<strong>the</strong>r hypo<strong>the</strong>sis that one could plausibly put forth is that stage (i) constitutes<br />
an entirely independent evolutionary path. Accordingly, one could suppose<br />
that <strong>the</strong> periphrases of stage (ii) exploited an already existing morphosyntactic<br />
structure, which had become available for a different usage. However, this hypo<strong>the</strong>sis<br />
is weakened by <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong> same development has made its appearance<br />
in two fairly heterogeneous languages, Latin and Old English.<br />
(Bertinetto et al. 2000: 553, note 16)<br />
The last sentence of this paragraph is an odd statement given that <strong>the</strong> reason<br />
why Bertinetto et al. offer an alternative hypo<strong>the</strong>sis in <strong>the</strong> first place is precisely <strong>the</strong><br />
fact that <strong>the</strong>ir original hypo<strong>the</strong>sis did not seem to be borne out by <strong>the</strong> English data.
86 Kristin Killie<br />
It is possible that Bertinetto et al.’s alternative hypo<strong>the</strong>sis about <strong>the</strong> origins of progressive<br />
constructions is closer to <strong>the</strong> truth than is <strong>the</strong>ir primary hypo<strong>the</strong>sis. It may<br />
well be true that many progressives originate as locative constructions, but judging<br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> history of <strong>the</strong> English progressive, this need not be <strong>the</strong> case. Thus, if we<br />
reformulate stage (i) so as to allow of several types of source constructions, assuming<br />
that stage (i) “constitutes an entirely independent evolutionary path”, it is possible<br />
that <strong>the</strong> English progressive has indeed undergone PROG imperfective drift,<br />
provided that <strong>the</strong> predominantly durative stage goes back to a time before written<br />
records. 13 Alternatively, <strong>the</strong> generalization in Fig. 1 may be generally correct, while<br />
<strong>the</strong> English progressive represents an aberrant development.<br />
5. Conclusion<br />
The clearest result of this corpus study is <strong>the</strong> finding that <strong>the</strong> English progressive<br />
has become increasingly focalized: while only twenty-eight percent of <strong>the</strong> Old<br />
English progressives are focalized, sixty-one percent of <strong>the</strong> Early Modern English<br />
progressives are. However, <strong>the</strong> data presented can nei<strong>the</strong>r confirm nor refute <strong>the</strong><br />
claim of Bertinetto et al. (2000) that <strong>the</strong> English progressive has undergone PROG<br />
imperfective drift. We have seen that <strong>the</strong> answer to this question to some extent<br />
depends on our definition of <strong>the</strong> process, i.e., on whe<strong>the</strong>r we presuppose that all<br />
progressives have a locative source, or whe<strong>the</strong>r we allow for multiple origins. It is<br />
doubtful whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> source of <strong>the</strong> progressive is to be found exclusively in a locative<br />
construction; most probably <strong>the</strong>re are several sources.<br />
But it is not only stage (i) in Fig. 1 which is problematic; stages (ii) and (iii)<br />
cannot be traced in <strong>the</strong> data ei<strong>the</strong>r. Durative progressives do not seem to have been<br />
frequent at any point in <strong>the</strong> written history of English. Thus, if <strong>the</strong> English progressive<br />
was ever predominantly durative, this stage must antedate <strong>the</strong> written records.<br />
This is not impossible, of course, and at least <strong>the</strong> figures suggest a decrease in <strong>the</strong><br />
use of durative progressives over time, as we would expect if <strong>the</strong> focalized progressive<br />
is indeed gradually replacing <strong>the</strong> durative progressive, becoming grammaticalized<br />
as <strong>the</strong> prototypical use of <strong>the</strong> English progressive. However, what role <strong>the</strong><br />
durative progressive has played in <strong>the</strong> history of English remains unclear. What<br />
seems clear is that narrative progressives are essentially an Old English phenomenon,<br />
while stative progressives are common in both Old and Middle English. The<br />
increased grammaticalization of <strong>the</strong> focalized progressive involves <strong>the</strong> loss of narrative<br />
progressives and decreased use of durative and stative progressives. It also<br />
involves increased use of <strong>the</strong> frame construction.<br />
13. This hypo<strong>the</strong>sis naturally does not work if one adopts <strong>the</strong> view that <strong>the</strong> beon/wesan + Vende<br />
construction was a literary phenomenon (cf. Dal 1952).
References<br />
Primary sources<br />
The English progressive 87<br />
All periods:<br />
VARIENG (The Research Unit for Variation and Change in English). 1991. The Helsinki corpus<br />
of English texts: diachronic part. Early Modern English section, in: ICAME. Bergen:<br />
Norwegian Computing for <strong>the</strong> Humanities.<br />
Additional Middle English corpus:<br />
Banks, Mary Macleod, ed. 1904, 1905. Alphabet of Tales: An English 15th Century Translation<br />
of <strong>the</strong> Alphabetum Narrationum of Etienne de Besançon, <strong>from</strong> additional MS. Add. 25719<br />
of <strong>the</strong> British Museum. (= EETS, OS 126–127.) London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trübner, &<br />
Co., Ltd.<br />
Davies, John Silvester, ed. 1856. An English chronicle of <strong>the</strong> reigns of Richard II, Henry IV, Henry<br />
V, and Henry VI written before <strong>the</strong> year 1471; with an appendix, containing <strong>the</strong> 18th and<br />
19th years of Richard II and <strong>the</strong> Parliament at Bury St. Edmund’s, 25th Henry VI and supplementary<br />
additions <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Cotton. ms. chronicle called ‘Eulogium’. (= Camden Society, 64.).<br />
London.<br />
Furnivall, Frederick James, ed. 1969. The English Conquest of Ireland: A.D. 1166–1185: Mainly<br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Expugnatio Hibernica of Giraldus Cambrensis: Part I, <strong>the</strong> Text. (= EETS, OS 107.)<br />
New York: Greenwood Press.<br />
Herrtage, Sidney J.H., ed. 1880–1881. Lyf of <strong>the</strong> noble and Crysten prynce, Charles <strong>the</strong> Grete,<br />
Translated <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> French by William Caxton. (= EETS, OS 36–37.) London, New<br />
York, Toronto: Oxford University Press, 1880–1881.<br />
Richardson, Octavia, ed. 1884. The right plesaunt and goodly historie of <strong>the</strong> foure sonnes of<br />
Aymon. Englisht <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> French by William Caxton, and printed by him about 1489. Ed.<br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> unique copy, now in <strong>the</strong> possession of Earl Spencer, with an introduction by Octavia<br />
Richardson. (= EETS, ES 45.) London: Trübner.<br />
Warner, George F., Sir, ed. 1889. The buke of John Mandeuill, being <strong>the</strong> travels of Sir John<br />
Mandeville, knight, 1322–1356: a hi<strong>the</strong>rto unpublished English version <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> unique<br />
copy (Egerton ms. 1982) in <strong>the</strong> British Museum. (= Roxburghe Club, 119.) Westminster:<br />
Nichols & Sons.<br />
All <strong>the</strong> texts in <strong>the</strong> additional Middle English corpus are available at <strong>the</strong> University of<br />
Michigan’s Humanities Text Initiative (HTI). Corpus of Middle English Prose and Verse. http://<br />
www.hti.umich.edu/<br />
Secondary sources<br />
Bertinetto, Pier Marco. 2000. The Progressive in Romance, as Compared with English. Dahl<br />
2000: 559–604.<br />
Bertinetto, Pier Marco, Karen H. Ebert & Casper de Groot. 2000. The Progressive in Europe.<br />
Dahl 2000: 517–558.<br />
Braaten, Bjørn. 1967. Notes on continuous tenses in English. Norsk Tidsskrift for Sprogvidenskap<br />
21: 167–180.<br />
Bybee, Joan, Revere Perkins & William Pagliuca. 1994. The Evolution of Grammar: Tense, Aspect,<br />
and Modality in <strong>the</strong> Languages of <strong>the</strong> World. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
88 Kristin Killie<br />
Comrie, Bernard. 1976. Aspect. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br />
Dahl, Östen, ed. 2000. Tense and Aspect in <strong>the</strong> Languages of Europe. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.<br />
Dal, Ingerid. 1952. Zur Entstehung des Englischen Participium Praesentis auf Hing. Norsk<br />
Tidsskrift for Sprogvidenskap 16: 5–116.<br />
Denison, David. 1993. English Historical Syntax: Verbal Constructions. London: Longman.<br />
De Groot, Casper. 2007. The King is on Huntunge: On <strong>the</strong> Relation between Progressive and Absentive<br />
in Old and Early Modern English. Structural-functional studies in English Grammr:<br />
In Honour of Lachlan Mackenzie ed. by Mike Hannay & Gerard J. Steen, 175–190. Amsterdam<br />
& Philadelphia: John Benjamins.<br />
Elsness, Johan. 1994. On <strong>the</strong> progression of <strong>the</strong> progressive in Early Modern English. ICAME<br />
Journal 18: 5–25.<br />
Fitzmaurice, Susan. 1998. Grammaticalisation, Textuality and Subjectivity: <strong>the</strong> Progressive and<br />
<strong>the</strong> Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. The Virtues of Language: History in Language, Linguistics and<br />
Texts. <strong>Papers</strong> in Memory of Thomas Frank ed. by Dieter Stein & Rosanna Sornicola, 21–49.<br />
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.<br />
Freckmann, Norbert. 1995. The Progressive and Adverbial Collocations: Corpus Evidence. Anglistentag<br />
1994 Graz: Proceedings ed. by Wolfgang Riehle & Hugo Keiper, 255–267. Tübingen:<br />
Max Niemeyer.<br />
Heine, Bernd. 2003. Grammaticalization. The Handbook of Historical Linguistics ed. by Brian D.<br />
Joseph & Richard D. Janda, 575–601. Oxford: Blackwell.<br />
Heine, Bernd, Ulrike Claudi & Friederike Hünnemeyer. 1991. Grammaticalization: a Conceptual<br />
Framework. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.<br />
Hübler, Alex. 1998. The Expressivity of Grammar: Grammatical Devices Expressing Emotion<br />
across Time. Berlin: Mouton.<br />
Jespersen, Otto. 1909–1949. A Grammar of English on Historical Principles. Vol. 4: syntax 3:<br />
Time and tense. London: George Allen.<br />
Jespersen, Otto. 1924. The Philosophy of Grammar. London: Allen & Unwin.<br />
Johanson, Lars. 2000. Viewpoint Operators in European Languages. Dahl 2000: 27–187.<br />
Núñez-Pertejo, Paloma. 2004. The Progressive in <strong>the</strong> History of English: with Special Reference to<br />
<strong>the</strong> Early Modern English Period: a Corpus-based Study. München: Lincom.<br />
Poppe, Erich. 2003. Progress on <strong>the</strong> progressive? A report. The Celtic Englishes III ed. by<br />
Hildegard L.C. Tristram, 65–84. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag Winter.<br />
Rydén, Mats. 1997. On <strong>the</strong> Panchronic Meaning of <strong>the</strong> English Progressive. To Explain <strong>the</strong> Present:<br />
Studies in <strong>the</strong> Changing English Language in Honour of Matti Rissanen ed. by Terttu<br />
Nevalainen & Leena Kahlas-Tarkka, 419–29. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.<br />
Smitterberg, Erik. 2005. The Progressive in 19th-century English. A Process of Integration.<br />
Amsterdam: Rodopi.<br />
Torres Cacoullos, Rena. 2000. Grammaticalization, Synchronic Variation, and Language Contact:<br />
a Study of Spanish Progressive –ndo Constructions. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.<br />
Ziegeler, Debra. 1999. Agentivity and <strong>the</strong> history of <strong>the</strong> English progressive. Transactions of <strong>the</strong><br />
Philological Society 97: 51–101.
Gender assignment in Old English<br />
Letizia Vezzosi<br />
University of Perugia<br />
Old English has a three-gender formal assignment system, <strong>the</strong>re are more<br />
than scanty instances where <strong>the</strong> same noun shows more than one gender.<br />
The phenomenon has been so far generally neglected both in textbooks and<br />
linguistic literature. In <strong>the</strong> present paper, <strong>the</strong> author classifies <strong>the</strong> Old English<br />
data, selected through a corpus analysis of electronic corpora and complete<br />
literary works on <strong>the</strong> base of a comparison with relevant data <strong>from</strong> typological<br />
investigations and historical linguistic studies, and shows that Old English<br />
gender variance depends on semantic and pragmatic factors that interfere with<br />
grammatical gender assignment, a linguistic fact that is cross-linguistically<br />
common. More precisely, besides <strong>the</strong> cross-linguistically frequent semantic traits<br />
such as [± animate] [± human], gender assignment in Old English seems to be<br />
sensitive to semantic roles. This parameter does not conflict with <strong>the</strong> previous<br />
semantic ones, since all of <strong>the</strong>m can be derived <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> more general feature<br />
[± individuated].<br />
1. Introduction<br />
Old English is undisputedly said to have a grammatical gender, i.e., it resorts to<br />
a formal gender assignment system according to Corbett’s (1991) definition of<br />
linguistic gender: formal – namely morphological – rules determine whe<strong>the</strong>r a<br />
noun is feminine, masculine or neuter regardless of its meaning.<br />
This system is not fully consistent, and shows a significant number of exceptions,<br />
where nouns appear to have more than one gender or a different gender <strong>from</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong>ir grammatical one. At <strong>the</strong> letter A in Clark’s Old English Dictionary 29 out of 72<br />
nouns have more than one gender. This phenomenon was noticed at <strong>the</strong> end of <strong>the</strong><br />
19th century (cf. Fleischhacker 1889), although nei<strong>the</strong>r of <strong>the</strong> standard grammars<br />
1. I would like to thank Prof. Koenig, Prof. Rosenbach and two anonimous reviewers for <strong>the</strong>ir<br />
helpful comments. Any remaining inadequacies or mistakes are of course my own.
90 Letizia Vezzosi<br />
(Campbell 1959; & Brunner 1962) hints to it, 2 but has so far received little if any<br />
attention. At most it has been considered as ei<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> outcome of language contact<br />
interference (Latin influence) or scribal error (Fisiak 1975; Mitchell 1985 & Wełna<br />
1978; etc.).<br />
The topic of <strong>the</strong> present chapter is exactly those gender assignment deviations<br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> formal system, with <strong>the</strong> exception of borrowings, loanwords and words<br />
formed on a Latin pattern. We intend to investigate whe<strong>the</strong>r it is a random phenomenon,<br />
due to scribal misunderstanding or error, or whe<strong>the</strong>r it shows some<br />
kind of consistency on <strong>the</strong> basis of which one can figure out rules that can account<br />
for gender assignment aberrations.<br />
To do so, Old English textual data, ga<strong>the</strong>red <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Anglo-Saxon Dictionary by<br />
Bosworth and Toller (1898), <strong>the</strong> Toronto on-line Old English Dictionary and <strong>the</strong> Helsinki<br />
Corpus, will be compared with relevant data <strong>from</strong> typological investigations<br />
and historical linguistic or Indo-European studies, and consequently classified according<br />
to <strong>the</strong> type of gender assignment <strong>the</strong>y take. This approach will prove to be<br />
a valuable tool for identifying coherence in gender inconsistency. Indeed, it clearly<br />
reveals that gender variance is not arbitrary, but depends on various semantic and<br />
pragmatic factors that may interfere with <strong>the</strong> Old English grammatical gender assignment<br />
system, i.e., <strong>the</strong> Old English noun classification. More precisely, besides<br />
semantic traits such as [± animate] [± human], fur<strong>the</strong>r semantic differentiations,<br />
significant <strong>from</strong> an anthropological or cultural point of view, such as [± containing]<br />
[± power], are related to gender variability. Whereas semantic features such as<br />
[± animate] or [± power] play roles in gender assignment systems in <strong>the</strong> languages<br />
of <strong>the</strong> world, gender assignment in Old English seems to be sensitive to ano<strong>the</strong>r<br />
unexpected feature, namely semantic roles: more precisely, masculine and feminine<br />
genders are preferred when <strong>the</strong> noun plays <strong>the</strong> role of an agent, whereas neuter<br />
gender is selected for <strong>the</strong> patient. This parameter like <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r semantic features<br />
interfering with <strong>the</strong> Old English grammatical gender assignment will be shown to<br />
derive <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> same and more general principle [± individuated]. Interestingly<br />
enough, this is <strong>the</strong> same macro-factor which is nowadays responsible for gender<br />
variation in spoken English varieties and dialects.<br />
1.1 Gender definition<br />
Before starting <strong>the</strong> core discussion, it may be worth recalling what we mean by<br />
<strong>the</strong> term ‘gender’. It is certain that gender is a category of any nominal system in <strong>the</strong><br />
. Campbell (1959 § 569 and refs) and Brunner (1962 § 236Anm) do not ignore <strong>the</strong><br />
phenomenon, but mention it only in relation to late confusion in inflections which in turn<br />
contributed to it.
Gender assignment in Old English 91<br />
languages of <strong>the</strong> world 3 ; less certain is how to define what it is. Since Hockett proposed<br />
to define genders as “classes of nouns reflected in <strong>the</strong> behaviour of associated<br />
words” (Hockett 1958: 231), gender has been associated with noun classification and<br />
with agreement in view of <strong>the</strong> fact that gender only exists if grammatical forms with<br />
variable gender (e.g., adjectives, pronouns, numerals and so on) regularly adopt<br />
forms to agree with grammatical forms of invariable gender, usually nouns (Fodor<br />
1959: 2). If <strong>the</strong> determining criterion of linguistic gender is agreement, <strong>the</strong>n saying<br />
that a language has three genders implies that <strong>the</strong>re are three classes of nouns which<br />
are syntactically distinguished by <strong>the</strong> agreements <strong>the</strong>y take.<br />
The way in which nouns are allotted to different genders is an intriguing question.<br />
If agreement can be used as a test to establish <strong>the</strong> gender of a given noun,<br />
native speakers must know <strong>the</strong> gender of nouns to produce correct sentences.<br />
According to Corbett (1991: 7), gender assignment depends on two basic types<br />
of information about <strong>the</strong> noun: its form and its meaning and accordingly formal<br />
and semantic gender assignment systems can be distinguished.<br />
Semantic systems are those systems where semantic factors 5 are sufficient on<br />
<strong>the</strong>ir own to account for <strong>the</strong> assignment. In semantic terms, nouns can be divided<br />
into those denoting animates and those denoting inanimates; <strong>the</strong> animates can<br />
be subdivided into those which are sex-differentiable and those which are not,<br />
<strong>the</strong> former in turn being subdivided into male and female. A case in point is <strong>the</strong><br />
Present Day English gender system, where words like woman or girl or cow are<br />
feminine only for <strong>the</strong> reason that <strong>the</strong>y refer to biologically female entities, man<br />
or boy or bull are masculine since <strong>the</strong>ir referents are male, and book, table, kitten<br />
and so on are neuter, because ei<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong>y name inanimate entities, and <strong>the</strong>refore<br />
biologically nei<strong>the</strong>r female nor male, or <strong>the</strong>ir sexuality is irrelevant.<br />
. In some languages gender markers are also present in verbal forms, e.g., <strong>the</strong> Bantu form<br />
a-likuja ‘came’ has <strong>the</strong> marker a- which marks gender 1/2 singular, in Arabic <strong>the</strong>re are feminine vs.<br />
masculine agreement forms in <strong>the</strong> verb, in a way similar to Italian: è andato/a ‘he/she has gone’.<br />
. Corbett (1991: 33) claims that “<strong>the</strong>re are no syntactic systems”. By ‘syntactic systems’ he<br />
means types of gender assignment rules which determine <strong>the</strong> gender of a noun on exclusively<br />
syntactic criteria, such as “nouns which take prepositional complements are neuter” (Corbett<br />
1991: 33), according to which a noun is neuter only if it governs prepositions, but it is not neuter<br />
in all <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r syntactic environments. But we will show later that syntax can play a role in<br />
gender assignment, at least in <strong>the</strong> old stages of Indo-European languages.<br />
. In non-strict semantic systems, besides <strong>the</strong> core semantic distinctions [± human] and<br />
[± animate], o<strong>the</strong>r concept associations may be responsible for noun classification (see also<br />
Lakoff 1987): [± harmful], [± power] [± concrete] etc. (Corbett 1991: 16–32). Given that similar<br />
distinctions are found in languages of totally unrelated families, classifications of gender semantic<br />
systems since <strong>the</strong> 19th century have been proposed according to <strong>the</strong> patterns of distinctions<br />
involved (see de la Grasserie 1989: 61 –15).
9 Letizia Vezzosi<br />
In a sense, all gender systems are semantic in that <strong>the</strong>re is a semantic core even<br />
in formal gender assignment systems 6 (Aksenov 198 : 17–18); for example, in Old<br />
Germanic languages, nouns with animate and more constantly human referents<br />
very rarely conflict with <strong>the</strong>ir formal gender. Never<strong>the</strong>less, in formal systems,<br />
irrespective of any semantic-biased considerations, <strong>the</strong> rules for gender assignment<br />
primarily depend on <strong>the</strong> form of nouns ra<strong>the</strong>r than <strong>the</strong>ir meaning. In those<br />
systems, information for gender assignment may in turn be word-structure, comprising<br />
derivation and inflection (morphology) and sound-structure (phonology).<br />
Qatar (i.e., an East Cushitic language) is a language where gender assignment<br />
depends on phonological criteria, since nouns that end in an accented vowel are<br />
feminine (e.g., baxà ‘daughter’, catò ‘help’) whereas all <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>rs are masculine<br />
(e.g., bàxa ‘son’, baànta ‘trumpet’); Russian can be an example of morphological<br />
gender systems, since <strong>the</strong> gender of a noun can be predicted on <strong>the</strong> basis of<br />
its declensional type: e.g., nouns of declensional type I are masculine, nouns of<br />
declensional types II and III are feminine and all <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>rs are neuter (Corbett<br />
1991: 36). In German derivation suffixes determine <strong>the</strong> gender of a noun: e.g.,<br />
nouns ending with -heit, -keit, -ung, -schaft, -erei, are feminine, diminutives in<br />
-lein, -chen are neuter as well as collectives with ge-prefix and -e suffix, and derivatives<br />
with -ismus are masculine. Here <strong>the</strong> gender is clear <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> noun itself and<br />
not only <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> agreeing forms: this phenomenon is known as overt gender.<br />
Since <strong>the</strong> relationship with <strong>the</strong> meaning of <strong>the</strong> word is accessory, in such systems<br />
<strong>the</strong>re is a sort of arbitrariness in gender assignment and possible incompatibility<br />
between sex and gender: noun x is feminine because it takes agreement y; in order<br />
to produce agreement y correctly <strong>the</strong> native speaker must simply know that noun<br />
x is feminine.<br />
Gender is defined as a grammatical category proper to nominal systems. 7<br />
However, as a grammatical category it has a special status. With regard to o<strong>the</strong>r<br />
grammatical categories, such as tense and mood in verbal systems or number and<br />
case in nominal systems, <strong>the</strong>re is always an alternative choice inasmuch as a verb<br />
can be ei<strong>the</strong>r present or past, ei<strong>the</strong>r indicative or subjunctive, and a noun can be<br />
ei<strong>the</strong>r singular or plural in <strong>the</strong> nominative ra<strong>the</strong>r than genitive case, and so on.<br />
. For a system to be exclusively formal, <strong>the</strong>re would also be no correlation between semantics<br />
and <strong>the</strong> genders established in this way: “<strong>the</strong> distribution of <strong>the</strong> nouns across <strong>the</strong> genders would<br />
be completely random as far as <strong>the</strong>ir meaning was concerned. Such a system is not found in any<br />
natural language” (Corbett 1991: 63).<br />
. Starting <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> assumption that <strong>the</strong> agreement evidence is what counts as far as gender<br />
is concerned, <strong>the</strong>re is <strong>the</strong> need to distinguish <strong>the</strong> sets in which nouns are divided (controller<br />
genders) <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> agreement forms found (target genders).
Gender assignment in Old English 9<br />
On <strong>the</strong> contrary, nominal gender allows no choice: as a rule, <strong>the</strong> gender of a noun<br />
cannot possibly be equally masculine or feminine or neuter.<br />
Moreover, not only is gender visible through agreement, but also <strong>the</strong> function<br />
of gender itself seems to be reduced to agreement, unlike <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r nominal<br />
categories which, while showing agreement, are not reduced to it.<br />
. Gender in Old English<br />
In Old English grammars and textbooks it is commonly stated that Old English<br />
has a formal system of gender assignment, like <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r Old Germanic languages.<br />
Specifically <strong>the</strong>re are three grammatical genders, i.e., feminine, masculine and<br />
neuter, whose assignment is claimed to be at most semantically unmotivated.<br />
Thus, different words referring to <strong>the</strong> same object can have different genders, as<br />
shown in <strong>the</strong> Old English pair ecg (f.) sweord (m.) for ‘sword’; <strong>the</strong> nouns wifman or<br />
wif (both for ‘woman’) are masculine and neuter respectively.<br />
As in Modern German, <strong>the</strong> Old English formal system is based not on <strong>the</strong><br />
sound-form of <strong>the</strong> noun, but on its morphological structure. In o<strong>the</strong>r words, <strong>the</strong><br />
gender of a noun is dependent on <strong>the</strong> presence of derivational suffixes or on <strong>the</strong><br />
declensional type. Thus, suffixes such as -lac or -et mark neuter gender (e.g., boclac<br />
‘decree’, þeowet ‘slavery’), -ð/ðu(*-iþō), -ung, *-īn, * -jō, -nes, -estre and -wist<br />
belong to <strong>the</strong> feminine gender (e.g., mægðmaiden’, hræglung ‘clothing’, strengu<br />
‘strength’, þiefþu ‘<strong>the</strong>ft’, clænes ‘purity’, lærestre ‘teacher’, huswist ‘household’), and<br />
-aþ/-oð, -dom, -end, -els, -ere, -had, -scipe masculine (e.g., fiscoþ ‘fishing’, cynedom<br />
‘reign’, hælend ‘Saviour’, cnyttels ‘sinew’, leornere ‘disciple’, cildhad ‘childhood’, burgscipe<br />
‘township’). Analogously, some <strong>the</strong>matic classes determine <strong>the</strong> gender of <strong>the</strong><br />
nouns following <strong>the</strong>ir inflectional patterns: e.g., strong declension in -o- or in -a- 8<br />
only comprise nouns of masculine/neuter and feminine nouns respectively (e.g.,<br />
stan-stanes pl. stanas ‘stone’ or wif-wifes pl. wifu as an -a-stem noun vs. giefu-giefe pl.<br />
giefa-e ‘gift’ an -o-stem noun).<br />
In Old English, gender is a covert and selectional parameter, to use Whorf ’s<br />
terminology (19 5: 3ff.), since it has no overt exponent, but becomes visible only<br />
by selecting a specific exponent for case and number both inside and outside <strong>the</strong><br />
NP. In <strong>the</strong> following examples <strong>the</strong> predicative strongly inflected adjective tilu, <strong>the</strong><br />
attributive weakly inflected brade and <strong>the</strong> deteminer seo appear in <strong>the</strong>ir feminine<br />
. It should be recalled that <strong>the</strong> gender of most Old English nouns is not predictable <strong>from</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong>ir morphology: e.g., a strong noun-ending with a consonant in <strong>the</strong> nominative singular could<br />
belong to any of <strong>the</strong> three genders.
9 Letizia Vezzosi<br />
form to agree with <strong>the</strong> singular number, <strong>the</strong> nominative case and <strong>the</strong> feminine<br />
gender of <strong>the</strong> noun lind, although <strong>the</strong> referent of lind is inanimate; for similar<br />
reasons, wimman (m.) selects <strong>the</strong> masculine form of <strong>the</strong> determiner se.<br />
(1) a. Seo brade lind wæs tilu and ic hire lufode.<br />
“That broad shield was good and I loved it.”<br />
b. [Ch 1 7] Þurwif hatte se wimman… . Þa tymde Wulfstan hine to<br />
Æþelstane æt Sunnanbyrig.<br />
“The woman’s name was Th… . Then W. called her [as witness]<br />
for Æ<strong>the</strong>lstan at S.”<br />
c. [ÆCHom ii.66.22] Babilonia … is gereht ‘gescyndnys’. Seo getacnað helle.<br />
“Babilonia is described as ‘shame’. It denotes hell.”<br />
As is clear in (1a–c), gender is also made explicit in terms of gender-specific pronominal<br />
reference by personal pronouns: hire is feminine because it refers to lind<br />
which is feminine, hine is masculine because wimman is grammatically masculine,<br />
although semantically referring to a female being, and <strong>the</strong> demonstrative seo is<br />
feminine because Babilonia is a burg ‘town’ which is feminine.<br />
As undeniable as <strong>the</strong> grammatical nature of <strong>the</strong> gender system in Old English<br />
might be, <strong>the</strong>re are more than random instances of ‘unexpected’, ‘ungrammatical’<br />
gender assignment as well as nouns of unstable gender (Matasović 200 ). This<br />
phenomenon was noticed a long time ago, but for Old English it has so far been<br />
analysed mainly in relation to borrowings (Wełna 1978) and Latin calques, 9 where<br />
one can claim that <strong>the</strong> uncertainty in gender assignment can be ascribed ei<strong>the</strong>r to<br />
clashes between <strong>the</strong> source language and <strong>the</strong> target language or to such processes<br />
as semantic analogy 10 and concept associations (Fleishhacker 1889).<br />
Gender fluctuation is not limited to <strong>the</strong>se cases, but also concerns words of<br />
Germanic origin, completely unrelated to any foreign language influence. There<br />
are three types of gender deviance <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> norm: (a) some words show gender<br />
variability outside and inside <strong>the</strong> NP (i.e., determiner, adjective, participles,<br />
relative and personal pronouns) inasmuch as <strong>the</strong>y may agree with <strong>the</strong> natural<br />
gender of <strong>the</strong> referent, in contrast with <strong>the</strong>ir grammatical gender; (b) related<br />
words with morphological differentiation and accordingly different gender may<br />
express difference in perspective of <strong>the</strong>ir semantic content; and (c) more than<br />
one gender is assigned to <strong>the</strong> same word, apparently without any motivation or<br />
consequence.<br />
9. In <strong>the</strong> present paper borrowings and Latin-based calques are objects of analysis. See also<br />
Wełna (1978) who considers <strong>the</strong> conflicting factors involved in <strong>the</strong> assignment of some fifty<br />
loanwords <strong>from</strong> Latin and Old Icelandic into Old English, or Fisiak (1975).<br />
10. Semantic analogy concerns <strong>the</strong> loanword taking <strong>the</strong> gender of a noun of similar meaning<br />
already in <strong>the</strong> language.
.1 First type of gender deviance: nature over grammar<br />
Gender assignment in Old English 9<br />
The (a) type of deviance concerns <strong>the</strong> predominance of <strong>the</strong> natural gender of <strong>the</strong><br />
referent over grammatical gender. This phenomenon can take place both within<br />
<strong>the</strong> NP, where variable gender words such as determiners and adjectives agree<br />
with <strong>the</strong> natural gender of <strong>the</strong> referent of <strong>the</strong> head noun – e.g., (2a–b) – and outside<br />
<strong>the</strong> NP, where <strong>the</strong> choice of <strong>the</strong> pronominal elements depends on <strong>the</strong> meaning<br />
of <strong>the</strong> antecedent both in <strong>the</strong> case of anaphoric reference – e.g., (3a–b) – and relative<br />
pronoun – e.g., (3c). This happens quite frequently when grammatical gender<br />
and semantic gender conflict. Consequently it is not surprising that such deviance<br />
mainly concerns words with animate and human referents, and less frequently<br />
nouns referring to inanimate entities.<br />
(2) a. [Judg .21] seo (f.) wifman (m)<br />
“<strong>the</strong> woman”<br />
b. [Cd. 32 Gen. 691] He hogode on ðæt (n.) micle morþ (m.) me forweorpan,<br />
forlætan and forlædan.<br />
“He (<strong>the</strong> devil) intended to throw me in <strong>the</strong> great death, to abandon<br />
and seduce”<br />
(3) a. [ÆCHom i.1 .21] geworhte of ðam ribbe ænne (m.acc.) wifman (m.) and<br />
axode Adam hu heo (f.) hatan sceolde<br />
“[he] created <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> rib a woman and asked Adam how to call her”<br />
b. [ÆCHom i. 20.31] Wyrc þe nu ænne arc … gehref hit eall<br />
“Prepare now an arc … roof it all”<br />
c. [ÆCHom I.2 .22.] to anum mædene (n.) … seo (f.) wæs Maria gehaten<br />
“to one virgin … whose name was Maria”<br />
As for anaphoric reference, <strong>the</strong> frequency of semantic gender assignment is<br />
directly proportional to <strong>the</strong> distance between <strong>the</strong> antecedent and <strong>the</strong> pronominal<br />
element: in ( a) wisdom is modified by an accusative masculine determiner and in<br />
its immediate sentence it is referred to by means of hiene, i.e., accusative masculine<br />
pronoun, as one would expect since it is a masculine singular; in <strong>the</strong> following<br />
sentence, where <strong>the</strong> personal pronoun is quite separated <strong>from</strong> its antecedent, <strong>the</strong><br />
word wisdom is referred to by means of hit, namely a pronoun that agrees with<br />
<strong>the</strong> natural gender of <strong>the</strong> referent [– animate]; in ( b), whereas inside <strong>the</strong> NP <strong>the</strong><br />
determiner agrees with <strong>the</strong> grammatical gender of its head, <strong>the</strong> referring pronoun<br />
agrees with <strong>the</strong> natural gender of <strong>the</strong> referent of wif.<br />
( ) a. [CP 3.2 ] þæt ðu þone wisdom ðe ðe God sealde ðær ðær ðu hiene<br />
befæstan mæge befæste. Geðenc hwelc witu us ða becomon for ðisse worulde,<br />
ða ða we hit nohwæðer ne selfe ne lufodon ne eac oþrum monnum ne lefdon …<br />
“that wisdom which God gave to you where you may implant it <strong>the</strong>re<br />
implant it. Think what punishment would come to us for this world if we<br />
did not love it nor allowed o<strong>the</strong>rs to do so”
9 Letizia Vezzosi<br />
b. [Genesis 2382–2383] þa þæt wif ahloh wereda drihtnes nalles glædlice,<br />
ac heo gearum frod<br />
“<strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> woman laughed at <strong>the</strong> lord of hosts, by no means kindly, for<br />
she, [was] advanced in years”<br />
In all those cases <strong>the</strong>re is a conflict between ‘semantic’ agreement and ‘syntactic’<br />
agreement: a linguistic fact cross-linguistically quite frequent in formal gender<br />
assignment systems, when <strong>the</strong> grammatical gender and <strong>the</strong> meaning of <strong>the</strong> noun<br />
clash. Especially in <strong>the</strong> case of pronominal gender, Moravcsik (1978) had already<br />
noticed that in noun phrase external agreement (e.g., agreement between<br />
nouns and verbs or anaphoric pronouns) grammatical gender agreement is often<br />
optional. 11 In his typological studies, by handling many instances of gender<br />
divergence and fluctuation between semantic and syntactic agreement, Corbett<br />
individuates four types of agreement targets, arranges <strong>the</strong>m into a hierarchy<br />
of agreement (5), and formulates constraints about <strong>the</strong> possible agreement<br />
patterns, as in (6a–c).<br />
(5) Agreement hierarchy (Corbett 1991: 20 )<br />
Attributive > Predicative > Relative Pronoun > Personal Pronoun<br />
(6) a. As we move rightwards along <strong>the</strong> hierarchy, <strong>the</strong> likelihood of semantic<br />
agreement will increase monotonically (that is with no intervening<br />
decrease). (Corbett 1991: 20 )<br />
b. If parallel targets show different agreement forms, <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> fur<strong>the</strong>r target<br />
will show semantic agreement. (Corbett 1991: 235)<br />
c. For any particular target type, <strong>the</strong> fur<strong>the</strong>r it is removed <strong>from</strong> its controller,<br />
<strong>the</strong> greater <strong>the</strong> likelihood of semantic agreement. (Corbett 1991: 235)<br />
These are also <strong>the</strong> agreement targets present in Old English and <strong>the</strong> discrepancies<br />
noted above are explicable in terms of Corbett’s maxims (6a–c). In a typological<br />
perspective, <strong>the</strong>n, Old English does not differ <strong>from</strong> many o<strong>the</strong>r languages<br />
with formal gender systems, at least with regard to this kind of gender fluctuation.<br />
When grammatical gender is not as expected, it is only because <strong>the</strong> referential<br />
gender of <strong>the</strong> noun overrides <strong>the</strong> lexical gender (Dahl 2000: 105–106). Like o<strong>the</strong>r<br />
languages in <strong>the</strong> world, this also happens in Old English when <strong>the</strong> morphology of<br />
<strong>the</strong> noun does not match its semantic content, and accordingly <strong>the</strong> gender of <strong>the</strong><br />
variable gender words may be determined by <strong>the</strong> gender of <strong>the</strong> conceptualised<br />
referent.<br />
11. Moravcsik (1978) distinguishes noun-phrase external agreement <strong>from</strong> noun phrase internal<br />
agreement (i.e., inflection of nouns, relative pronouns, adjectives, demonstratives, possessives,<br />
articles and numerals) where grammatical gender agreement is obligatory.
. Second type of gender deviance: semantic perspective<br />
Gender assignment in Old English 9<br />
Effective as it might appear, <strong>the</strong> predominance of referential gender over lexical<br />
gender cannot account for <strong>the</strong> second type of gender deviance in Old English,<br />
where <strong>the</strong> same lexemes or groups of etymologically and formally related words<br />
show different genders completely unrelated to <strong>the</strong> natural gender of <strong>the</strong>ir referents.<br />
Although less frequent, this phenomenon is intriguing, especially because it<br />
is found in Proto-Indo-European and all <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r Old Germanic languages.<br />
This type of gender variation concerns cases such as <strong>the</strong> triad lig (m.) – liget<br />
(n.) – ligetu (f.) or <strong>the</strong> pair list (f.) – list (m.), where <strong>the</strong>re seems to be no semantic<br />
difference in correspondence to gender fluctuation. Looking directly at <strong>the</strong>ir textual<br />
occurrences, however, it is possible to discern a slight, but consistent variation<br />
in meaning. Substantially, although, for instance, lig (m.) – liget (n.) – ligetu (f.) are<br />
all related to <strong>the</strong> idea of ‘fire’, not all of <strong>the</strong>m express ‘fire’: lig (m.) appears to refer to<br />
‘flame’, whereas liget (n.) specifically means ‘fire’ and ligetu (f.) denotes ‘lightening’.<br />
Similar differentiation of meanings turns up in pairs like tungol (n.) – tungol (m.),<br />
where <strong>the</strong> noun, if masculine, denominates <strong>the</strong> single items, i.e., ‘star, planet’, that<br />
constitute <strong>the</strong> entity, i.e., ‘constellation, firmament’, referred to by <strong>the</strong> same noun<br />
but in neuter gender. The alternation may involve both animate genders: for example,<br />
leod (f.) ‘people, nation’ – leod (m.) ‘man’, mircels (f.) ‘seal’ – mircels (m.) ‘mark’,<br />
list (f.) ‘cleverness, art’ – list (m.) ‘skill’, or traht (f.) ‘exposition, treatise’ – traht (m.)<br />
‘passage’. Here, again, <strong>the</strong> masculine gender turns out to express a single example of<br />
<strong>the</strong> general concept, whereas <strong>the</strong> feminine expresses a collective view. 12<br />
This linguistic fact is observable in o<strong>the</strong>r Old Germanic languages: in Old Norse<br />
(Gordon 1988) grunnr (m.) means ‘ground or sea floor, bottom’ whereas grunn (n.)<br />
indicates ‘shallows’ and grund (f.) a ‘grassy area, ground’; in Old High German<br />
(Leiss 2003) luft may have different meanings, namely luft (f.) ‘sky’, luft (m.) ‘gentle<br />
breeze’ and luft (n.) ‘air’ or felis (m.) ‘piece of rock’ and felisa (f.) ‘rock as substance’.<br />
Such correspondence between different genders and different meanings was<br />
not unknown in <strong>the</strong> old stages of Indo-European languages: it was already noticed<br />
by Schmidt (1889) and Brugmann (1889) who related it to <strong>the</strong> origin of grammatical<br />
gender in Indo-European. In this line of arguing, Delbrück (1893: 117) claimed<br />
that “Die häufige Doppelgeschlechtigkeit dürfte sich darus erklären, dass in der<br />
Urzeit der Prozess der Nachahmung noch nicht derart abgeschlossen war, dass<br />
für jedes Wort ein festes Geschlecht bestimmt gewesen wäre.” Hence, instability<br />
1 . Here, we are not confronted with such cases as those cross-linguistically observed where<br />
different genders correspond to different meanings. In Ojibwa mettik means ‘tree’ and is animate,<br />
or it can mean ‘piece of wood’ and is <strong>the</strong>n inanimate (Bloomfield 1957: 31–2). In <strong>the</strong> Old English<br />
instance, <strong>the</strong>re is only one ‘idea’, but different perspectives <strong>from</strong> which it is conceptualised.
9 Letizia Vezzosi<br />
of gender assignment was traditionally considered to reflect an intermediate stage<br />
between <strong>the</strong> Proto-Indo-European system which opposes common gender to neuter<br />
gender (Brugmann 1897; Schwink 200 & Sieburg 1997) and a subsequent<br />
stage with three gender oppositions. Initially every noun could be inflected with<br />
three different nominal endings, i.e., assigned to three genders, which modify <strong>the</strong><br />
meaning of <strong>the</strong> noun in a specific way (Lehmann 1958): masculine had ‘singulative’<br />
quality, neuter was a nominal resultative and feminine a collective.<br />
What has been observed in Old English examples, as well as in <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r Old<br />
Germanic languages, could be a reflex of <strong>the</strong> original Indo-European categorical<br />
meanings of <strong>the</strong> three gender opposition, before <strong>the</strong> gender oppositions formally<br />
dissolved and <strong>the</strong> corresponding semantic oppositions consequently broke down,<br />
giving rise to grammatical gender.<br />
. Third type: more than one gender related to [± individuated]<br />
The most immediate case of multiple gender pertains to those nouns like baby,<br />
doctor and so on, o<strong>the</strong>rwise called ‘nouns of common gender’ (Corbett 1991: 181).<br />
In Old English, such nouns have different derivative suffixes that express gender<br />
difference: thus <strong>the</strong> word ‘wolf ’ appears as wulf following <strong>the</strong> a-stem declension<br />
when referring to both to wolves and to he-wolf, but is wylf, i.e., jo-stem noun<br />
derived <strong>from</strong> wulf if feminine; similarly henn is <strong>the</strong> feminine derivative <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
masculine hann ‘cock’; o<strong>the</strong>rwise, different suffixes were used, as in <strong>the</strong> case of<br />
hunta (m) ‘hunter’ and hunticge/huntigestre (f.). Therefore, <strong>the</strong>y do not represent<br />
any ambiguous instance of gender encoding in Old English.<br />
Much more interesting is ano<strong>the</strong>r subset of Old English nouns that appears with<br />
inflectional morphology associated with two or three gender classes and includes<br />
inanimates: for example, sæ ‘sea’ can be ei<strong>the</strong>r feminine or masculine; sæl ‘time’, usually<br />
masculine, also occurs as feminine; hearg ‘temple’ is masculine as often as it is<br />
feminine, and so on. In fact, such a fluctuation in gender assignment cannot possibly<br />
be explained in terms of Corbett’s hierarchy or maxims and is not easily inserted<br />
in Lehmann’s (1958) frame. Apparently no such pragmatic or semantic reasons as<br />
those in § 2.1 can be called for, nor do <strong>the</strong>ir meanings differ in terms of <strong>the</strong> singulative<br />
– collective – resultative perspective, although <strong>the</strong>y mean differently.<br />
In a very restricted group, <strong>the</strong> ‘connotations’ of gender appear to be brought to<br />
<strong>the</strong> surface. Following Jakobson’s (1966) intuition, 13 in some circumstances, <strong>the</strong><br />
factors which help determine <strong>the</strong> semantic rule, that is, <strong>the</strong> things which help us<br />
1 . Jakobson (1966: 236–7) is also more extreme, when he claims ‘everyday verbal mythology<br />
and poetry’ can be ‘potential circumstances’ in which semantic gender may appear meaningful
Gender assignment in Old English 99<br />
establish a person’s sex, can be extended beyond <strong>the</strong>ir obvious domain and be<br />
applied to nouns which would normally belong to what Corbett calls ‘semantic<br />
residue’, i.e., biologically undistinguished. This could be <strong>the</strong> underlying mechanism<br />
on <strong>the</strong> basis of which <strong>the</strong> Latin word vinea ‘vineyard-vine’ is glossed in <strong>the</strong><br />
Lindisfarne Gospel (see ex. 7) consistently with wingeard (f.) to express <strong>the</strong> idea of<br />
vineyard and with wingeard (m.) to indicate vine. Here <strong>the</strong> feminine gender is a<br />
meaning feature that denotes ‘X bearing Y’. 1<br />
(7) [Lxxi/13,15]<br />
and ongann ðæm³ him on bispellum sprecca wingeard gesette mon<br />
et coepit illis in parabolis loqui vineam pastinauit homo<br />
and sende to lond-buendum on tid esne þte <strong>from</strong> þæm lond-buendum<br />
et misit ad agricolas in tempore serrum ut <strong>from</strong> agricolis<br />
onfenge of wæstm þære wingearde and gelahton hine ofslogon and<br />
acciperit de fructu vineae et apprehendes eum occiderunt et<br />
gewurpon buta ðæm wingeard hwæt ofðon doeð hlaferd ðære<br />
eiecerunt extra uineam quid ergo faciet dominus<br />
wingearde cymeð and fordoeð ða lond-buendo and dabit þ<br />
uineae uenit et perdet colonos et dabit<br />
winegeard oðrum<br />
uineam aliis<br />
In a few cases, concept associations cause <strong>the</strong> assignment of different genders to<br />
<strong>the</strong> same noun: hæð occurs as feminine, masculine and neuter, probably in analogy<br />
to feld (m.) and gærs (n.) (see Fleischhacker 1889).<br />
But cases such as wingeard and hæð are not <strong>the</strong> norm in this subset. With most<br />
of those more-than-one-gender nouns, <strong>the</strong>re is an alternation between neuter<br />
and non-neuter gender, and if gender fluctuation has a meaning, it is not always<br />
easily explicable in terms of extension of <strong>the</strong> semantic features prototypically<br />
associated with feminine and masculine gender, nor with concept associations.<br />
Never<strong>the</strong>less, <strong>the</strong>re are behavioural consistencies: non-neuter gender is often<br />
associated with (a) plurality, (b) specific interpretation, (c) individuatedness, and<br />
(d) semantic roles.<br />
in <strong>the</strong> residue gender. More specifically he accounts for <strong>the</strong> gender of Russian words for ‘fork’<br />
and ‘knife’ to a Russian popular superstition according to which if a knife is dropped a male<br />
guest will come, while if a fork is dropped a female guest can be expected. That’s why ‘knife’<br />
in Russian is masculine and ‘fork’ is feminine. Of course <strong>the</strong>se are post hoc explanations of an<br />
apparently arbitrary phenomenon.<br />
1 . Slightly different, but connected, meaning is embodied by feminine gender in Italian word<br />
pairs, such as cassetto (m.) ‘drawer’ – cassetta (f.) ‘box’, cesto (m.) – cesta (f.) ‘corb’, where <strong>the</strong> feminine<br />
gender denotes a bigger size of an object (e.g., [+ big]), often more suitable as a container.
100 Letizia Vezzosi<br />
.1 Third type of gender deviance: [± countable]<br />
The close relationship between number and gender is so undisputedly recognized<br />
for gender to be <strong>the</strong> category most often realised toge<strong>the</strong>r with number:<br />
indeed Greenberg claims that agreement in gender implies number agreement<br />
(1978: 9 ). Cross-linguistically, phenomena of syncretism are commonly observed,<br />
where singular forms have more gender specifications than <strong>the</strong> plural. In a convergent<br />
system <strong>the</strong>re is only one form for <strong>the</strong> plural with no gender distinction<br />
(cf. in German <strong>the</strong>re are three genders in <strong>the</strong> singular, e.g., der Tisch – die Tasche<br />
– das Buch vs. one in <strong>the</strong> plural, e.g., die Tische-Taschen-Bücher); in cross systems<br />
<strong>the</strong> gender distinctions in <strong>the</strong> plural are also found in <strong>the</strong> singular (cf. in Tamil<br />
<strong>the</strong> singular indicates masculine, feminine and neuter while <strong>the</strong> plural rational vs.<br />
neuter, or in Qatar where <strong>the</strong> associative particle in <strong>the</strong> masculine form is used<br />
also for feminine 15 and masculine plurals, e.g., -ka).<br />
Gender syncretism of this kind is proper to Old English too, but has nothing<br />
to do with gender instability. In Old English <strong>the</strong>re is an alternation between <strong>the</strong><br />
neuter gender in <strong>the</strong> singular (cf. 8a and 9a) and <strong>the</strong> masculine or feminine gender<br />
in <strong>the</strong> plural (cf. 8b and 9b) within <strong>the</strong> paradigm of <strong>the</strong> same noun.<br />
(8) a. [Bt.Met. Fox 26, 235] ðæt ingeþonc ælces monnes ðone lit [læt] ðider hit wile<br />
“<strong>the</strong> mind of every man bands <strong>the</strong> body whi<strong>the</strong>r it will”<br />
b. [Bt. 7.1; Fox 16, 5] Oþ ðæt he ongeat ðæs modes inngeþoncas<br />
“until he understood <strong>the</strong> mind’s thoughts”<br />
(9) a. [Chr. 1086] … Hy arerdon unrihte tollas<br />
“They established unfair tributes”<br />
b [Chart.Th. 635, 2 ] and Ælfric Hals nam þæt toll for ðæs kynges hand.<br />
“and Ælfric Hals took <strong>the</strong> impost for <strong>the</strong> king’s hand”<br />
More than one reason can be advanced to justify <strong>the</strong> shift <strong>from</strong> neuter to nonneuter<br />
gender, <strong>the</strong> first being morphological transparency, since in many inflection<br />
paradigms plural neuter nouns are not distinguished <strong>from</strong> singular ones.<br />
However, while it is certain that plurality is associated with non-neuter gender,<br />
what can be pluralized can also be counted: In o<strong>the</strong>r words, <strong>the</strong> semantic feature<br />
connected with non-neuter gender in <strong>the</strong>se instances is [± countable].<br />
. Third type of gender deviance: [± specific] [± individuated]<br />
In ano<strong>the</strong>r subset of nouns, <strong>the</strong> alternation neuter vs. non-neuter seems to depend<br />
on <strong>the</strong> interpretation of <strong>the</strong> referent: cwælm in (10a) is different <strong>from</strong> cwælm in<br />
1 . In Qatar <strong>the</strong> associative particle in <strong>the</strong> feminine form is –ta.
Gender assignment in Old English 101<br />
(10b) only in terms of specificity, that is, in (10a) it refers to <strong>the</strong> act through which<br />
Abel was slaughtered, whereas in (10b) it refers to <strong>the</strong> event of dying.<br />
(10) a. [Beo 107] þone cwealm gewræc ece drihten, þæs he Abel slog<br />
“<strong>the</strong> eternal Lord punished <strong>the</strong> slaughter with which he murdered Abel”<br />
b. [Prog. 1.2. (Foerst) 6] Gif on frigedæg geþunrað þonne getacnað<br />
þæt nytena cwealm<br />
“If on Friday it thunders, <strong>the</strong>n it means death to <strong>the</strong> ignorant”<br />
Such a contrast between a specific and a generic interpretation could also be <strong>the</strong><br />
reason why in Riddle (c) <strong>the</strong> neuter gender wiht is maintained in <strong>the</strong> choice of <strong>the</strong><br />
gender–specific pronoun (e.g., him) when it is generically mentioned, but is changed<br />
when <strong>the</strong> ‘creature’ becomes more and more individuated (e.g., seo wiht and he).<br />
Analogously, if <strong>the</strong> non-neuter gender is considered to be semantically connected<br />
with <strong>the</strong> feature [+ individuated], <strong>the</strong> alternation neuter vs. non-neuter gender in<br />
(12a) vs. (12b) becomes remarkably significant: in (12a) geniht is generically interpreted,<br />
whereas in (12b) it becomes specific thanks to its genitive modifier ðines<br />
huses, and individuated as it is contrasted with <strong>the</strong> abundance of o<strong>the</strong>r houses.<br />
(11) [Riddle (c)]<br />
Ic ða wiht (n) geseah wæpnedcynnes.<br />
Geoguðmyrðe grædig him on gafol forlet<br />
Mon maþelade, se þe me gesægde:<br />
Seo (f.) wiht, gif hio gedygeð duna briceð<br />
gif he tobirsteð bindeð cwice<br />
“<strong>the</strong>n I saw a creature of masculine nature/with joy of youth greedy for itself as<br />
a gift let/he said who spoke to me /The creature if survived breaks hills/if dies it<br />
binds <strong>the</strong> living.”<br />
(12) a. [Bt. 33.1] Wenst ðu ðæt se anweald and ðæt geniht seo to forseonne<br />
“thinkest thou that power and abudance are to be despised?”<br />
b. [Ps.Th. 35.8] Hy beoþ oferdrencte on ðære genihte ðines huses<br />
inebriabuntur ab ubertate domus tuae<br />
. Third type of gender deviance: agent vs. patient<br />
Nei<strong>the</strong>r past nor recent scientific literature has paid any attention to <strong>the</strong> possible<br />
correspondence between gender assignment and semantic roles. Such complete<br />
neglect could be due to <strong>the</strong> fact that this condition is often intertwined with or<br />
can be interconnected with o<strong>the</strong>r factors. Even typologically, Corbett (1991: 33)<br />
argues that <strong>the</strong>re are no syntactic systems of gender assignment, that is, <strong>the</strong>re is no<br />
system where gender assignment only depends on syntactic rules. Never<strong>the</strong>less,<br />
it has been noticed that several of <strong>the</strong> criteria which underlie gender systems also<br />
turn up regularly in o<strong>the</strong>r aspects of morphology and syntax, e.g., in Tlapanec
10 Letizia Vezzosi<br />
where its semantic gender system has reflexes in its syntax, specifically in its<br />
Word Order.<br />
The case in point consists of those occurrences where <strong>the</strong> same word, although<br />
denoting <strong>the</strong> same entity, shows different gender. In those instances no o<strong>the</strong>r reason<br />
can be put forward to motivate <strong>the</strong> change but <strong>the</strong> semantic roles 16 encoded<br />
by <strong>the</strong> NP: in (13a–b) lyft denotes <strong>the</strong> same entity, but in (13a) it is neuter and in<br />
(13b) it is feminine; <strong>the</strong> only difference between <strong>the</strong> two passages is that in (13a)<br />
lyft is <strong>the</strong> object of <strong>the</strong> action and in (13b) it is <strong>the</strong> subject.<br />
This preference for non-neuter gender for agent roles and for neuter gender for<br />
patient roles could be one of <strong>the</strong> reasons why in (13c) cild is masculine, since in <strong>the</strong><br />
same text, i.e., Lindisfarne Gospel, it is regularly neuter if in <strong>the</strong> object position. Similarly,<br />
in (13d) <strong>the</strong> formal rule, according to which <strong>the</strong> suffix –ung forms feminine<br />
nouns, is rendered completely ineffective by <strong>the</strong> patient role played by geddung.<br />
(13) a. [Hexam 6] He gesceop ðæt upplice lyft …<br />
“<strong>the</strong> heavenly sky he created”<br />
b. [Lchdom.iii.272.12] Ðeos lyft … is an ðæra feower gesceafta<br />
“This sky is one of <strong>the</strong> several creations … ”<br />
c. [L i/ 1, ] gefeade se cild (n.) in inna ire<br />
exultauit infans in utero eius<br />
d. [L xix /11] ðas ðæm geherendum to-geecde cuoeð þ geddung<br />
haec illis audientibus adiciens dixit parabolam<br />
In those occurrences, gender variation in <strong>the</strong> same lexeme apparently seems<br />
to be unrelated to <strong>the</strong> above-mentioned semantic and pragmatic features, such as<br />
[± countable], [± individuated]. On <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, semantic roles are linked to<br />
o<strong>the</strong>r pragmatic features: topicality and animacy, first of all, for agents are prototypically<br />
human or animate and topical, but also individuality, agents being generally<br />
high in <strong>the</strong> individuality scale (cf. Givón 198 : 139 or Sasse 1993: 659). Consequently,<br />
semantic roles also present <strong>the</strong> pertinent semantic and pragmatic traits already<br />
investigated in <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r instances of gender deviance, i.e., [± human] [± animate]<br />
[± countable] [± specific] [± individuated], which are in turn specific manifestations<br />
of <strong>the</strong> more general principles of ‘individualisation’ (Seiler 1986: 25).<br />
1 . A similar phenomenon was noticed by Lazzeroni (2002) in Old Greek, in Sanskrit and in<br />
Hittite, where words with <strong>the</strong> same referent but different gender had a complementary distribution<br />
in <strong>the</strong> sentence, that is, masculine gender to encode <strong>the</strong> ‘actor’ and neuter <strong>the</strong> ‘undergoer’:<br />
Sanskr. svar (n.) and sūrah ‘sun’, Sanskr. udaka-,udan-,vār-(n.) and ap-(f.) ‘water’; OGreek ὄυаρ<br />
(n.) and ὄυєιοϚ (m.) ‘dream’; in Hittite watar ‘water’ is masculine when it purifies, but neuter<br />
when is given. Already according to Meillet (1921: 129 ff.) <strong>the</strong> masculine form of ‘dream’ represented<br />
<strong>the</strong> dream as active force, where <strong>the</strong> neuter as an event.
Gender assignment in Old English 10<br />
In o<strong>the</strong>r words, Old English gender incoherence is not chaotic, but depends<br />
on <strong>the</strong> primary conceptual parameter of individualisation or ‘divisibility’ (Vogel<br />
2000), which secondary features underlie (Weber 2000):<br />
[+ countable] [– countable]<br />
[+ individualized] [– individualized]<br />
[+ external perspective] [– external perspective]<br />
[– additive] [+ additive]<br />
[– divisible] [+ divisible]<br />
All <strong>the</strong> traits on <strong>the</strong> left column speak for a higher degree of individualisation and<br />
consequently favour <strong>the</strong> non-neuter gender assignment. On <strong>the</strong> contrary, every<br />
feature in <strong>the</strong> right column characterises lower degree of individualisation and<br />
often corresponds to neuter nominal gender.<br />
. Conclusion<br />
Nearly all historical discussions of English classification suggest that English gender<br />
evolved <strong>from</strong> a grammatical to a natural system. Such a shift is generally explained<br />
as <strong>the</strong> direct result of <strong>the</strong> decay of noun and modifier inflectional endings<br />
in <strong>the</strong> late Old English and early Middle English (Mustanoja 1960). Along this line<br />
gender inconsistency is considered to be connected with <strong>the</strong> decadence 17 of <strong>the</strong><br />
Old English nominal system: 18 developments such as “<strong>the</strong> dissolution of inflectional<br />
classes, <strong>the</strong> dissociation of <strong>the</strong> categories of case and number and <strong>the</strong> gradual<br />
generalization of word-based noun morphology” (Kastovsky 2000: 709–10)<br />
affected <strong>the</strong> rules on which <strong>the</strong> Old English formal system was based.<br />
Accordingly, gender variability simply signals “<strong>the</strong> disintegration of <strong>the</strong> category<br />
as such and consequently of <strong>the</strong> gradual loss of any sensitivity for grammatical<br />
gender” (Kastovsky 2000: 722). However, it has been attested in all types<br />
of texts, irrespective of text genres and chronology: it is not rare to come upon<br />
gender deviance even in Beowulf (see 1 ). Therefore, we agree with Kastovsky<br />
(2000: 709–10) when he argues that “<strong>the</strong> decay of [grammatical] gender is not just<br />
1 . The analyses of Fleischhacker (1889) and Wełna (1978) also concord with this view: borrowings<br />
or loanwords are not internalised into <strong>the</strong> target language morphology and prestigious<br />
foreign languages could be very influential, as well as concept associations and morphological<br />
levelling were possible, because of <strong>the</strong> weakness and opacity of <strong>the</strong> Old English nominal system.<br />
1 . Mitchell (1985: § 62–65) provides three explanations for <strong>the</strong>se mixtures of forms: errors<br />
<strong>from</strong> ignorance of a ‘dying system’; analogical confusion confined to a particular context; variation<br />
(or confusion) of gender and class in Germanic and in Old English.
10 Letizia Vezzosi<br />
a phenomenon of <strong>the</strong> late Old English and early Middle English periods.” Already<br />
in Beowulf one can find instances of semantic gender agreement overriding formal<br />
gender agreement: in (1 ) hlæw ‘mound’ is grammatically feminine, but its<br />
referent is inanimate; accordingly <strong>the</strong> anaphoric pronoun is hit, namely <strong>the</strong> accusative<br />
neuter form, and not <strong>the</strong> expected accusative feminine hie which would<br />
agree with <strong>the</strong> gender of its antecedent.<br />
(1 ) [Beowulf 2802–2807]<br />
Hatað heaðomære hlæw gewyrcean<br />
…<br />
þæt hit sæliðend syððan hatan<br />
Biowulfes biorh<br />
“Bid <strong>the</strong> warriors to build a mound … that afterwards sailors call it <strong>the</strong> barrow<br />
of Beowulf ”<br />
Nor is help provided by standard grammars of Old English, in which gender<br />
confusion is related to inflectional confusion or is at most taken into consideration<br />
only in connection with natural agreement overruling grammatical agreement<br />
(Mitchell 1985 § 69). Even in this case, it continues to be common practice to<br />
attribute gender variation found in <strong>the</strong> manuscripts to ‘scribal error’, and, indeed,<br />
scribes certainly made plenty of mistakes in copying. Never<strong>the</strong>less, when confronting<br />
unexpected forms, <strong>from</strong> a heuristic point of view, it would be, in my opinion,<br />
preferable to invoke scribal error only when <strong>the</strong> evidence clearly supports such a<br />
hypo<strong>the</strong>sis. On <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, <strong>the</strong> regularity and consistency of variant gender<br />
forms require investigation in <strong>the</strong>mselves.<br />
Undoubtedly this phenomenon must be related to a general progressive change<br />
in Old English morphology through which “<strong>the</strong> functional load of grammatical<br />
gender markers diminish[ed]” (Braunmüller 2000: 9). Conversely, gender marking<br />
was not lost, but, thanks to its diminishing grammatical function, it could be<br />
“used for o<strong>the</strong>r purposes […] reinterpreted as a semantic feature in order to express<br />
o<strong>the</strong>r grammatical categories or functions” (Wurzel 1986: 9 ). Old English<br />
gender deviations might be a remnant of <strong>the</strong> original Indo-European categorial<br />
meanings of <strong>the</strong> three gender opposition (Lehmann 1958): masculine encoded<br />
countability, feminine expressed collectiveness without distributive character, and<br />
neuter represented uncountable mass nouns. In o<strong>the</strong>r words, Indo-European gender<br />
marking encoded <strong>the</strong> concept of [individuality]. 19 But it is undoubted that Old<br />
English already had such a well-developed formal system of gender assignment<br />
19. In Indo-European languages (cf. Serzisko 1982: 99–103) <strong>the</strong> concept of gender is based on<br />
a quantitative opposition, i.e., definite vs. indefinite, which corresponds to <strong>the</strong> opposition masculine<br />
vs. feminine/neuter since <strong>the</strong> feature [+ individuated] includes <strong>the</strong> feature [+ definite].
Gender assignment in Old English 10<br />
that this one was about to decline. More convincingly one could <strong>the</strong>n suppose that<br />
a new gender category apparently acquired a new function, that is, difference in<br />
gender corresponded to difference in <strong>the</strong> perspectivisation of nouns: gender variation<br />
underlies <strong>the</strong> primary conceptual parameter of ‘individuality’.<br />
The pervasiveness and <strong>the</strong> consistency of <strong>the</strong> phenomenon raises <strong>the</strong> question<br />
whe<strong>the</strong>r this perspectivisation function might be simply interpreted as <strong>the</strong> outcome<br />
of a re-interpretation process of gender due to <strong>the</strong> decay of <strong>the</strong> Old English<br />
formal system, or whe<strong>the</strong>r it is deeply rooted in <strong>the</strong> grammatical category of gender.<br />
This chapter cannot provide a definitive answer, but a preliminary and tentative<br />
hypo<strong>the</strong>sis can never<strong>the</strong>less be attempted.<br />
Present Day English represents a language with a strict semantic gender system.<br />
However, <strong>the</strong>re are cases where <strong>the</strong> straightforward semantic rules are overridden<br />
by emotive and affective factors (Vachek 196 ), and especially in colloquial usage,<br />
considerable variation is possible: humans may be downgraded by <strong>the</strong> use of it, 20<br />
and inanimates upgraded by <strong>the</strong> use of he or she, only if <strong>the</strong>y are countable and individuated<br />
(cf. 15a–b). In English varieties and dialects gender variation is common,<br />
and <strong>the</strong>re is general agreement that <strong>the</strong> determining feature underlying such fluctuation<br />
is <strong>the</strong> individuality parameter (Siemund 2001; Kortmann & Scheider 200 ):<br />
feminine and masculine pronouns 21 are also used with inanimates if characterised<br />
by <strong>the</strong> feature [+ individuated], but never with mass nouns (cf. 16a).<br />
(15) a. Is he washable? [thus an American female customer at a store refers to a<br />
bedspread (Corbett 1991: 12)]<br />
b. You said <strong>the</strong> black knife, you said. I said <strong>the</strong> sharp one this one he’s fairly<br />
cheap but <strong>the</strong>y use him a lot [BNC KD0]<br />
(16) a. how did <strong>the</strong>y do that [sc. Baking] again? Well, y-you see, you and-,<br />
had – ’twas hearth fires <strong>the</strong>n, th., th-, right down on <strong>the</strong> hearth, you see, and<br />
<strong>the</strong>y had a big round iron with a handle on ‘n, and <strong>the</strong>y used to put he under<br />
<strong>the</strong> fire and he’d get hot; <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong>y used to put some – take some fire <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
corner o’<strong>the</strong> fireplace like and put it here where you was going to bake to, and<br />
put this iron on top of it [South West England (Wakelin 1986: 103– )]<br />
b. <strong>the</strong>y heard <strong>the</strong> sneck o <strong>the</strong> door liftin, and <strong>the</strong> door tried but sho would no<br />
open [Orkney speaker (Wales 1996: 138)]<br />
0. Mathiot and Roberts (1979) give examples <strong>from</strong> American English in which humans are<br />
downgraded by <strong>the</strong> use of it: e.g., <strong>the</strong> burglar broke into <strong>the</strong> house. It destroyed our furniture while<br />
stealing.<br />
1. Hockett calls <strong>the</strong> animate gender ‘absorptive’, by which he means that ‘<strong>the</strong>re are routes for a<br />
shift of gender <strong>from</strong> inanimate to animate, but not <strong>the</strong> opposite’ (1966: 62).
10 Letizia Vezzosi<br />
North Germanic languages, such as Swedish, Danish and Norwegian, have a<br />
two-gender system, i.e., uter gender – historically derived <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> syncretism of<br />
Old Germanic feminine and masculine – vs. neuter gender. Their distribution<br />
is formally ruled. However, <strong>the</strong>y can alternate in special circumstances, as is clear<br />
in (17).<br />
(17) a. Är färsk sill gott? [Swedish]<br />
is fresh herring [uter] good [neuter]?<br />
“is fresh herring good?”<br />
b. Nyfångad sill är särskilt god [Swedish]<br />
new-caught herring [uter] is specially good [uter]<br />
“<strong>the</strong> herring, recently caught, is good in a special way”<br />
Here, as in Present Day English varieties and dialects, <strong>the</strong> difference in gender<br />
appears to correspond to a difference in perspectivisation. If a noun is<br />
[+ individuated], <strong>the</strong>n uter agreement is favoured. This also holds true in o<strong>the</strong>r<br />
Germanic languages, such as Dutch: if ‘toothpaste’, which grammatically is of<br />
common gender, is conceptualised as mass noun, <strong>the</strong> specific-gender pronoun is<br />
neuter, but when ‘toothpaste’ is individuated it becomes of common gender (18).<br />
(18) a. Is de tandpasta op? ja, het is op. [Dutch]<br />
is <strong>the</strong>.common toothpaste up? yes, Pron-Neut. is up<br />
“Is toothpaste finished’ Yes, it is”<br />
b. Is de tube tandpasta leeg? Ja, hij (common) is leeg [Dutch]<br />
Is <strong>the</strong>.common toothpaste empty? Yes, Pron.Common is empty<br />
“Is <strong>the</strong> toothpaste tube finished’ Yes, it is”<br />
To conclude, gender is traditionally described as a sort of ‘secondary grammatical<br />
category’ of <strong>the</strong> noun (Ibrahim 1973: 26), because unlike o<strong>the</strong>r grammatical categories<br />
it allows no choice and has no ‘au<strong>the</strong>ntic relation’ to conceptual categories.<br />
Thus gender is given a special status. From <strong>the</strong> analysis of Old English data and<br />
comparison with Germanic and cross-linguistic data, it clearly appears that gender<br />
is ei<strong>the</strong>r primarily or secondarily linked to some semantic or pragmatic factors,<br />
in any gender assignment systems. Accordingly, if one thinks gender essentially<br />
underlies <strong>the</strong> concept of [± individuality], <strong>the</strong>n its function is no longer reduced<br />
to agreement, but becomes a meaningful feature of <strong>the</strong> noun: among <strong>the</strong> nominal<br />
grammatical categories, <strong>the</strong> function of gender can be categorised as ‘nominal<br />
aspect’ or ‘perspectivisation’ of <strong>the</strong> noun.<br />
Consequently, in periods such as Old English, gender deviance in no way signals<br />
<strong>the</strong> disintegration of <strong>the</strong> category, but represents a special circumstance in<br />
which <strong>the</strong> basic function of gender marking becomes more visible, thanks to a<br />
weakening of <strong>the</strong> formal nominal inflectional system.
References<br />
Gender assignment in Old English 10<br />
Aksenov, A.T. 198 . K probleme ékstralingvističeskoj motivacii grammatičeskoj kategorii roda.<br />
Voprosy jazykoznanija 1: 1 –25.<br />
Bloomfield, L. 1957. Eastern Ojibwa: Grammatical Sketch, Texts and Word List. Ann Arbor:<br />
University of Mitchigan Press.<br />
Bosworth, J. & T.N. Toller. 1898. An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary. Oxford: Clarendon.<br />
Braunmüller, Kurt. 2000. Gender in North Germanic: A diasystematic and functional approach.<br />
Gender in Grammar and Cognition ed. by B. Unterbeck & M. Rissanen, 26–53. Berlin &<br />
New York: Mouton de Gruyter.<br />
Brugmann, Karl. 1889. Das Nominalgeschlecht in den indogermanischen Sprachen. Techmer’s<br />
<strong>International</strong>e Zeitschrift für allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft IV: 100–109.<br />
Brugmann, Karl. 1897. The Nature and Origin of <strong>the</strong> Noun Genders in <strong>the</strong> Indo-European Languages.<br />
New York: Scribners.<br />
Brunner, Karl. 1962. Die englische Sprache: ihre geschichtliche Entwicklung. II. Tübingen: Niemeyer.<br />
Campbell, Aristair. 1959. Old English Grammar. Oxford: Clarendon.<br />
Corbett, Grenville. 1991. Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br />
Dahl, Östen. 2000. Animacy and <strong>the</strong> Notion of Semantic Gender. Gender in Grammar and Cognition<br />
ed. by B. Unterbeck & M. Rissanen, 99–115. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.<br />
Delbrück, B. 1893. Vergleichende Syntax der Indogermanischen Sprachen, vol I. Strasbourg:<br />
Trübner.<br />
Fisiak, Jacek. 1975. Some remarks concerning <strong>the</strong> noun gender assignment of loanwords.<br />
Biuletyn Polskiego Towarzystwa Jẹzykoznawcaego 33: 59–63.<br />
von Fleischhacker, Robert. 1889. On <strong>the</strong> Old English nouns of more than one gender. Transactions<br />
of <strong>the</strong> Philological Society 1888–90: 235–25 .<br />
Fodor, István. 1959. The origin of <strong>the</strong> grammatical gender I, II. Lingua 8. 1– 1, 186–21 .<br />
Givón, Talmy. 198 . Syntax I. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.<br />
de la Grasserie, R. 1989. La Catégorie psychologique de la classification revelée par le language.<br />
Revue philosophique de la France et de l’étranger 5: 59 –62 .<br />
Gordon, E.V. 1988. An introduction to Old Norse. 2nd edition revised by A.R. Taylor. Oxford:<br />
Clarendon.<br />
Greenberg, Joseph H. 1978. Some universals of grammar with particular reference to <strong>the</strong> order<br />
of meaningful elements. Universals of human language. Syntax ed. by J. Greenberg et al.,<br />
Vol. , 73–113. Stanford: Stanford University Press.<br />
Hockett, C.F. 1958. A course in Modern Linguistics. New York: Macmillan.<br />
Hockett, C.F. 1966. What Algonquinian is really like. <strong>International</strong> Journal of American<br />
Linguistics 32: 59–73.<br />
Ibrahim, M.H. 1973. Grammatical Gender. The Hague: Mouton.<br />
Jackobson, Roman. 1966. On linguistic aspects of translation. On Translation ed. by R.A. Brower,<br />
232–239. New York: Oxford University Press.<br />
Kastovsky, Dieter. 2000. Inflectional Classes, Morphological Restructuring, and <strong>the</strong> Dissolution<br />
of Old English Grammatical Gender. Gender in Grammar and Cognition ed. by<br />
B. Unterbeck & M. Rissanen, 709–728. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.<br />
Kortmann, Bernd & Edgar W. Scheider (eds.). 200 . A handbook of varieties of English: a multimedia<br />
reference tool. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.<br />
Lakoff, G. 1987. Women, Fire and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal about <strong>the</strong> Mind.<br />
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
10 Letizia Vezzosi<br />
Lazzeroni, Romano. 2002. Ruoli tematici e genere grammaticale. Un aspetto della morfosintassi<br />
indoeuropea?. Archivio Glottologico Italiano 87: 3–19.<br />
Lehmann, Winfred P. 1958. On Earlier Stages of Indo-European Influence. Language 3 : 179–202.<br />
Leiss, Elizabeth. 2003. Genus im Althochdeutsch. Heidelberg: Winter.<br />
Matasović, Ranko. 200 . Gender in Indo-European. Heidelberg: Winter.<br />
Mathiot, Madeleine & M. Roberts. 1979. Sex roles as revealed through referential gender in<br />
American English. Ethnolinguistics: Boas, Sapir and Whorf Revisited ed. by M. Mathiot,<br />
1– 7, The Hague: Mouton.<br />
Meillet, Antoine. 1921. Linguistique historique et Linguistique générale. I. Paris: Champion.<br />
Mitchell, Bruce. 1985. Old English Syntax. Oxford: Clarendon.<br />
Moravcsik, E.A. 1978. Agreement. Universals of human language. Syntax ed. by J. Greenberg et al.,<br />
Vol. , 331–7 . Stanford: Stanford University Press.<br />
Mustanoja, Tauno F. 1960. A Middle English Syntax. Part I: Parts of Speech. Helsinki. Memoires<br />
de la Societé Néophilologique de Helsinki.<br />
Sasse, Hans-Jürgen. 1993. Syntactic categories and subcategories. Syntax. Ein internationales<br />
Handbuch zeitgenössischer Forschung / An international Handbook of Contemporary<br />
Research ed. by J. Jacobs, et al., 6 6–686. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.<br />
Schmidt, Johannes. 1889. Die Pluralbildungen der indogermanischen Neutra. Weimar: Böhlau.<br />
Schwink, Frederic. 200 . A third gender: studies in <strong>the</strong> origin and history of Germanic grammatical<br />
gender. Heidelberg: Winter.<br />
Seiler, Hansjacob. 1986. The universal dimension of apprehension. Tübingen: Narr.<br />
Serzisko, F. 1982. Numerus/Genus-Kongruenz und das Phänomen der Polarität am Beispiel einiger<br />
ostkuschitischer Sprachen. Apprehension. II ed. by H. Seiler & F.J. Stachowiak, 179–200.<br />
Tübingen: Narr.<br />
Sieburg, Heinz (ed.). 1997. Sprache – Genus/Sexus. Frankfurt a.M. Berlin u.a. (Dokumentation<br />
Germanistischer Forchung 3).<br />
Siemund, Peter. 2001. Pronominal gender in English: a Study of English Varieties <strong>from</strong> a Cross-<br />
Linguistic Perspective. Habilitationschrift, Freie Universität, Berlin.<br />
Vachek, Josef. 196 . Notes on gender. Modern English Sbornik-Praci Filosoficke Fakulty.<br />
Pornenske Uniersity A12. 189–19 .<br />
Vogel, Petra Maria. 2000. Nominal abstracts and gender in Modern German: A quantitative<br />
approach towards <strong>the</strong> function of gender. Gender in Grammar and Cognition ed. by<br />
B. Unterbeck & M. Rissanen, 61– 93. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.<br />
Wakelin, Martyn F. 1986. The Southwest of England. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.<br />
Wales, Katie. 1996. Personal Pronouns in Present-Day English. Cambridge: Cambridge University<br />
Press.<br />
Weber, Doris. 2000. On <strong>the</strong> function of gender. Gender in Grammar and Cognition ed. by<br />
B. Unterbeck & M. Rissanen, 95–509. Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.<br />
Wełna, Jerzy. 1978. On gender change in linguistic borrowing (Old English). Historical Morphology.<br />
Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs. 17. ed. by J. Fisiak, 399– 20. The Hague:<br />
Mouton.<br />
Whorf, Benjamin L. 19 5. Grammatical categories. Language 21: 1–11.<br />
Wurzel, Wolfgang. U. 1986. Die wiederholte Klassifikation von Substantiven: Zur Entstehung<br />
von Deklinationskalssen. Zeitschrift für Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung<br />
39: 76–96.
On <strong>the</strong> position of <strong>the</strong> OE quantifier eall<br />
and PDE all*<br />
Tomohiro Yanagi<br />
Chubu University<br />
This paper, through a study of <strong>the</strong> corpus of Ælfric’s Catholic Homilies, shows<br />
that <strong>the</strong> quantifier eall in Old English exhibited <strong>the</strong> same distributional properties<br />
as <strong>the</strong> quantifier all in present-day English: (i) eall can float <strong>from</strong> a nominative<br />
noun phrase (NP) it modifies; (ii) eall can float <strong>from</strong> an accusative NP when it is<br />
followed by a predicative complement; and (iii) <strong>the</strong> ‘pronoun-quantifier’ order is<br />
more frequent than <strong>the</strong> ‘quantifier-pronoun’ order. The paper also argues that <strong>the</strong><br />
quantifier eall is base-generated as <strong>the</strong> head of <strong>the</strong> Quantifier Phrase (QP) and<br />
selects an NP as its complement. The ‘full-NP-quantifier’ order can be derived by<br />
adjoining <strong>the</strong> NP to <strong>the</strong> QP. However, this operation is not applied to an NP in<br />
<strong>the</strong> argument position, due to <strong>the</strong> ban on adjunction to arguments. Unlike NPs,<br />
pronouns are adjoined to <strong>the</strong> head of a QP, yielding <strong>the</strong> ‘pronoun-quantifier’<br />
order more freely.<br />
1. Introduction<br />
It is well-known that in present-day English (PDE) <strong>the</strong> quantifier all can occur in<br />
various positions as in (1), as well as in <strong>the</strong> pre-nominal position as in (2).<br />
(1) a. The children all would have been doing that.<br />
b. The children would all have been doing that.<br />
c. The children would have all been doing that.<br />
d. The children would have been all doing that. (Baltin 1995: 211)<br />
(2) All <strong>the</strong> children would have been doing that.<br />
* An earlier version of this paper was presented at <strong>the</strong> 14th <strong>International</strong> Conference on<br />
English Historical Linguistics, held at <strong>the</strong> University of Bergamo, Italy on 21–25 August 2006.<br />
I am grateful to Masayuki Ohkado and anonymous reviewers for <strong>the</strong>ir valuable comments and<br />
suggestions. I am also indebted to Patrick Miller for correcting stylistic errors. Of course, all<br />
remaining inadequacies are my own.
110 Tomohiro Yanagi<br />
The sentences in (1) involve <strong>the</strong> quantifier floating <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> subject it modifies. 1<br />
The positions of this floating quantifier are generally assumed to be <strong>the</strong> positions<br />
a subject occupies in cyclically moving to <strong>the</strong> sentence-initial position as<br />
in (2). By contrast, <strong>the</strong> quantifier cannot occur after an object NP unless it is followed<br />
by a predicative complement. These facts have been discussed in generative<br />
literature. 2<br />
On <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, it seems that little attention has been paid to <strong>the</strong> quantifier<br />
eall in Old English (OE) <strong>from</strong> a generative point of view. 3 This chapter <strong>the</strong>refore<br />
focuses on <strong>the</strong> OE quantifier eall, and shows that eall in OE exhibits <strong>the</strong> same<br />
distributional properties as <strong>the</strong> quantifier all in PDE. We also examine in what<br />
positions <strong>the</strong> OE quantifier eall can occur.<br />
2. PDE quantifier all<br />
Before dealing with <strong>the</strong> OE quantifier eall data, this section reviews some syntactic<br />
properties of <strong>the</strong> quantifier all in PDE. First, <strong>the</strong> PDE quantifier can ‘float’ <strong>from</strong> a<br />
subject it modifies, as in (3b).<br />
(3) a. All <strong>the</strong> students have finished <strong>the</strong> assignment.<br />
b. The students have all finished <strong>the</strong> assignment. (Bobaljik 2003: 107)<br />
In (3a) all occurs before <strong>the</strong> subject NP while all in (3b) occupies <strong>the</strong> position<br />
between <strong>the</strong> two verbs have and finished.<br />
Second, unlike <strong>the</strong> quantifier modifying a subject, <strong>the</strong> quantifier modifying an<br />
object generally cannot follow <strong>the</strong> object, as in (4).<br />
(4) a. * Mary hates <strong>the</strong> students all.<br />
b. * I like <strong>the</strong> men all.<br />
c. * I saw <strong>the</strong> men all yesterday.<br />
However, <strong>the</strong>se sentences become grammatical if <strong>the</strong> objects are pronominalized<br />
as in (5).<br />
1. In <strong>the</strong> recent generative framework <strong>the</strong> term ‘floating’ would be replaced by ‘stranded’, but<br />
this paper uses <strong>the</strong> conventional term.<br />
2. There are two major approaches to <strong>the</strong> floating quantifier: <strong>the</strong> stranding analysis (cf. Sportiche<br />
1988; McCloskey 2000; Bošcović 2004, and o<strong>the</strong>rs) and <strong>the</strong> adverbial analysis (cf. Williams<br />
1982; Baltin 1995; Torrego 1996, and o<strong>the</strong>rs). See Bobaljik (2003) for an extensive overview of<br />
floating quantifiers.<br />
3. For a diachronic study of <strong>the</strong> quantifier all and o<strong>the</strong>r quantifiers such as each, many, and<br />
some, see Carlson (1978) and Lightfoot (1979).
(5) a. Mary hates <strong>the</strong>m all.<br />
b. I like <strong>the</strong>m all.<br />
c. I saw <strong>the</strong>m all yesterday.<br />
On <strong>the</strong> position of <strong>the</strong> OE quantifier eall and PDE all 111<br />
Third, in contrast to sentences like (4), if a predicative complement follows <strong>the</strong><br />
quantifier, <strong>the</strong> sentence will be grammatical. This is illustrated in (6).<br />
(6) a. I gave <strong>the</strong> kids all some candy to keep <strong>the</strong>m quiet.<br />
b. Mom found <strong>the</strong> boys all so dirty when she got home, that she made <strong>the</strong>m<br />
(all) take a bath.<br />
c. Cinderella’s fairy godmo<strong>the</strong>r turned <strong>the</strong> pumpkins all into handsome coaches.<br />
d. Hang your coats all up on hangers. (Maling 1976: 715)<br />
The distribution of <strong>the</strong> PDE floating quantifier can be summarized in (7).<br />
(7) In PDE <strong>the</strong> quantifier all can float when<br />
i. <strong>the</strong> noun phrase it modifies is a subject; or<br />
ii. <strong>the</strong> noun phrase it modifies is an object that is followed by a predicative<br />
complement. (cf. Bowers 2001)<br />
3. OE quantifier eall<br />
This section provides examples of <strong>the</strong> quantifier eall in OE. The examples were retrieved<br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> parsed corpus of Ælfric’s Catholic Homilies, 4 <strong>the</strong> First and Second<br />
series, which is part of The York-Toronto-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Old English<br />
Prose (YCOE; Taylor et al. 2003). 5 Following <strong>the</strong> YCOE tag system and searching<br />
<strong>the</strong> corpus for nominative and accusative eall, I have found 420 examples with<br />
nominative eall and 451 examples with accusative eall. 6<br />
3.1 Eall with full NP<br />
Let us first take examples with nominative eall and a full NP it modifies. Among<br />
<strong>the</strong> 420 examples of nominative eall, 237 contain full NPs. Some examples are<br />
4. The present study is limited to <strong>the</strong> data collected <strong>from</strong> Ælfric’s Catholic Homilies in order to<br />
exclude some possible effects of <strong>the</strong> difference in <strong>the</strong> genre, author, and period on <strong>the</strong> distributional<br />
properties of <strong>the</strong> quantifier.<br />
5. The editions of Ælfric’s Catholic Homilies included in <strong>the</strong> YCOE are Clemoes (1997) for<br />
<strong>the</strong> first series and Godden (1979) for <strong>the</strong> second series. In citing examples <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> YCOE,<br />
Thorpe’s (1844–1846) PDE translations are added to <strong>the</strong>m except for example (9c).<br />
6. The tags used for retrieval are ‘Q^N’ for nominative eall and ‘Q^A’ for accusative eall.<br />
‘Q’ with no case was not searched since it is difficult to distinguish a floating quantifier <strong>from</strong><br />
adverbial use.
112 Tomohiro Yanagi<br />
given in (8) and (9). In what follows <strong>the</strong> quantifier eall is in boldface, and its related<br />
elements are in bold italics.<br />
(8) nominative eall and full NP following it (234 exx.)<br />
a. Hit ne mihte eall mancyn gedon gif he sylf nolde;<br />
it neg might all mankind do if he self not-would<br />
“All mankind could not have done it, if he himself had not willed it;”<br />
(ÆCHom I 343.238)<br />
b. Nabbað ealle men gelice gife æt gode; for þan ðe he forgifð þa<br />
not-have all men like grace at God because he gives <strong>the</strong><br />
gastlican geþincþu. ælcum be his gecnyrdnyssum;<br />
ghostly honours each about his endeavours<br />
“All men have not like grace <strong>from</strong> God, for he gives ghostly honours to<br />
every one according to his endeavours.” (ÆCHom I 376.151)<br />
(9) nominative eall and full NP preceding it (3 exx.)<br />
a. his neb bið gerifod. 7 his leomu ealle gewæhte;<br />
his face is wrinkled and his limbs all afflicted<br />
“his face [is] wrinkled, and his limbs all afflicted;” (ÆCHom I 528.113)<br />
b. ac gif we ða modru acwellað. þonne beoð heora bearn<br />
but if we <strong>the</strong> mo<strong>the</strong>rs kill <strong>the</strong>n are <strong>the</strong>ir children<br />
ealle adydde;<br />
all destroyed<br />
“but if we kill <strong>the</strong> mo<strong>the</strong>rs, <strong>the</strong>n will all <strong>the</strong>ir children be destroyed”<br />
(ÆCHom II 124.491)<br />
c. Þa ongunnon ða gelaðedan ealle hi beladian;<br />
<strong>the</strong>n began <strong>the</strong> invited all <strong>the</strong>m excuse<br />
“Then <strong>the</strong> invited people all began to make excuses.” (ÆCHom II 213.6)<br />
The quantifier in (8) precedes <strong>the</strong> full NP and in (9) it follows it. Out of <strong>the</strong> 237<br />
examples, 234 are of <strong>the</strong> former type while only three are of <strong>the</strong> latter type.<br />
Next we take examples with accusative eall and a full NP it modifies. As in <strong>the</strong><br />
case of nominative eall, <strong>the</strong> ‘quantifier-full-NP’ order is dominant. In 377 out of<br />
383 examples <strong>the</strong> quantifier precedes a full NP, as in (10) while only six exhibit <strong>the</strong><br />
‘full-NP-quantifier’ order, as in (11).<br />
(10) accusative eall and full NP following it (377 exx.)<br />
a. Ealle ðas word spræc se symeon be ðam cylde to þam<br />
all <strong>the</strong>se words spoke <strong>the</strong> Simeon about <strong>the</strong> child to <strong>the</strong><br />
heofenlican fæder; þe hine to mannum sende;<br />
heavenly fa<strong>the</strong>r who him to men sent<br />
“All <strong>the</strong>se words concerning <strong>the</strong> child, Simeon spake to <strong>the</strong> heavenly Fa<strong>the</strong>r,<br />
who sent him to men.” (ÆCHom I 253.139)
On <strong>the</strong> position of <strong>the</strong> OE quantifier eall and PDE all 113<br />
b. ealle ðas þincg ic forgife ðe. gif ðu wilt afeallan to minum<br />
all <strong>the</strong>se things I give <strong>the</strong>e if thou will fall to my<br />
fotum. 7 þe to me gebiddan;<br />
feet and <strong>the</strong>e to me adore<br />
“All <strong>the</strong>se things will I give <strong>the</strong>e, if thou wilt fall at my feet, and adore me.”<br />
(ÆCHom I 269.87)<br />
(11) accusative eall and full NP preceding it (6 exx.)<br />
a. Hwæt ða siððan se sigefæsta cempa. þone eard ealne. emlice<br />
<strong>the</strong>reupon <strong>the</strong> victorious champion <strong>the</strong> country all equally<br />
dælde. betwux twelf mægðum. þæs æðelan ancynnes.<br />
divided between twelve tribes of <strong>the</strong> noble race<br />
“Thereupon <strong>the</strong> victorious champion equally divided all <strong>the</strong> country<br />
among <strong>the</strong> twelve tribes of <strong>the</strong> noble race” (ÆCHom II 122.409)<br />
b. and he ðone eard ealne todælde. betwux ðam twelf mægðum<br />
and he <strong>the</strong> country all divided between <strong>the</strong> twelve tribes<br />
þe him mid fuhton;<br />
which him with fought<br />
“and he divided all <strong>the</strong> country among <strong>the</strong> twelve tribes<br />
which had fought with him” (ÆCHom II 122.440)<br />
The distribution of <strong>the</strong> quantifier eall and full NP is summarized in Table 1.<br />
Table 1. Distribution of eall and full NP<br />
Q-NP NP-Q Total<br />
Nominative 234 (98.7%) 3 (1.3%) 237 (100%)<br />
Accusative 377 (98.4%) 6 (1.6%) 383 (100%)<br />
Total 611 (98.5%) 9 (1.5%) 620 (100%)<br />
3.2 Eall with pronoun<br />
In contrast to <strong>the</strong> 620 occurrences of <strong>the</strong> quantifier and a full NP, <strong>the</strong> quantifier<br />
occurs less frequently with a pronoun: 139 examples were found. Among <strong>the</strong>m,<br />
102 contain nominative eall and a pronoun, and <strong>the</strong> remaining 37 contain accusative<br />
eall and a pronoun. The examples in (12) and (13) involve nominative eall and<br />
pronouns; (14) and (15) involve accusative eall and pronouns.<br />
(12) nominative eall and pronoun following it (27 exx.)<br />
a. Ealle we cumað to anre ylde. on þam gemænelicum æriste;<br />
all we come to one age on <strong>the</strong> common resurrection<br />
“We shall all come to one age at <strong>the</strong> common resurrection,”<br />
(ÆCHom I 220.114)
114 Tomohiro Yanagi<br />
b. Ealle ge me æswiciað. on ðissere anre nihte;<br />
all ye me offend on this one night<br />
“Ye shall all be offended with me on this one night.” (ÆCHom II 139.69)<br />
(13) nominative eall and pronoun preceding it (75 exx.)<br />
a. 7 hi ealle anmodlice ræddon þæt ealle his gesetnyssa<br />
and <strong>the</strong>y all unanimously resolved that all his decrees<br />
aydlode wæron;<br />
annulled were<br />
“and <strong>the</strong>y all unanimously resolved that all his decrees should be annulled”<br />
(ÆCHom I 207.32)<br />
b. Ða astrehton hi ealle hi æt his fotum biddende þæt he þæt<br />
<strong>the</strong>n stretched <strong>the</strong>y all <strong>the</strong>m at his feet praying that he that<br />
behat mid weorcum gefylde;<br />
promise with works fulfilled<br />
“Then <strong>the</strong>y all stretched <strong>the</strong>mselves at his feet, praying that he would fulfill<br />
that promise by works.” (ÆCHom II 282.89)<br />
(14) accusative eall and pronoun following it (1 ex.)<br />
ac wentst abuton þæt ðu ealne hine geseo;<br />
but turn about that thou all it see<br />
“but turnest it about, that thou mayest see it all” (ÆCHom I 341.172)<br />
(15) accusative eall and pronoun preceding it (36 exx.)<br />
a. 7 he us ealle gebletsað 7 gehalgað<br />
and he us all blesses and hallows<br />
“and who blesses and hallows us all” (ÆCHom I 328.75)<br />
b. ne þeahhwæðere we ne magon hi ealle gereccan.<br />
neg yet we neg may <strong>the</strong>m all reckon<br />
“yet can we not reckon <strong>the</strong>m all” (ÆCHom II 9.215)<br />
c. and unscrydde hine ealne.<br />
and unclo<strong>the</strong>d him all<br />
“and unclo<strong>the</strong>d himself entirely” (ÆCHom II 93.51)<br />
The distribution of <strong>the</strong> quantifier eall and pronoun is summarized in <strong>the</strong> following<br />
table:<br />
Table 2. Distribution of eall and pronoun<br />
Q-PRO PRO-Q Total<br />
Nominative 27 (26.5%) 75 (73.5%) 102 (100%)<br />
Accusative 1 (2.7%) 36 (97.3%) 37 (100%)<br />
Total 28 (20.1%) 111 (79.9%) 139 (100%)<br />
As for word order, comparing Tables 1 and 2, two interesting contrasts can<br />
be pointed out. First, full NPs follow <strong>the</strong> quantifier much more frequently than
On <strong>the</strong> position of <strong>the</strong> OE quantifier eall and PDE all 115<br />
pronouns, regardless of <strong>the</strong> quantifier case. Only one to two percent exhibit <strong>the</strong><br />
‘full-NP-quantifier’ order. Second, nominative eall can ei<strong>the</strong>r precede or follow a<br />
pronoun whereas accusative eall cannot precede a pronoun with <strong>the</strong> exception of<br />
one case (cf. (14)). 7<br />
3.3 Floating quantifier eall<br />
So far we have seen examples in which <strong>the</strong> quantifier is adjacent to a full NP<br />
or a pronoun. This section shows examples in which <strong>the</strong> quantifier floats <strong>from</strong><br />
an element it modifies. 58 examples of floating quantifier eall were found.<br />
Among <strong>the</strong>m, nominative eall is found in 49 examples (84.5%) and nine examples<br />
(15.5%) contain accusative eall. Examples of each type are given in (16)<br />
and (17).<br />
(16) nominative floating quantifier (49 exx.)<br />
a. Gelyfst ðu þæt we sceolon ealle arisan mid urum lichaman on<br />
believe thou that we shall all arise with our bodies on<br />
domes dæge togeanes criste.<br />
doom’s day towards Christ<br />
“Believest thou that we shall all arise with our bodies on doom’s day before<br />
Christ?” (ÆCHom II 27. 281)<br />
b. and ðeah hi ne magon beon ealle gegaderode;<br />
and though <strong>the</strong>y neg may be all ga<strong>the</strong>red<br />
“and though <strong>the</strong>y may not all be ga<strong>the</strong>red” (ÆCHom II 14.77)<br />
c. Næron hi swa þeah ealle endemes ungeleaffulle:<br />
not-were <strong>the</strong>y however all equally unbelieving<br />
“They were not, however, all equally unbelieving” (ÆCHom I 235.102)<br />
d. þi we sceolon ealle beon on gode gebroþru.<br />
<strong>the</strong>refore we should all be on God bro<strong>the</strong>rs<br />
“<strong>the</strong>refore should we all be bro<strong>the</strong>rs in God” (ÆCHom I 327. 47)<br />
e. and hi ða eodon ealle gewæpnode. and mid leohtfatum to ðam<br />
and <strong>the</strong>y <strong>the</strong>n went all armed and with torches to <strong>the</strong><br />
lifigendum drihtne;<br />
living lord<br />
“and <strong>the</strong>y <strong>the</strong>n went all armed and with torches to <strong>the</strong> Living Lord”<br />
(ÆCHom II 140.80)<br />
7. As pointed out by a reviewer, this one exception may be a mistake of scribal origin. Actually,<br />
in <strong>the</strong> manuscripts B, H, U, and V, <strong>the</strong> ‘pronoun-quantifier’ order was employed instead of <strong>the</strong><br />
‘quantifier-pronoun’ order in (14): hine al in B and hyne ealne in H, U, and V (Clemoes 1997:<br />
341). If <strong>the</strong> ‘quantifier-pronoun’ order in (14) were a scriber’s mistake, <strong>the</strong> contrast between<br />
nominative and accusative eall would be clearer.
116 Tomohiro Yanagi<br />
(17) accusative floating quantifier (9 exx.)<br />
a. god hi gesceop ealle gode.<br />
God <strong>the</strong>m created all good<br />
“God created <strong>the</strong>m all good” (ÆCHom I 179.27)<br />
b. 7 crist hi gebrincð ealle to anre eowde, on ðam ecan life;<br />
and Christ <strong>the</strong>m brings all to one fold in <strong>the</strong> eternal life<br />
“and Christ will bring <strong>the</strong>m all to one fold in eternal life”<br />
(ÆCHom I 316.86)<br />
c. Hwa mæg æfre. ealle gereccan. þa mihtigan tacna. ðises<br />
who may ever all relate <strong>the</strong> mighty miracles of this<br />
halgan weres.<br />
holy man<br />
“Who may ever relate all <strong>the</strong> mighty miracles of this holy man?”<br />
(ÆCHom II 90.304)<br />
d. and he ealle gefæstnode heora fet to eorðan<br />
and he all fastened <strong>the</strong>ir feet to earth<br />
“and he fastened all <strong>the</strong>ir feet to <strong>the</strong> earth” (ÆCHom II 292:156)<br />
e. and his æhta him ealle forgeald be twyfealdum;<br />
and his possessions him all repaid by twofold<br />
“and repaid him all his possessions by twofold” (ÆCHom II 266.198)<br />
The distribution of <strong>the</strong> floating quantifier eall is summarized in Table 3.<br />
Table 3. Distribution of floating quantifier<br />
Nominative Accusative Total<br />
49 (84.5%) 9 (15.5%) 58 (100%)<br />
3.4 O<strong>the</strong>r cases<br />
There is ano<strong>the</strong>r type of quantifier which was not dealt with in <strong>the</strong> previous<br />
sections: <strong>the</strong> pronominal use of eall. The examples are given in (18) and (19).<br />
(18) pronominal quantifier<br />
a. 7 on þinre bec ealle sind awritene;<br />
and in thy book all are written<br />
“and in thy book all are written” (ÆCHom I 481. 174)<br />
b. Hwæt ða ealle samod blissodon on godes herungum. swa micclum<br />
what <strong>the</strong>n all toge<strong>the</strong>r rejoiced in God’s praises so greatly<br />
“All <strong>the</strong>n toge<strong>the</strong>r rejoiced with praises to God so greatly”<br />
(ÆCHom II 16.166)
On <strong>the</strong> position of <strong>the</strong> OE quantifier eall and PDE all 117<br />
(19) quantifier followed by relative clause<br />
a. Hwæt ða ealle þa ðe þæt gehyrdon miclum þæs wundrodon;<br />
what <strong>the</strong>n all who that heard greatly that wondered<br />
“Now all who heard that wondered greatly <strong>the</strong>reat” (ÆCHom I 197.202)<br />
b. 7 he hatað ealle þa ðe unrihtwisnysse wyrcað.<br />
and he hates all who unrighteousness work<br />
“and he hates all those who work unrighteousness” (ÆCHom I 237.176)<br />
In (18) <strong>the</strong> quantifier is used by itself, and in (19) it is followed by <strong>the</strong> relative<br />
clause. This type of quantifier is excluded <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> following discussion, simply<br />
because <strong>the</strong>re is no NP or pronoun which is modified by <strong>the</strong> quantifier.<br />
3.5 Summary<br />
Section 3 can be summarized in Table 4.<br />
Table 4. Distribution of nominative and accusative quantifier eall<br />
Q-NP NP-Q Q-PRO PRO-Q Floating O<strong>the</strong>rs Total<br />
Nominative 234 3 27 75 49 32 420<br />
Accusative 377 6 1 36 9 22 451<br />
Total 611 9 28 111 58 54 871<br />
The findings found <strong>from</strong> this table are as follows:<br />
i. The quantifier eall almost always precedes a full NP whe<strong>the</strong>r it is nominative<br />
or accusative.<br />
ii. The quantifier eall can ei<strong>the</strong>r precede or follow a nominative pronoun, but<br />
always follows an accusative pronoun.<br />
iii. The quantifier floating <strong>from</strong> a nominative, or a subject, is more frequent than<br />
that floating <strong>from</strong> an accusative, or an object (84.5% vs. 15.5%).<br />
The following section discusses <strong>the</strong> low frequency of <strong>the</strong> ‘full-NP-quantifier’<br />
order and <strong>the</strong> high frequency of <strong>the</strong> ‘pronoun-quantifier’ order, and shows that<br />
<strong>the</strong> contrast in frequency between <strong>the</strong> two word orders can be attributed to <strong>the</strong><br />
difference in <strong>the</strong> position <strong>the</strong> quantifier occupies within <strong>the</strong> quantifier phrase. It<br />
is also shown that some accusative floating quantifiers are followed by predicative<br />
complements.
118 Tomohiro Yanagi<br />
4. Syntactic position of quantifier eall<br />
4.1 Quantifier Phrase<br />
This section discusses <strong>the</strong> syntactic position where <strong>the</strong> quantifier eall can occur. We<br />
will examine <strong>the</strong> NP internal position of <strong>the</strong> quantifier eall. As already seen in Section 3,<br />
eall almost always precedes <strong>the</strong> noun phrase it modifies whe<strong>the</strong>r it is nominative or<br />
accusative. On <strong>the</strong> basis of this fact, <strong>the</strong> structure in (20) can be assumed: 8<br />
(20) QP<br />
Q<br />
eall<br />
NP<br />
In (20) <strong>the</strong> quantifier is <strong>the</strong> head of Quantifier Phrase (QP) and selects an NP as its<br />
complement. From this structure, <strong>the</strong> ‘full-NP-quantifier’ order can be derived by<br />
adjoining NP to QP. This is illustrated in (21).<br />
(21) a. QP<br />
Q<br />
NP<br />
eall Q<br />
t<br />
This operation is <strong>the</strong>oretically possible, but if <strong>the</strong> target of adjunction is an argument,<br />
it is prohibited (cf. Chomsky 1986 & Bošcović 1997, among o<strong>the</strong>rs). The idea behind<br />
this prohibition is that adjunction to arguments interferes with <strong>the</strong>ta-role assignment.<br />
Here we also assume that adjunction can be applied to <strong>the</strong> structure acyclically<br />
(cf. Bošcović 2004 & Stepanov 2001). The conditions on adjunction are summed<br />
up in (22). They can account for <strong>the</strong> ungrammatical sentence in (23).<br />
(22) Conditions on adjunction<br />
a. Adjunction to arguments interferes with <strong>the</strong>ta-role assignment.<br />
b. Adjunction can be applied to <strong>the</strong> structure acyclically.<br />
8. In what follows no distinction between NP and DP is made for <strong>the</strong> reason of simplicity. For<br />
<strong>the</strong> functional projection DP see Abney (1987) among o<strong>the</strong>rs. Also see Giusti (1991) for <strong>the</strong><br />
validity of <strong>the</strong> structure of (20).<br />
b.<br />
NP<br />
QP<br />
eall<br />
QP
(23) * Mary hates <strong>the</strong> students all.<br />
On <strong>the</strong> position of <strong>the</strong> OE quantifier eall and PDE all 119<br />
The students all is derived by adjoining <strong>the</strong> student to <strong>the</strong> QP headed by all. Since<br />
this operation takes place in <strong>the</strong> complement of VP, which is a <strong>the</strong>ta position, it interferes<br />
with <strong>the</strong>ta-role assignment, rendering <strong>the</strong> sentence ungrammatical. Given<br />
this, let us now consider example (11a), repeated here as (24).<br />
(24) Hwæt ða siððan se sigefæsta cempa. þone eard ealne.<br />
<strong>the</strong>reupon <strong>the</strong> victorious champion <strong>the</strong> country all<br />
emlice dælde. betwux twelf mægðum. þæs æðelan mancynnes.<br />
equally divided between twelf tribes of <strong>the</strong> noble race<br />
“Thereupon <strong>the</strong> victorious champion equally divided all <strong>the</strong> country among <strong>the</strong><br />
twelve tribes of <strong>the</strong> noble race” (ÆCHom II 122.409)<br />
In (24) <strong>the</strong> quantified object þone eard ealne “all <strong>the</strong> country” is considered to be<br />
derived through <strong>the</strong> operation illustrated in (21). If this object were in <strong>the</strong> complement<br />
of <strong>the</strong> VP headed by dælde “divided”, as in (23), <strong>the</strong> sentence would be<br />
ungrammatical. However, it should be noted here that in (24) <strong>the</strong> adverb emlice<br />
“equally” intervenes between <strong>the</strong> object þone eard ealne “all <strong>the</strong> country” and <strong>the</strong><br />
verb dælde “divided”. Assuming that this adverb is adjoined to <strong>the</strong> VP, <strong>the</strong> quantified<br />
object may be raised out of <strong>the</strong> VP. The derivation takes place as follows:<br />
(25) a. [ VP emlice [ VP [ QP ealne þone eard ] dælde ]]<br />
b. [ QP ealne þone eard ] [ VP emlice [ VP t dælde]]<br />
c. [ QP [ NP þone eard ] [ QP ealne t ]] [ VP emlice [ VP t dælde ]]<br />
In (25b) <strong>the</strong> quantified object ealne þone eard is raised out of <strong>the</strong> VP headed by dælde,<br />
and <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> NP þone eard is adjoined to <strong>the</strong> QP acyclically within <strong>the</strong> QP in (25c).<br />
In <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r examples with accusative NPs and <strong>the</strong> quantifier, no adverbs intervene<br />
between <strong>the</strong> quantified objects and <strong>the</strong> verbs. These examples provide no<br />
clear evidence that an object exists outside <strong>the</strong> VP. But, if <strong>the</strong> object remains in <strong>the</strong><br />
complement of VP, <strong>the</strong> sentence will be ruled out as a violation of <strong>the</strong> conditions in<br />
(22). This may have resulted in <strong>the</strong> low frequency of <strong>the</strong> ‘full-NP-quantifier’ order<br />
in <strong>the</strong> data. 9<br />
Compared with <strong>the</strong> ‘full-NP-quantifier’ order, <strong>the</strong> ‘pronoun-quantifier’ order<br />
is more frequent, as described in Section 3 (1.5% vs. 80.0%). This can be accounted<br />
9. In order to show what position <strong>the</strong> object occupies in sentences like (11b), however, a more<br />
detailed study will be needed. This is left open for future research.
120 Tomohiro Yanagi<br />
for by assuming that <strong>the</strong> pronoun is adjoined not to <strong>the</strong> maximal projection, QP,<br />
but to <strong>the</strong> head, Q, as in (26).<br />
(26) a.<br />
Q<br />
QP<br />
NP<br />
eall pronoun<br />
pronoun eall<br />
t<br />
Unlike adjunction to maximal projections described in (21), adjunction to heads is<br />
possible even in <strong>the</strong>ta positions, because head-adjunction does not interfere with<br />
<strong>the</strong>ta-role assignment. The head-adjunction in (26) may be driven by <strong>the</strong> clitic<br />
property of pronouns (cf. Van Kemenade 1987; Koopman 1990 & Pintzuk 1996,<br />
among o<strong>the</strong>rs). The fact that <strong>the</strong> pronoun precedes <strong>the</strong> quantifier more frequently<br />
than <strong>the</strong> full NP can be attributed to this property of pronouns.<br />
4.2 Floating quantifier<br />
In <strong>the</strong> previous section, it was argued that while <strong>the</strong> full NP cannot be adjoined to <strong>the</strong><br />
quantifier phrase in <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>ta position, <strong>the</strong> pronoun can be adjoined to <strong>the</strong> head of <strong>the</strong><br />
QP in <strong>the</strong> same position. This section first discusses <strong>the</strong> nominative floating quantifier<br />
and <strong>the</strong>n turns to <strong>the</strong> accusative floating quantifier. The relevant examples of <strong>the</strong><br />
nominative floating quantifier are repeated here in (27) for convenience.<br />
(27) nominative floating quantifier<br />
a. Gelyfst ðu þæt we sceolon ealle arisan mid urum lichaman on<br />
believe thou that we shall all arise with our bodies on<br />
domes dæge togeanes criste.<br />
doom’s day towards Christ<br />
“Believest thou that we shall all arise with our bodies on doom’s day before<br />
Christ?” (ÆCHom II 27.281)<br />
b. and ðeah hi ne magon beon ealle gegaderode;<br />
and though <strong>the</strong>y neg may be all ga<strong>the</strong>red<br />
“and though <strong>the</strong>y may not all be ga<strong>the</strong>red” (ÆCHom II 14.77)<br />
c. Næron hi swa þeah ealle endemes ungeleaffulle:<br />
not-were <strong>the</strong>y however all equally unbelieving<br />
“They were not, however, all equally unbelieving”<br />
(ÆCHom I 235.102)<br />
d. þi we sceolon ealle beon on gode gebroþru.<br />
<strong>the</strong>refore we should all be on God bro<strong>the</strong>rs<br />
“<strong>the</strong>refore should we all be bro<strong>the</strong>rs in God” (ÆCHom I 327.47)<br />
b.<br />
Q<br />
QP<br />
NP
On <strong>the</strong> position of <strong>the</strong> OE quantifier eall and PDE all 121<br />
e. and hi ða eodon ealle gewæpnode. and mid leohtfatum to ðam<br />
and <strong>the</strong>y <strong>the</strong>n went all armed and with torches to <strong>the</strong><br />
lifigendum drihtne;<br />
living lord<br />
“and <strong>the</strong>y <strong>the</strong>n went all armed and with torches to <strong>the</strong> Living Lord”<br />
(ÆCHom II 140.80)<br />
In sentence (27a) <strong>the</strong> quantifier occurs before <strong>the</strong> non-finite verb arisan “arise”.<br />
This preverbal position corresponds to <strong>the</strong> position where <strong>the</strong> subject is basegenerated.<br />
This is because in OE <strong>the</strong> subject of unaccusative verbs like arisan<br />
“arise” is base-generated before <strong>the</strong> verbs (i.e., <strong>the</strong> complement of VP). Similarly,<br />
<strong>the</strong> quantifier in (27b) occurs before <strong>the</strong> non-finite verb gegaderode “ga<strong>the</strong>red”.<br />
This surface word order is <strong>the</strong> same as that in (27a), but <strong>the</strong>y are different in that<br />
<strong>the</strong> quantifier in (27b) agrees with <strong>the</strong> verbal predicate. Under Yanagi’s (1999)<br />
assumption that agreement is licensed through <strong>the</strong> Spec-Head configuration<br />
(cf. Chomsky 1993 & 1995), it can be said that <strong>the</strong> quantifier in (27b) moves up<br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> complement of VP to a higher specifier position, as illustrated in (28). 10<br />
It can also be argued that <strong>the</strong> quantifier in (27c) is raised to a higher specifier<br />
position for <strong>the</strong> same reason.<br />
(28) a. [ VP [ QP ealle ] gegaderode ]<br />
b. [ XP [ QP ealle ] [ X’ [ VP t QP t V ] gegaderode ] ]<br />
On <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, <strong>the</strong> quantifier in (27d) occurs not before <strong>the</strong> nominal<br />
predicate gebroþru “bro<strong>the</strong>rs”, but before <strong>the</strong> non-finite verb beon “be”. Given that<br />
<strong>the</strong> subject is base-generated in <strong>the</strong> pre-predicate position, eall in (27d) also moves<br />
up to a higher position, in this case, <strong>the</strong> specifier position of <strong>the</strong> VP headed by<br />
beon “be”. This is illustrated in (29).<br />
(29) a. [ VP beon [ XP [ QP ealle ] in gode gebroþru ]<br />
b. [ VP [ QP ealle ] beon [ XP tQP in gode gebroþru ] ]<br />
Here we can conclude that <strong>the</strong> OE quantifier eall, just like <strong>the</strong> PDE quantifier all,<br />
marks <strong>the</strong> intermediate subject positions.<br />
Next we consider <strong>the</strong> sentence in (27e). Unlike <strong>the</strong> quantifier in <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r examples<br />
in (27), <strong>the</strong> quantifier in (27e) occupies <strong>the</strong> postverbal position. Under <strong>the</strong><br />
10. In (28) and (29) <strong>the</strong> positions of <strong>the</strong> pronouns modified by eall are ignored for reasons of<br />
simplicity.
122 Tomohiro Yanagi<br />
general assumption of subject movement, subjects cannot move to a postverbal<br />
position unless <strong>the</strong>y are base-generated postverbally. As mentioned above, OE is<br />
an OV language, and subjects of unaccusative verbs like gan “go” are assumed to<br />
be base-generated before <strong>the</strong> verbs. Thus, it could be assumed that <strong>the</strong> quantifier<br />
eall in (27e) is associated with <strong>the</strong> secondary predicate gewæpnode “armed”. The<br />
structure of (27e) would be (30).<br />
(30) hii ða [ VP t i eodon ] [ VP [ QP ealle PRO i ] gewæpnode ]<br />
Now let us turn to <strong>the</strong> accusative floating quantifier. The relevant examples are<br />
repeated here in (31).<br />
(31) accusative floating quantifier<br />
a. god hi gesceop ealle gode.<br />
God <strong>the</strong>m created all good<br />
“God created <strong>the</strong>m all good” (ÆCHom I 179.27)<br />
b. 7 crist hi gebrincð ealle to anre eowde, on ðam ecan life;<br />
and Christ <strong>the</strong>m brings all to one fold in <strong>the</strong> eternal life<br />
“and Christ will bring <strong>the</strong>m all to one fold in eternal life”<br />
(ÆCHom I 316.86)<br />
c. Hwa mæg æfre. ealle gereccan. þa mihtigan tacna. ðises<br />
who may ever all relate <strong>the</strong> mighty miracles of this<br />
halgan weres.<br />
holy man<br />
“Who may ever relate all <strong>the</strong> mighty miracles of this holy man?”<br />
(ÆCHom II 90.304)<br />
d. and his æhta him ealle forgeald be twyfealdum;<br />
and his possessions him all repaid by twofold<br />
“and repaid him all his possessions by twofold” (ÆCHom II 266.198)<br />
In (31a) and (31b) <strong>the</strong> accusative quantifier follows <strong>the</strong> finite verbs gesceop “created”<br />
and gebrincð “brings”, respectively. What is important here is that <strong>the</strong> quantifier is<br />
followed by <strong>the</strong> predicative complements, just like <strong>the</strong> PDE examples in (6). In<br />
(31c), <strong>the</strong> quantifier precedes <strong>the</strong> non-finite verb gereccan “relate”. Since an object<br />
is base-generated before a verb, it can be assumed that <strong>the</strong> object moves rightward<br />
and is adjoined to <strong>the</strong> VP. This movement does not violate <strong>the</strong> conditions in (22):<br />
VP is not an argument. In contrast, sentence (31d) involves leftward movement of<br />
<strong>the</strong> object. If <strong>the</strong> target of this operation were QP in <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>ta position, <strong>the</strong> sentence<br />
would be ruled out. However, <strong>the</strong> presence of <strong>the</strong> pronoun between <strong>the</strong> quantifier<br />
and <strong>the</strong> moved element indicates that <strong>the</strong> object his æhta “his possessions” is not<br />
adjoined to <strong>the</strong> QP, but to a higher projection.
5. Concluding remarks<br />
On <strong>the</strong> position of <strong>the</strong> OE quantifier eall and PDE all 123<br />
It has been shown in this paper, through a study of <strong>the</strong> corpus of Ælfric’s Catholic<br />
Homilies, that <strong>the</strong> OE quantifier eall shares <strong>the</strong> following distributional properties<br />
with <strong>the</strong> PDE quantifier all: (i) eall can float <strong>from</strong> a nominative, or subject, noun<br />
phrase it modifies; (ii) eall can float <strong>from</strong> an accusative, or object, noun phrase,<br />
that is followed by a predicative complement; and (iii) <strong>the</strong> ‘pronoun-quantifier’<br />
order is more frequent than <strong>the</strong> ‘quantifier-pronoun’ order. It was also argued that<br />
<strong>the</strong> quantifier eall is base-generated as <strong>the</strong> head of a QP and selects an NP as its<br />
complement. The ‘full-NP-quantifier’ order can be derived by adjoining <strong>the</strong> NP to<br />
<strong>the</strong> QP. However, this operation is not applied to an NP in <strong>the</strong> argument position,<br />
due to <strong>the</strong> ban on adjunction to arguments. Unlike NPs, pronouns are adjoined<br />
to <strong>the</strong> head of a QP, yielding <strong>the</strong> ‘pronoun-quantifier’ order. The head-adjunction<br />
may be driven by <strong>the</strong> clitic property of pronouns. If so, <strong>the</strong>re remains a question:<br />
why is <strong>the</strong> ‘quantifier-pronoun’ order observed though it is less frequent than <strong>the</strong><br />
‘pronoun-quantifier’ order? This is left open for future research.<br />
References<br />
Abney, Steven. 1987. The English Noun Phrase in its Sentential Aspect. Ph.D. dissertation. MIT.<br />
Baltin, Mark. 1995. Floating Quantifiers, PRO, and Predication. Linguistic Inquiry 26:<br />
199–248.<br />
Bobaljik, Jonathan David. 2003. Floating Quantifiers: Handle with Care. The Second Glot<br />
<strong>International</strong> State-of-<strong>the</strong>-Article Book: The Latest in Linguistics ed. by Lisa Cheng & Rint<br />
Sybesma, 107–148. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.<br />
Bošcović, Željko. 1997. The Syntax of Nonfinite Complementation: An Economy Approach.<br />
Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.<br />
Bošcović, Željko. 2004. Be Careful Where You Float Your Quantifiers. Natural Language and<br />
Linguistic Theory 22: 671–742.<br />
Bowers, John. 2001. Predication. The Handbook of Contemporary Syntactic Theory ed. by Mark<br />
Baltin & Chris Collins, 299–333. Oxford: Blackwell.<br />
Carlson, Anita M. 1978. A Diachronic Treatment of English Quantifiers. Lingua 46: 295–328.<br />
Chomsky, Noam. 1986. Barriers. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.<br />
Chomsky, Noam. 1993. A Minimalist Program for Linguistic Theory. The View <strong>from</strong> Building 20<br />
ed. by Kenneth Hale & Samuel J. Keyser, 1–52. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.<br />
Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.<br />
Clemoes, Peter. 1997. Ælfric’s Catholic Homilies: The First Series. EETS SS 17.<br />
Giusti, Giuliana. 1991. The Categorial Status of Quantified Nominals. Linguistische Berichte<br />
136: 438–454.<br />
Godden, Malcolm. 1979. Ælfric’s Catholic Homilies: The Second Series. EETS SS 5.<br />
Kemenade, Ans van. 1987. Syntactic Case and Morphological Case in <strong>the</strong> History of English.<br />
Dordrecht: Foris.
124 Tomohiro Yanagi<br />
Koopman, Willem. 1990. Word Order in Old English: With Special Reference to <strong>the</strong> Verb Phrase.<br />
Ph.D. dissertation. Amsterdam University.<br />
Lightfoot, David. 1979. Principles of Diachronic Syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University<br />
Press.<br />
Maling, Joan. 1976. Notes on Quantifier Postposing. Linguistic Inquiry 7: 708–718.<br />
McCloskey, James. 2000. Quantifier Float and Wh-Movement in an Irish English. Linguistic<br />
Inquiry 31: 57–84.<br />
Pintzuk, Susan. 1996. Cliticization in Old English. Approaching Second: Second Position Clitics<br />
and Related Phenomena ed. by Aaron L. Halpern & Arnold M. Zwicky, 375–409. Stanford:<br />
CSLI Publications.<br />
Sportiche, Dominique. 1988. A Theory of Floating Quantifiers and Its Corollaries for Constituent<br />
Structure. Linguistic Inquiry 19: 425–449.<br />
Stepanov, Arthur. 2001. Late Adjunction and Minimalist Phrase Structure. Syntax 4: 94–125.<br />
Taylor, Ann, Anthony Warner, Susan Pintzuk, & Frank Beths. 2003. The York-Toronto-Helsinki<br />
Parsed Corpus of Old English Prose. University of York.<br />
Thorpe, Benjamin. 1844–1846. The Homilies of <strong>the</strong> Anglo-Saxon Church. 2 vols. London: Ælfric<br />
Society.<br />
Torrego, Es<strong>the</strong>r. 1996. On Quantifier Float in Control Clauses. Linguistic Inquiry 27: 111–126.<br />
Williams, Edwin S. 1982. The NP Cycle. Linguistic Inquiry 13: 277–295.<br />
Yanagi, Tomohiro. 1999. Verb Movement and <strong>the</strong> Historical Development of Perfect Constructions<br />
in English. English Linguistics 16: 436–464.
On <strong>the</strong> post-finite misagreement<br />
phenomenon in Late Middle English<br />
Richard Ingham<br />
UCE Birmingham<br />
Klean<strong>the</strong>s K. Grohmann<br />
University of Cyprus<br />
Early Modern English shows some incidence of misagreement between a singular<br />
verb and a plural subject. A corpus of 15th century London chronicles was searched<br />
in order to investigate <strong>the</strong> origins of this phenomenon, and whe<strong>the</strong>r it should be<br />
handled in structural terms. It was found that misagreement almost always arose<br />
with a postfinite subject, and co-occurred in texts allowing null impersonal subjects.<br />
It is analysed as agreement with a singular expletive subject, overt or null, existing<br />
as an option alongside <strong>the</strong> option of regular number agreement. A preverbal<br />
subject contained no expletive element, hence number agreement was regular. The<br />
structural position of <strong>the</strong> postverbal subject was found to be irrelevant: three postfinite<br />
subject configurations were identified, in all of which agreement was optional.<br />
It is fur<strong>the</strong>r noted that an increase in <strong>the</strong> phenomenon occurred during <strong>the</strong> 15th<br />
century for which a dialect contact explanation is proposed.<br />
1. Introduction<br />
This study considers <strong>the</strong> status of singular finite verbs with post-finite subjects in<br />
Late Middle and Early Modern English, focussing on cases of misagreement between<br />
<strong>the</strong> finite verb and a following subject. Examples <strong>from</strong> mid-15th to early 17th century<br />
sources (Ingham 2006a) are given below, first with expletive <strong>the</strong>re-subjects (1), and<br />
<strong>the</strong>n without (2):<br />
(1) a. Ther is labouryd many menys to intytill <strong>the</strong> Kyng in his good.<br />
Paston (1459)<br />
b. Ther is grete spies layd here. Paston (?1463)<br />
c. Ther is lately comyn hider twoo ambassadours <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong>mprour out of spayn.<br />
Cromwell 58, 17 (1537)<br />
(2) a. In like wyse standyth Sir TT’s neybours to himward. Paston (1450)<br />
b. The xiiij day of May was <strong>the</strong> sam men cared [carried] to Westmynster hall.<br />
Machyn, Diary 234:19 (1560)<br />
c. Down goes <strong>the</strong> pots. Beaumont-Fletcher, Monsieur Thomas IV, 2
126 Richard Ingham & Klean<strong>the</strong>s K. Grohmann<br />
The loss of <strong>the</strong> Middle English verb-second tendency with nominal subjects<br />
(Haeberli 2002) meant that by <strong>the</strong> end of <strong>the</strong> medieval period and <strong>the</strong>reafter,<br />
post-verbal subjects are no longer as common as before. However, as shown by<br />
Warner (2006), inversion is still frequently found in <strong>the</strong> early modern period in<br />
<strong>the</strong> context of passives and unaccusative clauses, i.e. those where <strong>the</strong> verb lacks an<br />
external argument in its lexical structure (Levin & Rappaport 1995) Seeking to<br />
obtain a sizable body of data allowing us to analyse possible factors involved in <strong>the</strong><br />
phenomenon of post-finite misagreement (henceforth, PFM), we have identified<br />
about 400 passive and unaccusative contexts <strong>from</strong> 15th-century London chronicles.<br />
These texts often <strong>the</strong>matise time and place adverbials in passive clauses, and thus<br />
favour potential contexts for PFM. Examples are given below for <strong>the</strong>re-subjects (3)<br />
as well as unexpressed (empty or null) subjects (4):<br />
(3) a. And <strong>the</strong>r was new grotes and pensse made. Lamb. 80 (1465)<br />
b. This yere after alhalontyde <strong>the</strong>re was proclamacions made in London.<br />
Gough 163 (1469)<br />
(4) a. And vpon Saterday next folowyng was <strong>the</strong>ir hedes set vpon London Brigge.<br />
Vitell 216 (1497)<br />
b. And <strong>the</strong> xx day of Janyver was certayne poyntys of armys done in Sme<strong>the</strong>fylde.<br />
Greg. 184 (1441)<br />
Although little if any discussion of <strong>the</strong> PFM phenomenon features in <strong>the</strong> recent<br />
historical linguistic literature, 1 it is evident that <strong>the</strong> data presented in (1)–(4)<br />
relate fairly directly to significant issues of current concern. They may be taken to<br />
reflect a vernacular tendency towards using was for were, running counter to what<br />
was to become <strong>the</strong> norm in standard English (Nevalainen 2006 & Wright 2000). It is<br />
known that London was often active in new developments, as population change, not<br />
least <strong>the</strong> influx of Nor<strong>the</strong>rn speakers, induced shifts in <strong>the</strong> sociolinguistic mix. Since<br />
Nor<strong>the</strong>rn English extended <strong>the</strong> use of <strong>the</strong> third person singular -s inflexion beyond<br />
that of Sou<strong>the</strong>rn varieties, it is natural to wonder, as Nevalainen (2006) does, whe<strong>the</strong>r<br />
<strong>the</strong> extension of was to plural subject contexts can be seen as part of <strong>the</strong> same trend.<br />
Alternatively, one might opt for a psycholinguistic explanation, and see<br />
<strong>the</strong> co-occurrence of misagreement with post-finite subjects as a language<br />
processing issue: perhaps <strong>the</strong> grammatical number of <strong>the</strong> nominal subject has<br />
not yet been processed at <strong>the</strong> point where <strong>the</strong> verb is produced. This and a sociolinguistic<br />
account are not mutually exclusive, of course: it could well be envisaged<br />
1. Visser (1963: 72–30) notes examples of both pre- and post-finite misagreement; <strong>the</strong> former<br />
type appears to be rare until <strong>the</strong> 16th century, whereas <strong>the</strong> latter is quite widely attested in Old<br />
and Middle English as well as in <strong>the</strong> Early Modern period.
On <strong>the</strong> post-finite misagreement phenomenon 127<br />
that PFM was a vernacular trait just because it represented <strong>the</strong> natural unmonitored<br />
performance of speakers, and that <strong>the</strong> impact of growing standardisation on <strong>the</strong><br />
written textual record had <strong>the</strong> effect of expunging PFM as writers paid more<br />
attention to norms.<br />
Finally, we might consider a formal syntactic account of <strong>the</strong> PFM phenomenon,<br />
such that agreement fails in certain types of structure, as has been proposed,<br />
among o<strong>the</strong>rs, for Celtic (cf. Borsley 2006) and Arabic (Mohammad 1989). Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore,<br />
it is known that agreement inflexions in Old English were often reduced<br />
in inverted clauses (van Gelderen 1997), especially in <strong>the</strong> 2nd person, e.g.:<br />
(5) For hwon ahenge þu mec? Exeter Book, Christ 1.1487<br />
why hang you me<br />
‘Why did you hang me?’<br />
It could be that <strong>the</strong> pattern illustrated in (1)–(4) above is a late survival of <strong>the</strong> Old<br />
English structure. If this line of investigation is followed, questions of subject type<br />
and position will be relevant, as well as <strong>the</strong> presence or absence of expletive <strong>the</strong>re,<br />
and perhaps information structure characteristics of clauses.<br />
The goal of this paper is thus to clarify <strong>the</strong> status of subject-verb misagreement<br />
in Late Middle English, in terms of <strong>the</strong> level of analysis at which it should<br />
be addressed: Should it be called a vernacular trait? Does it reflect a processing<br />
phenomenon, or can we see it as structurally determined?<br />
The article is laid out as follows. In Section 2 we present <strong>the</strong> results of our<br />
analysis of <strong>the</strong> London Chronicle plural subject data. We <strong>the</strong>n try a number of avenues<br />
offering potential solutions to <strong>the</strong> problem in Section 3, going on to propose<br />
what we think best accounts for <strong>the</strong> nature and timing of <strong>the</strong> PFM phenomenon<br />
in Section 4. Section 5 briefly summarises our main points.<br />
2. Data<br />
2.1 Sources<br />
Data were drawn <strong>from</strong> eight 15th-century London chronicles analyzed for full<br />
nominal plural subjects in pre- or post-finite position in clauses with a finite form<br />
of be (copula or auxiliary). Co-ordinate subjects were discarded, as <strong>the</strong>se could<br />
take singular verb forms in Old French or Latin (Legge & Holdsworth 1934), potential<br />
sources of influence on educated speakers at this time. The London chronicles<br />
seem to have been compiled in English between 1430 and 1480 (Flenley 1911).<br />
One that was begun in <strong>the</strong> 1440s (Vitellius) was continued into <strong>the</strong> first few years<br />
of <strong>the</strong> 16th century. Their authors were citizens of London of <strong>the</strong> merchant class,
128 Richard Ingham & Klean<strong>the</strong>s K. Grohmann<br />
mayors, aldermen, etc. The texts may thus be expected to reflect <strong>the</strong> language styles<br />
of prosperous and educated speakers, who were not usually language professionals<br />
in <strong>the</strong> sense that clerical scribes of lawyers would have been.<br />
The period covered by <strong>the</strong> content of <strong>the</strong>se chronicles typically goes far back into<br />
English history, along <strong>the</strong> lines of <strong>the</strong> Brut chronicle (Brie 1906), and <strong>the</strong>ir entries<br />
for years prior to about 1430 were presumably adapted <strong>from</strong> pre-existing materials,<br />
possibly originally written in Anglo-Norman or Latin. Some residual use of <strong>the</strong> -en<br />
plural inflection is observed in <strong>the</strong> chronicles, especially in <strong>the</strong> entries prior to 1450,<br />
but not sufficiently regularly to be considered a valid measure of agreement with <strong>the</strong><br />
subject. We <strong>the</strong>refore looked for verbal forms where singular versus plural agreement<br />
contrasts continued to be robustly observed into <strong>the</strong> Early Modern period, that is,<br />
with be and have. In practice, post-verbal subjects with have were not found in this<br />
corpus but be, especially as a passive auxiliary, was very well represented throughout.<br />
This no doubt reflected <strong>the</strong> discourse preferences of <strong>the</strong> chroniclers, who were much<br />
taken up with public events in which participants underwent experiences, often unpleasant<br />
ones such as hanging, beheading and <strong>the</strong> like – this was after all <strong>the</strong> time of<br />
<strong>the</strong> Wars of <strong>the</strong> Roses and <strong>the</strong> early Tudor monarchy. Thus most of <strong>the</strong> data featuring<br />
post-finite subjects were found to consist of passive clauses, often with an initial<br />
adverbial stating <strong>the</strong> date or location of <strong>the</strong> event. The highly frequent use of clauses<br />
with topicalised adverbials and passive inversion, though discoursally not typical of<br />
English usage as a whole, offered an excellent field in which to explore <strong>the</strong> nature of<br />
<strong>the</strong> post-finite misagreement phenomenon.<br />
2.2 Results<br />
Table 1 summarises <strong>the</strong> frequency of singular and plural forms of copula be with<br />
plural subjects in <strong>the</strong> 15th century chronicles investigated. As can be seen, cases<br />
of post-finite misagreement were found to represent nearly 31% of plural subject<br />
clauses in <strong>the</strong> London chronicles (N = 55), whereas pre-finite subject misagreement<br />
(N = 2) was below 1%. 2<br />
The o<strong>the</strong>r point to note here is that PFM sharply increases in frequency during<br />
<strong>the</strong> 15th century. Up to 1450, it is ra<strong>the</strong>r uncommon; but <strong>the</strong>n, in <strong>the</strong> later 15th<br />
century, PFM actually becomes more common than post-finite agreement.<br />
2. The key for <strong>the</strong> abbreviated chronicle names used in Table 1 (and <strong>the</strong> examples throughout<br />
<strong>the</strong> text) can be found in <strong>the</strong> list of primary sources (before <strong>the</strong> References); for cited examples,<br />
<strong>the</strong> date of <strong>the</strong> entry follows <strong>the</strong> source in paren<strong>the</strong>ses (where not specified, <strong>the</strong> chronicle<br />
entry date is given within single quotes). ‘VFin’ in Table 1 refers to ‘finite verb’ (distinguished as<br />
‘singular’ or ‘plural’).
2.3 Observations<br />
On <strong>the</strong> post-finite misagreement phenomenon 129<br />
Table 1. Frequency of singular and plural be with plural subjects in 15th century chronicles<br />
Pre-finite plural subject Post-finite plural subject<br />
VFin VFin VFin VFin<br />
Source Date range3 pl sg T# pl sg T#<br />
Jul. –1432 24 0 24 9 1 10<br />
Bradf. –1440 20 0 20 20 1 21<br />
Cleop. –1443 15 0 15 3 5 8<br />
Bale –1450 8 0 8 12 1 13<br />
Vitell. –1450 10 0 10 3 0 3<br />
Lamb. 306 –1450 16 0 16 12 4 16<br />
Greg. –1451 48 0 48 39 5 44<br />
Gough 1451–1470 6 0 6 1 4 5<br />
Lamb. 306 1451–1465 4 0 4 3 8 11<br />
Vitell. 1451–1503 73 2 75 21 26 47<br />
TOTAL 224 2 226 123 55 178<br />
0.9% 30.9%<br />
PFM occurs in three syntactic contexts. In one, a nominal subject may stand<br />
between <strong>the</strong> finite and non-finite verb, as in <strong>the</strong> following examples:<br />
(6) a. And <strong>the</strong>r whas many take of <strong>the</strong>m. Cleop. 140 (1436)<br />
b. This yere was dyverse of <strong>the</strong> castelles in <strong>the</strong> nor<strong>the</strong> yolden a yene to Kynge<br />
Edwarde. Lamb. 78 (c.1462)<br />
c. And <strong>the</strong> said nyghte was secret meanes made vnto my lord Chambereyn.<br />
Vitell. 214 (1497)<br />
Since <strong>the</strong> subject is embraciated (i.e., enclosed) between <strong>the</strong> finite and non-finite<br />
verbs, we shall refer to this as <strong>the</strong> ‘embraciated subject’ type.<br />
Alternatively, <strong>the</strong> nominal subject may stand after <strong>the</strong> non-finite verb:<br />
(7) a. And at that same distresse whas takyn all Lahire horsses, a vij corseryrs and<br />
all his pages. Cleop. 140 (1436)<br />
c. And anon <strong>the</strong>r was sent certayn aldermen and comynes for to …<br />
Lamb. 73 (1460)<br />
d. … before whom was arayned <strong>the</strong> fore named viij prisoners for lyf and deth.<br />
Vitell. 228 (1499)<br />
We shall borrow <strong>the</strong> expression ‘late subjects’ <strong>from</strong> Warner (2006) to refer to<br />
this type.<br />
3. Where no initial date is given, this is because <strong>the</strong> chronicle begins in ancient times.
130 Richard Ingham & Klean<strong>the</strong>s K. Grohmann<br />
Finally, <strong>the</strong> subject may occur in absolute clause-final position and be separated<br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> non-finite verb by an adjunct. Relevant data are provided in (8):<br />
(8) a. … and <strong>the</strong>r whas hangyd round abowt him all his instrumentes wich were<br />
take with him. Cleop. 148 (1441)<br />
b. There was redde among <strong>the</strong>ym certeyne articles and poyntys that …<br />
Gough 161 (1461)<br />
c. Also in Aprill was set vpon <strong>the</strong> pillery in Cornhill ij men for forging of false<br />
lettirs. Vitell. 205 (1495)<br />
We shall refer to this type as ‘extraposed subjects’, noting that <strong>the</strong>y typically involve<br />
heavy subject constituents.<br />
On <strong>the</strong> basis of <strong>the</strong> above classification, it is interesting to note that PFM<br />
increases across time in embraciated and late subject contexts only, as seen<br />
in Table 2 (for occurrences up to 1450) and Table 3 (for <strong>the</strong> period <strong>from</strong> 1451<br />
to 1503):<br />
Table 2. Clauses with auxiliaries in Bale, Bradf., Cleop., Greg., Jul., Lamb., Vitell. up to 1450<br />
Embraciated Total<br />
was<br />
Late subject<br />
2 were 37 39<br />
was<br />
Extraposition<br />
5 were 25 30<br />
was 10 were 9 19<br />
Total 17 (19.3%) 71 (80.7%) 88<br />
Table 3. Clauses with auxiliaries in Gough, Lamb., Vitell. chronicles 1451–1503<br />
Embraciated Total<br />
was<br />
Late subject<br />
16 were 8 24<br />
was<br />
Extraposition<br />
14 were 6 20<br />
was 6 were 9 15<br />
Total 36 (61.0%) 23 (39.0%) 59<br />
Why <strong>the</strong>re was no increase in PFM in extraposed subject contexts between <strong>the</strong> two<br />
periods is an interesting issue, to which we return below. Admittedly, <strong>the</strong> numbers<br />
are relatively small, but <strong>the</strong> sharp increase in <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r two contexts is very striking<br />
and seems to us unlikely to be simply an artefact of small numbers.
On <strong>the</strong> post-finite misagreement phenomenon 131<br />
Our next observation drawn <strong>from</strong> an examination of <strong>the</strong> data is that PFM cooccurs<br />
with impersonal <strong>the</strong>re-subjects (in all three structural types), and also in<br />
clauses without <strong>the</strong>re, following an initial adverbial:<br />
(9) a. And on <strong>the</strong> same day was made xvij knyghtis of <strong>the</strong> Ba<strong>the</strong>.<br />
Lamb. p. 64 (1444)<br />
b. … and <strong>the</strong> said nyghte was secret meanes made vnto my lord Chambereyn.<br />
Vitell p. 214 (1497)<br />
(10) a. And anon <strong>the</strong>r was sent certayn aldermen and comynes for to …<br />
Lamb. p. 73 (1460)<br />
b. This yere after alhalontyde <strong>the</strong>re was proclamacions made in london by <strong>the</strong><br />
kingis commanndement. Gough p.163 (1469)<br />
The two constructions, with and without <strong>the</strong>re, seem to have been in free variation.<br />
This situation appears reminiscent of ano<strong>the</strong>r variation we observed in <strong>the</strong>se texts<br />
between overt and null impersonal subjects with clausal complement-taking verbs<br />
following an initial adverbial. The grammatical subject was often impersonal it, e.g.:<br />
(11) a. Whanne this was done hit was decreed by <strong>the</strong> seyde Arbitrours that …<br />
Jul. 94 (‘1426’)<br />
b. Fyrst hit is accordyd that Syr Gy Butler … Greg. 122 (‘1419’)<br />
c. And this yere it was ordeyned that <strong>the</strong> sonday shold be hold.<br />
Vitell. 156 (1443)<br />
Alternatively, <strong>the</strong> grammatical subject position was left null, here marked Ø:<br />
(12) a. And that yere Ø was grauntyde unto <strong>the</strong> kyng that every person …<br />
Greg. 90 (‘1377’)<br />
b. In this same yere Ø whas cryed that all men that wold aventure eny corn …<br />
Cleop. 152 (1443)<br />
c. In this yere Ø was ordeyned by a common counseill that …<br />
Vitell. 187 (1475)<br />
It may <strong>the</strong>refore be that <strong>the</strong> availability of a null structural subject option is related in<br />
some way to <strong>the</strong> PFM phenomenon. This is a <strong>the</strong>me to which we shall return below.<br />
3. Discussion<br />
Differing lines of explanation have already been suggested in Section 1. We begin<br />
with <strong>the</strong> possibility that <strong>the</strong> PFM phenomenon can be related to <strong>the</strong> persistence<br />
of an archaic syntactic structure, such as <strong>the</strong> Old English mis-agreement pattern<br />
shown above in (5). Whatever <strong>the</strong> explanation for Old English ‘reduced inflection’<br />
may be, however, <strong>the</strong> structural configuration in which it appeared is not easily
132 Richard Ingham & Klean<strong>the</strong>s K. Grohmann<br />
adapted to 15th century PFM. In (5), an interrogative clause, <strong>the</strong> verb precedes a<br />
pronominal subject. In generative syntactic analyses this is taken to indicate that<br />
<strong>the</strong> verb has moved to a higher position than <strong>the</strong> one it occupies in <strong>the</strong> corresponding<br />
declarative clause structure. That higher domain is normally designated<br />
Complementizer Phrase (CP) in accounts of Middle English syntax (e.g., Fischer<br />
et al. 2000). But PFM does not seem to involve movement of <strong>the</strong> inflected verb into<br />
<strong>the</strong> CP domain. Clauses with impersonal <strong>the</strong>re-subjects preceding <strong>the</strong> finite verb<br />
also show PFM, e.g.:<br />
(13) a. This yere after alhalontyde <strong>the</strong>re was proclamacions made in london by <strong>the</strong><br />
kingis commanndement. Gough 163 (1469)<br />
b. And <strong>the</strong>r was new grotes and pensse made. Lamb. 80 (1465)<br />
Now, existential <strong>the</strong>re in Middle English occupied <strong>the</strong> normal Spec TP subject<br />
position of a declarative clause (Williams 2000 & Ingham 2001), so <strong>the</strong> finite verb<br />
remains in T. Therefore passive clauses with inverted subjects, including PFM cases,<br />
must have a different structure <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Old English examples of van Gelderen<br />
(1997), e.g., (5), in which <strong>the</strong> postposed subject indicates that <strong>the</strong> verb has moved<br />
out of TP. Consequently, we do not believe that <strong>the</strong> PFM phenomenon can be seen<br />
as relatable to a structural property of Old English.<br />
Still in terms of prior factors that might have shaped <strong>the</strong> PFM phenomenon,<br />
it is worth considering <strong>the</strong> possibility of French contact influence. This is a plausible<br />
direction in which to seek an explanation of <strong>the</strong> findings reported here,<br />
because French had been a language of record prior to English, and several French<br />
chronicles dating <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 14th century are extant in which events are recorded<br />
in terms that could well have served as a model for <strong>the</strong> London chroniclers, cf.<br />
(14a) and (14b).<br />
(14) a. Et le lundi proschain apres la tiffanie sistrent justic. a le guildhall pur faire<br />
la deliveraunce. French Chron. Lond. 15, 22<br />
b. And on <strong>the</strong> Monday next after <strong>the</strong> Epithanie <strong>the</strong> justyces setene at <strong>the</strong><br />
Yeldhalle to make deliveraunce. Chron. Lond. Ms Harley 28, 19<br />
In this particular case, admittedly, <strong>the</strong> Late Middle English example has used <strong>the</strong><br />
plural verb form setene ‘sit’ corresponding to <strong>the</strong> plural verb form sistrent ‘sit’ in<br />
French. Still, it is known that in Old French verbs could appear in <strong>the</strong> singular<br />
form when followed by a co-ordinate plural subject (Legge & Holdsworth 1934).<br />
This pattern could conceivably have favoured a singular verb with a post-finite<br />
plural subject, <strong>the</strong> PFM phenomenon of our investigation. Accordingly, following<br />
an earlier investigation of Anglo-French chronicles conducted by one of <strong>the</strong> present<br />
authors (Ingham 2006b), we examined all plural subjects standing after a finite<br />
verb in <strong>the</strong> 14th century French Chronicles of London (Aungier 1844). However, of
On <strong>the</strong> post-finite misagreement phenomenon 133<br />
<strong>the</strong> 31 such cases identified in this text, all showed a plural verb form, as exemplified<br />
in (15):<br />
(15) a. En cele an furent deux Romeins occys en Westchepe. Chron. Lond. 1, 3<br />
‘In this year two Romans were killed in Westcheap.’<br />
b. A cele houre furent les Escoces entrez en Stannowe Park.<br />
Chron. Lond. 60, 3<br />
‘At this time <strong>the</strong> Scots had entered Stanhope Park.’<br />
It <strong>the</strong>refore seems implausible to suppose that <strong>the</strong> PFM phenomenon can be<br />
attributed to contact with French.<br />
Let us now move on to considering whe<strong>the</strong>r PFM should be seen as an early<br />
appearance of a vernacular trait, namely was for were. In this connection, Nevalainen<br />
(2006) has raised <strong>the</strong> question whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong>re was an association between was for were<br />
and <strong>the</strong> Nor<strong>the</strong>rn Subject Rule. In <strong>the</strong> Nor<strong>the</strong>rn Subject Rule, a singular -s inflection<br />
is in most contexts used with a plural subject (cf. Ihalainen 1994). It is true that our<br />
data precede <strong>the</strong> time when London forms displayed any known Nor<strong>the</strong>rn influence<br />
(cf. Schendl 1994), but never<strong>the</strong>less <strong>the</strong> increase in PFM in <strong>the</strong> later period we studied<br />
indicates that we are dealing with an innovation, and vernacular trends, particularly<br />
under <strong>the</strong> influence of Nor<strong>the</strong>rn speakers, might have been heading in <strong>the</strong> direction<br />
of favouring was for were. The problem here is <strong>the</strong> positional asymmetry overwhelmingly<br />
attested in our data. Vernacular Early Modern English that makes widespread<br />
use of non-standard forms – for example, George Fox’s Journal (Penney 1911) – shows<br />
frequent use of was for were with plural subjects in pre-finite position too:<br />
(16) As wee was goinge alongst ye streets. Fox, Journal (1694)<br />
It is difficult to see why London chronicle writers, if <strong>the</strong>y were content to use putative<br />
vernacular verbal agreement forms, should have so carefully avoided <strong>the</strong>m in<br />
pre-finite subject contexts. Accordingly, we do not believe that a sociolinguistic<br />
account couched simply in terms of morphological variation can be sustained.<br />
A fur<strong>the</strong>r possibility is that <strong>the</strong> PFM phenomenon was a language processing<br />
matter: it might be supposed that, while planning <strong>the</strong> sentence, <strong>the</strong> number feature<br />
on <strong>the</strong> subject has not yet been determined at <strong>the</strong> point where <strong>the</strong> finite auxiliary<br />
is produced. This is not to our knowledge a notion that has any empirical support<br />
<strong>from</strong> psycholinguistic research, but <strong>the</strong>re may be some merit in considering a processing<br />
account, especially since <strong>the</strong> commonest use of was for were in <strong>the</strong> pre-1451<br />
data is in extraposed position, where <strong>the</strong> subject stood fur<strong>the</strong>st <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> finite verb,<br />
hence, in online terms, was produced appreciably later than <strong>the</strong> finite verb was.<br />
However, this runs into <strong>the</strong> problem that it does not explain why our data show no<br />
effect of distance <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> finite verb after 1450. Since part of <strong>the</strong> phenomenon to<br />
be explained is <strong>the</strong> sharp increase in PFM in <strong>the</strong> later 15th century in o<strong>the</strong>r contexts,<br />
but not in extraposition, a processing account does not seem particularly helpful.
134 Richard Ingham & Klean<strong>the</strong>s K. Grohmann<br />
An attractive possibility would be to appeal to a structural account which<br />
handles <strong>the</strong> asymmetry by postulating that PFM occurs when <strong>the</strong> subject is not<br />
in its canonical structural position. Although such an analysis would be able to<br />
handle <strong>the</strong> quasi-obligatoriness of agreement when <strong>the</strong> subject is in its canonical<br />
pre-finite position, it runs into <strong>the</strong> problem that agreement is still possible when<br />
<strong>the</strong> verb is post-finite, in particular in any of <strong>the</strong> three post-finite positions identified<br />
above. It is <strong>the</strong>refore false to say that, once <strong>the</strong> subject is out of its canonical position,<br />
agreement fails, perhaps defaulting to a singular form. Accordingly, we reject <strong>the</strong><br />
notion of a morphological account by which was is a default form.<br />
The fundamental problem is to explain <strong>the</strong> variability of agreement, in any<br />
post-finite position. Since <strong>the</strong> PFM phenomenon alternates with plural agreement<br />
in texts apparently written by <strong>the</strong> same individual, we are not dealing with intrasocietal<br />
variation by social class or region, it seems. We come back <strong>the</strong>refore to <strong>the</strong><br />
position that PFM is an apparent free variant within an idiolect, which may indeed<br />
support <strong>the</strong> notion of an incoming vernacular feature (Nevalainen 2006), yet at<br />
<strong>the</strong> same time it is syntactically conditioned. What is thus needed is a syntactic account<br />
which comports with <strong>the</strong> vernacular status of <strong>the</strong> feature. Simply postulating<br />
alternative lexical realisations of be [+ past, +3pl] as was or were will plainly make<br />
<strong>the</strong> wrong predictions for <strong>the</strong> data we have here. To account for <strong>the</strong> alternative of<br />
using was for were only if <strong>the</strong> subject is post-finite we require a more fine-grained<br />
analysis of <strong>the</strong> structures and of grammatical properties of <strong>the</strong> elements that fill<br />
<strong>the</strong>m. In <strong>the</strong> next section we attempt to provide such an account.<br />
4. Analysis<br />
We pursue an approach whereby <strong>the</strong> configurations with was and with were have<br />
slightly different formal analyses underpinning <strong>the</strong> ‘vernacular’ and ‘standard’ usages.<br />
These analyses turn on differing properties of <strong>the</strong> expletive element (<strong>the</strong>re).<br />
We argue that <strong>the</strong> ‘vernacular’ option was to make <strong>the</strong> verb agree with a singular<br />
feature on <strong>the</strong> expletive subject. In fact this is still <strong>the</strong> vernacular pattern in nonstandard<br />
present-day English, which commonly has a singular verb form with plural<br />
associate subjects. Consider (17) for illustration:<br />
(17) % There’s three people outside.<br />
We have found informally that even speakers who do not regularly use non-standard<br />
forms find such utterances marginally acceptable (as indicated by <strong>the</strong> percentage<br />
mark) – as opposed to <strong>the</strong> ungrammatical counterpart *Three people’s outside – and<br />
believe <strong>the</strong>y produce such examples <strong>the</strong>mselves.<br />
It was shown above that PFM is not plausibly an archaic residue of <strong>the</strong> agreement<br />
reduction seen in Old English. However, <strong>the</strong>re was one facet of <strong>the</strong> data
On <strong>the</strong> post-finite misagreement phenomenon 135<br />
exhibiting <strong>the</strong> PFM phenomenon that should be considered an archaism: <strong>the</strong> persistence<br />
of <strong>the</strong> possibility of a null expletive subject with passive and unaccusative<br />
clauses having an initial adverbial. The alternation between a null expletive and<br />
an overt expletive <strong>the</strong>re-subject had been a feature of <strong>the</strong> language long before <strong>the</strong><br />
15th century.<br />
The Old English example (18a) and its re-working in an Early Middle<br />
English transliteration (18b) toge<strong>the</strong>r show an alternation between a null and a<br />
<strong>the</strong>re-expletive: 4<br />
(18) a. Þa wæron gegaderode binnan ðære byrig Hierusalem eawfeste weras of<br />
ælcere ðeode. Ælfr Hom I (Thorpe 314, 11)<br />
b. Þa weren þer igedered widhinne þere buruh of ierusalem trowfeste men of<br />
elchere þeode. Lamb Hom IX 89, 28<br />
‘Then <strong>the</strong>re were ga<strong>the</strong>red within <strong>the</strong> city of Jerusalem true men of every<br />
nation.’<br />
The <strong>the</strong>re-expletive in (18b) was not an innovation of Early Middle English.<br />
Already in Old English we find existential sentences with expletive <strong>the</strong>re (19a) and<br />
without (19b):<br />
(19) a. Þonne synd þær þry porticas emb þa ciricean utan geworht. BHom 125<br />
‘Then <strong>the</strong>re are three gates around <strong>the</strong> church.’<br />
b. Þonne syndon on þyssum Simone twa speda. BHom 179<br />
‘Then <strong>the</strong>re are in this Simon two powers.’<br />
Existential clauses with an initial adverbial PP tended not to have an overt expletive<br />
in Old English and Early Middle English, as can be seen in <strong>the</strong> following data:<br />
(20) a. On þam æfteran dæge biþ gehyred mycel stefn on heofenum fyrdweorodes<br />
getrymnesse. BHom 91, 34<br />
‘On <strong>the</strong> next day <strong>the</strong>re shall be heard in <strong>the</strong> heavens a great sound of <strong>the</strong><br />
arraying of armies.’<br />
b. On þære tide wæs sum oðer witega on Iudea-lande.<br />
Ælfr I Thorpe 570, 32<br />
‘At this time <strong>the</strong>re was ano<strong>the</strong>r prophet in <strong>the</strong> land of Judah.’<br />
c. On þis niht beð fowuer niht weaches. Trin Hom 39, 33<br />
‘In this night <strong>the</strong>re are four watches.’<br />
The obligatory insertion of an overt expletive subject took a long time to be adopted.<br />
There is a 14th century revision of Ancrene Riwle (AR), known as Ancrene<br />
4. We take it that þer is not a locative expression in (18b), given <strong>the</strong> specification of place in<br />
<strong>the</strong> post-verbal PP wiðinne þere buruh of ierusalem. Note that this phrase is not in apposition to<br />
þer, so an interpretation ‘<strong>the</strong>re within <strong>the</strong> city of Jerusalem’ is unlikely.
136 Richard Ingham & Klean<strong>the</strong>s K. Grohmann<br />
Wisse (AW), and probably executed in <strong>the</strong> third quarter of <strong>the</strong> 14th century, which<br />
provides interesting evidence of <strong>the</strong> gradual nature of <strong>the</strong> change. After an initial<br />
quantified nominal, expletive subjects now tended to become overt where <strong>the</strong>y<br />
were left unexpressed (‘null expletive subject’) in <strong>the</strong> original:<br />
(21) a. And vi enchesuns beoþ. AR (M) 232<br />
b. Sex enchesuns þer beþ. AW (M) 232<br />
‘There are six reasons.’<br />
(22) a. Moni cunne riwle boeð. AR (M) 232<br />
b. Many dyvers reules þere ben. AW (M) 232<br />
‘There are many different rules.’<br />
However, existential clauses with initial PP adjuncts remain without an overt<br />
expletive in AW, as shown with three examples in (23)–(25):<br />
(23) a. To þe inre is neod wisdome AR (M) 180<br />
‘To <strong>the</strong> inner <strong>the</strong>re is a need for wisdom.’<br />
b. To þe utter temptaciouns is need patience AW (M) 180<br />
‘To <strong>the</strong> outer <strong>the</strong>re is a need for patience.’<br />
(24) a. & in everichon beoð vif ver. AR (M) 36<br />
b. In vchone of þise psalmes ben fyve verses. AW (M) 36<br />
‘(and) in each one <strong>the</strong>re are five verses.’<br />
(25) a. Vor iðisse wildernesse beoð monie vuele bestes. AR (M) 198<br />
‘For in this desert <strong>the</strong>re are many evil beasts.’<br />
b. In þis waie … ben yuel bestes many. AW (M) 198<br />
‘In this way … <strong>the</strong>re are many evil beasts.’<br />
The absence of an expletive after an adverbial PP remains noticeable in Trevisa’s<br />
Polychronicon, written in <strong>the</strong> 1380s, <strong>from</strong> which <strong>the</strong> following two instances<br />
are taken:<br />
(26) a. Aboute þat tyme in Gasquen was a woman departed and todeled vram <strong>the</strong><br />
nauel opward. Trevisa, Polychronicon MET 52, 4<br />
‘About that time in Gascony a woman was cut apart <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> navel up.’<br />
b. In þes Henry hys time was so gret strif in þe cherche of Rome.<br />
Trevisa, Polychronicon MET 136, 104<br />
‘In this Henry’s time <strong>the</strong>re was such great conflict in <strong>the</strong> church of Rome.’<br />
Thus <strong>the</strong> context in which we are arguing that a null expletive remained in Late<br />
Middle English – certainly as concerns <strong>the</strong> London Chronicles – is <strong>the</strong> one which<br />
exhibits a clear lag in developing an obligatory use of an overt expletive in <strong>the</strong> 14th<br />
century. The London Chronicles show that <strong>the</strong> null expletive subject option with<br />
initial adverbials continued into <strong>the</strong> late 15th century.
On <strong>the</strong> post-finite misagreement phenomenon 137<br />
According to our analysis of <strong>the</strong> London Chronicles data, we are now in a position<br />
to provide a structural account of how <strong>the</strong> PFM phenomenon arose. It took <strong>the</strong><br />
form of an optional agreement with a singular expletive subject, overt or null, existing<br />
as an option alongside <strong>the</strong> option of regular number agreement between <strong>the</strong> finite<br />
verb and <strong>the</strong> subject left in <strong>the</strong> VP. Crucially, it was not available when <strong>the</strong> subject<br />
preceded <strong>the</strong> verb, since this structure contained no expletive element. In keeping<br />
with o<strong>the</strong>r sociolinguistic phenomena such as negative concord (Labov 1972), PFM<br />
was not categorical but alternated with <strong>the</strong> ‘standard’ plural agreement pattern. 5<br />
It is interesting to consider <strong>the</strong> PFM phenomenon in terms of how language<br />
change arises as a modification of speakers’ internalised grammars under <strong>the</strong> pressure<br />
of external shifts in <strong>the</strong>ir language experience (see e.g., Lightfoot 2006). The<br />
data patterns testify to <strong>the</strong> acquisition of speaker grammars that freely allowed<br />
PFM but not misagreement when subjects preceded <strong>the</strong> verb. This may have come<br />
about when London speakers heard was for were, possibly as a result of <strong>the</strong> influx<br />
of speakers of o<strong>the</strong>r varieties during <strong>the</strong> 15th century, but ra<strong>the</strong>r than simply<br />
positing this as an across-<strong>the</strong>-board default morphological property, <strong>the</strong>y gave a<br />
structural analysis to <strong>the</strong> input <strong>the</strong>y observed. This would be favoured if <strong>the</strong> primary<br />
linguistic data to which <strong>the</strong>y were exposed contained plenty of evidence for<br />
such a structural analysis. Indeed, Nevalainen (2006), who used a large sample<br />
of English correspondence beginning at around <strong>the</strong> right time for our purposes<br />
(1420), notes that was for were was particularly frequent in <strong>the</strong> context of expletive<br />
<strong>the</strong>re sentences. Although it is highly unlikely that <strong>the</strong> passive clauses with initial<br />
adverbials studied in this paper would have formed a significant proportion of <strong>the</strong><br />
primary linguistic data of language acquisition, expletive <strong>the</strong>re-sentences, on <strong>the</strong><br />
o<strong>the</strong>r hand, are likely to have been relatively common, thus permitting a structural<br />
cue to be established in which an expletive was marked for singular number.<br />
When this vernacular trait is combined with <strong>the</strong> persistence of residual null<br />
expletives, we get <strong>the</strong> result that we see in <strong>the</strong> chronicles data: verbs optionally<br />
agree with expletives, and in this genre expletives may be null as well as overt,<br />
hence <strong>the</strong> PFM phenomenon occurs with and without expletive <strong>the</strong>re. The scenario<br />
found in <strong>the</strong>se texts is thus an intriguing combination of an archaism and an<br />
innovation. The structural position of <strong>the</strong> passive subject is irrelevant to <strong>the</strong> form<br />
of agreement, as we would expect if it is indeed <strong>the</strong> properties of <strong>the</strong> expletive preverbal<br />
constituent that are at issue. Thus <strong>the</strong> passive subject standing in any of <strong>the</strong><br />
three post-finite configurations we identified (embraciated, late, and extraposed)<br />
may agree or not agree with <strong>the</strong> verb. Since <strong>the</strong> PFM phenomenon is independent<br />
5. We use this term somewhat anachronistically, meaning <strong>the</strong> form that was to become <strong>the</strong><br />
norm in <strong>the</strong> later standardisation process.
138 Richard Ingham & Klean<strong>the</strong>s K. Grohmann<br />
of <strong>the</strong> position of <strong>the</strong> passive subject, we would expect that pre-modern and early<br />
modern English varieties in which PFM is not found would exhibit <strong>the</strong> same range<br />
of passive subject possibilities as we found in <strong>the</strong> London chronicles. However,<br />
this, as well as o<strong>the</strong>r aspects of <strong>the</strong> topic, must be left for fur<strong>the</strong>r research.<br />
5. Conclusion<br />
The goal of this paper was to present findings <strong>from</strong> an investigation of subject-verb<br />
misagreement we have identified in Late Middle English, namely a finite singular<br />
auxiliary form with a plural post-finite subject found in expletive passive constructions<br />
in Late Middle English (mid to late 15th century). It occurs not only in clauses<br />
containing an overt expletive subject (<strong>the</strong>re), but also in those with no overt expletive.<br />
We <strong>the</strong>n sought to understand why <strong>the</strong> PFM phenomenon arose when it did,<br />
and what level of linguistic analysis seems most appropriate. The notion of was as<br />
a morphological default form of were was rejected as constituting no more than a<br />
re-description of <strong>the</strong> phenomenon in question, ra<strong>the</strong>r than offering an explanatory<br />
account. Our conclusion is that both <strong>the</strong> sociolinguistic dimension, in particular<br />
<strong>the</strong> presence of vernacular influence, and also a structural analysis of clauses having<br />
post-finite subjects need to be covered. We have <strong>the</strong>refore made <strong>the</strong> assumption<br />
that PFM reflected a formal property of <strong>the</strong> grammar of speakers represented by <strong>the</strong><br />
authors of <strong>the</strong> London chronicles, but was sensitive to <strong>the</strong> sociolinguistic context in<br />
which <strong>the</strong>y operated. It has been proposed here that an increase in <strong>the</strong> use of was<br />
for were by London speakers in <strong>the</strong> 15th century – possibly as a result of <strong>the</strong> dialectal<br />
mix known to have been a feature of <strong>the</strong> capital in that period – became analysed by<br />
learners of this grammar as a structural cue. A structure was posited in which not<br />
only <strong>the</strong> overt expletive <strong>the</strong>re, but also <strong>the</strong> by now archaic null expletive, was variably<br />
assigned a singular number feature. PFM consisted of agreement between <strong>the</strong> finite<br />
verb form and that element. To that extent London chronicle writers, even when<br />
using an archaism, never<strong>the</strong>less reflected <strong>the</strong> vernacular that <strong>the</strong>y witnessed.<br />
Sources<br />
‘Ælfr C. Hom Thorpe’: The Homilies of <strong>the</strong> Anglo-Saxon Church: The First Part, Containing<br />
<strong>the</strong> Sermones Catholici or Homilies of Ælfric, ed. Benjamin Thorpe (2 vols.). London,<br />
1844–6.<br />
‘AR’: Ancren Riwle, ed. and tr. by James Morton <strong>from</strong> Ms. Nero A. xiv, Vol, 57. London: Camden<br />
Soc., 1852 (De la More Press reprint, 1905).<br />
‘AW’: Ancrene Wisse: The English Text of <strong>the</strong> Ancrene Riwle, ed. by Arne Zettersten <strong>from</strong> Magd.<br />
Coll. Cambs Ms. Pepys 2498, EETS OS 274. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1976.
On <strong>the</strong> post-finite misagreement phenomenon 139<br />
‘Bale’: “Bale’s Chronicle”, in Six Town Chronicles of England, ed. by Ralph Flenley. Oxford: Oxford<br />
University Press, 1911.<br />
‘Beaumont-Fletcher’: The Works of Francis Beaumont and John Fletcher, ed. by Alfred R. Glover<br />
& Arnold Waller. London, 1906.<br />
‘BHom’: The Blickling Homilies of <strong>the</strong> Tenth Century: From <strong>the</strong> Marquis of Lothian’s Unique MS.<br />
A.D. 971 — N. Trübner & Co., OS no. 63, Early English Text Society, London, 1880.<br />
‘Bradf.’: “MS Bradford 32D86/42”, in The London Chronicles of <strong>the</strong> 15th Century: A Revolution in<br />
English Writing, ed. by Mary-Rose McLaren, Cambs.: Brewer, 2002, 154–226.<br />
‘Cleop.’: “Cleopatra ms. C IV”, in Chronicles of London, ed. by Charles L. Kingsford. Oxford:<br />
Oxford University Press, 1905.<br />
‘Cromwell’: The Life and Letters of Thomas Cromwell, ed. by Roger B. Merriman (2 vols.). Oxford:<br />
Oxford University Press, 1902.<br />
‘Exeter Book’: The Exeter Book, ed. by George P. Krapp & Eliott Dobbie, Anglo-Saxon Poetic<br />
Records 3. New York: Columbia University Press, 1905.<br />
‘Gough’: “Gough London”, in Six Town Chronicles of England, ed. by Ralph Flenley. Oxford:<br />
Oxford University Press, 1911.<br />
‘Greg.’: The Historical Collections of a Citizen of London in <strong>the</strong> 15th Century, ed. by James Gairdner.<br />
London: Camden Soc., 1876.<br />
‘Hom.’: “Lambeth Homilies”, in Old English Homilies I (= EETS OS 29 & 34), ed. by Richard<br />
Morris. New York, 1969.<br />
‘Jul.’: “Julius BII 1386–1432”, in Chronicles of London, ed. by Charles L. Kingsford. Oxford: Oxford<br />
University Press, 1905.<br />
‘Lamb.’: “A Short English Chronicle in Lambeth ms. 306”, in Three 15th Century Chronicles, ed. by<br />
James Gairdner. London: Camden Soc., 1880.<br />
‘Machyn’: The Diary of Henry Machyn, Citizen and Merchant-Taylor of London, <strong>from</strong> A.D. 1550 to<br />
A.D. 1563, ed. by John Gough Nichols. London: Camden Society 42, 1848.<br />
‘Paston’: Paston Letters and <strong>Papers</strong> of <strong>the</strong> Fifteenth Century, ed. by Norman Davis. Oxford: Clarendon<br />
Press, 1971.<br />
‘Trevisa’: “Trevisa, John”, in Ranulphus Higden: John Trevisa’s Translation of <strong>the</strong> Polychronicon of<br />
Ranulph Higden, Book VI. Ed. based on British Library MS Cotton Tiberius D. VII, ed. by<br />
Ronald Waldron. Heidelberg: Winter, 2004.<br />
‘Trin. Hom’: Old English Homilies of <strong>the</strong> Twelfth Century. Second Series, ed. by Richard Morris.<br />
Early English Text Society, O.S. 53. London, 1873.<br />
‘Vitell.’: “Vitellius A XVI, 1439–1503”, in Chronicles of London, ed. by Charles L. Kingsford. Oxford:<br />
Oxford University Press, 1905.<br />
References<br />
Aungier, George J., ed. 1844. Chroniques de London. (= Camden Society No. 28). London:<br />
Bowyer Nichols.<br />
Borsley, Robert. 2006. “On <strong>the</strong> Nature of Welsh VSO Clauses”. Lingua 116.462–490.<br />
Brie, F.W. 1906. The Brut, or <strong>the</strong> Chronicle of England. (= EETS OS 131,136.) London: Truebner.<br />
Fischer, Olga, Ans van Kemenade, Willem Koopman & Wim van der Wurff. 2000. The Syntax of<br />
Early English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br />
Flenley. Ralph. 1911. Six Town Chronicles of England. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
140 Richard Ingham & Klean<strong>the</strong>s K. Grohmann<br />
van Gelderen, Elly. 1997. “Inflection and Movement in Old English”. German: Syntactic<br />
Problems – Problematic Syntax ed. by Werner Abraham & Elly van Gelderen, 71–82. Tübingen:<br />
Niemeyer.<br />
Haeberli, Eric. 2002. “Inflectional Morphology and <strong>the</strong> Loss of V2 in English”. Syntactic Effects of<br />
Morphological Change ed. by David Lightfoot. Oxford: Oxford University Press.<br />
Ihalainen, Ossi. 1994. “The Dialects of England since 1776”. The Cambridge History of <strong>the</strong> English<br />
Language, vol. V. English in Britain and Overseas: Origins and Developments, ed. by Robert<br />
Burchfield, 197–270. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br />
Ingham, Richard. 2001. “The Structure and Function of Expletive <strong>the</strong>re in Pre-Modern English”.<br />
Reading Working <strong>Papers</strong> in Linguistics 5: 231–249.<br />
Ingham, Richard. 2006a. “Standardising English Syntax: Evidence <strong>from</strong> Seventeenth Century<br />
Corrected Editions”. Paper presented at <strong>the</strong> Directions in English Language conference,<br />
University of Manchester, April 2006.<br />
Ingham, Richard. 2006b. “Syntactic Change in Anglo-Norman and Continental French Chronicles:<br />
Was There a ‘Middle’ Anglo-Norman?”. Journal of French Language Studies 16: 26–49.<br />
Labov, William. 1972. Language in <strong>the</strong> Inner City: Studies in <strong>the</strong> Black English Vernacular.<br />
Philadelphia, Penn.: University of Pennsylvania Press.<br />
Legge, Mary Dominica & Sir William Holdsworth. 1934. Year Books of Edward II, vol. XXI 10<br />
Edward II A.D. 1316–17. London: Selden Society.<br />
Levin, Beth & Malka Rappaport-Hovav 1995. Unaccusativity: At <strong>the</strong> Syntax-Lexical Semantics<br />
Interface. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.<br />
Lightfoot, David W. 2006. How New Languages Emerge. Cambridge: Cambridge University<br />
Press.<br />
Mohammad, Mohammad A. 1989. The Sentential Structure of Arabic. Ph.D. dissertation,<br />
University of Sou<strong>the</strong>rn California, Los Angeles.<br />
Nevalainen, Terttu. 2006. “Vernacular Universals? The Case of Plural was in Early Modern English”.<br />
Types of Variation: Diachronic Dialectal and Typological Interfaces, ed. by Juhani Klemola &<br />
Mikko Laitinen, 351–361. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.<br />
Penney, Norman, ed. 1911. The Journal of George Fox. New York: Octagon.<br />
Schendl, Herbert. 1994. “The 3rd Plural Present Indicative in Early Modern English”. English<br />
Historical Linguistics 1994, ed. by Derek Britton, 143–160. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.<br />
Visser, Fredericus T. 1963. An Historical Syntax of <strong>the</strong> English Language, Part 1: Syntactical Units<br />
with One Verb. Leiden: Brill.<br />
Warner, Anthony. 2006. “Types of Inversion in English”. York <strong>Papers</strong> in Linguistics 5: 157–177.<br />
Williams, Anthony. 2000. “Null Subjects in Middle English Existentials”. Diachronic Syntax ed.<br />
by Susan Pintzuk, George Tsoulas & Anthony Warner, 164–187. Oxford: Oxford University<br />
Press.<br />
Wright, Laura, ed. 2000. The Development of Standard English 1300–1800. Cambridge: Cambridge<br />
University Press.
Syntactic dialectal variation in Middle<br />
English 1<br />
Cristina Suárez-Gómez<br />
Universitat de les Illes Balears<br />
ME is widely known as “par excellence, <strong>the</strong> dialectal phase of English” (Strang<br />
1970: 224). It is <strong>the</strong>refore not at all surprising that <strong>the</strong> linguistic differences<br />
among dialects in ME have long attracted <strong>the</strong> attention of scholars. It is generally<br />
assumed that nor<strong>the</strong>rn dialects innovate mainly due to Scandinavian influence<br />
as opposed to sou<strong>the</strong>rn dialects, which maintain <strong>the</strong> tradition. The aim of my<br />
study is to test whe<strong>the</strong>r this tendency is also reflected in relativization, both in<br />
<strong>the</strong> system of relativizers used and in <strong>the</strong> position adopted by <strong>the</strong> relative clause.<br />
My study shows that <strong>the</strong> system of relativizers inherited <strong>from</strong> OE, with deictic<br />
relativizers, and <strong>the</strong> tendency towards extraposition typical of ME are associated<br />
with sou<strong>the</strong>rn dialects, while <strong>the</strong> North shows a simplified system of relativizers<br />
as well as a marked tendency for relative clauses to be intraposed. The data for<br />
<strong>the</strong> present study have been drawn <strong>from</strong> The Helsinki Corpus of English Texts:<br />
Diachronic and Dialectal.<br />
1. Introduction<br />
The fact that research into English historical dialectology has focused almost<br />
exclusively on Middle English comes as no surprise given that Strang hailed<br />
this period as “par excellence, <strong>the</strong> dialectal phase of English” (1970: 224), and<br />
for Milroy it “exhibited <strong>the</strong> greatest diversity in written language of any period<br />
before or since” (1992: 156). Indeed, for Milroy “<strong>the</strong> label ‘Middle English’<br />
does not refer to a coherent entity, but to a complex series of divergent, rapidly<br />
changing and intertwining varieties restrospectively seen as transitional<br />
1. I am grateful to <strong>the</strong> Autonomous Government of Galicia (grant no. PGIDIT05PXIC20401PN),<br />
and <strong>the</strong> Spanish Ministry of Education and Science and <strong>the</strong> European Regional Development<br />
Fund (grant no. HUM2004–00940/FILO) for generous financial support. Thanks are also due to<br />
Prof Teresa Fanego, Dr Elena Seoane and Dr Belén Méndez for valuable comments on an earlier<br />
version of this chapter.
142 Cristina Suárez-Gómez<br />
between ‘Old English’ and ‘Modern English’ ” (1992: 157). This diversity was<br />
less obvious in both Old English and Early Modern English. In Old English,<br />
this was due to <strong>the</strong> importance of West-Saxon, spoken in <strong>the</strong> sou<strong>the</strong>rn part<br />
of England (with <strong>the</strong> exception of <strong>the</strong> Sou<strong>the</strong>astern part which had its own<br />
Kentish dialect), as West-Saxon became <strong>the</strong> dialectal variety used in most available<br />
prose texts. O<strong>the</strong>r dialects are recorded in a few sparse documents, mainly<br />
glosses of Latin texts: The Lindisfarne Gospels gloss and <strong>the</strong> Durham Ritual,<br />
written in <strong>the</strong> Northumbrian dialect; The Rushworth Gospels and <strong>the</strong> Vespasian<br />
Psalter, written in <strong>the</strong> Mercian dialect. 2 There were also some poems (Cædmon’s<br />
Hymn) and riddles, but because of <strong>the</strong>ir intrinsic nature <strong>the</strong>se provide little information<br />
on syntax. As for Early Modern English, most written evidence is in<br />
<strong>the</strong> ‘standard’ variety used in <strong>the</strong> London area, which thus leaves us with Middle<br />
English as <strong>the</strong> period within <strong>the</strong> historical dialectology of <strong>the</strong> English language<br />
that disposes of most comparable texts.<br />
Studies of Middle English have disclosed major differences between nor<strong>the</strong>rn<br />
(comprising <strong>the</strong> North, West and East-Midlands) and sou<strong>the</strong>rn (including<br />
<strong>the</strong> South and Kentish) dialectal areas. In this North-South divide, nor<strong>the</strong>rn dialects<br />
are considered linguistically more advanced than sou<strong>the</strong>rn ones, which are<br />
deemed more traditional or conservative. It is generally assumed that innovation<br />
in <strong>the</strong> nor<strong>the</strong>rn dialects (inheritors of Old English Northumbrian and Mercian)<br />
stems <strong>from</strong> eighth and ninth century Scandinavian invasions, while <strong>the</strong> sou<strong>the</strong>rn<br />
dialects (inheritors of West-Saxon and Kentish), especially <strong>the</strong> Southwestern,<br />
continue <strong>the</strong> linguistic tradition. According to Milroy (1992: 181), “it is tempting,<br />
<strong>the</strong>refore, to suggest that a history of relatively strong contacts with Danes and (to<br />
a lesser extent) Normans may be implicated here, and that traditional forms survived<br />
where <strong>the</strong>se contacts were less strong” (Milroy 1992: 181).<br />
Such linguistic differences lie basically at <strong>the</strong> level of lexis, phonology and<br />
spelling and, to a lesser extent, at <strong>the</strong> level of grammar. The aim of this chapter<br />
is to test whe<strong>the</strong>r evidence allows us to discuss different dialects <strong>from</strong> a syntactic<br />
perspective paying attention to processes of relativization, both as regards<br />
<strong>the</strong> paradigm of relativizers and <strong>the</strong> position adopted by <strong>the</strong> relative clause<br />
within <strong>the</strong> main clause. Taking into account <strong>the</strong> fact that sou<strong>the</strong>rn dialects are<br />
more conservative than <strong>the</strong>ir nor<strong>the</strong>rn counterparts, <strong>the</strong> underlying hypo<strong>the</strong>sis<br />
would be that <strong>the</strong> system of relativizers inherited <strong>from</strong> Old English and <strong>the</strong><br />
tendency towards extraposition typical of Old English, will be more frequent<br />
in sou<strong>the</strong>rn dialects. Non-sou<strong>the</strong>rn dialects would show a more innovative<br />
2. The dialect classification has been made following <strong>the</strong> corresponding COCOA headers of<br />
The Helsinki Corpus of English Texts: Diachronic and Dialectal.
Syntactic dialectal variation in Middle English 143<br />
system of relativizers, with a marked tendency for relative clauses to be intraposed<br />
ra<strong>the</strong>r than extraposed, which is also an innovative trait in <strong>the</strong> English Language.<br />
2. Description of <strong>the</strong> Corpus<br />
The data for <strong>the</strong> present study have been drawn <strong>from</strong> The Helsinki Corpus of English<br />
Texts: Diachronic and Dialectal. Only prose texts <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> M1 period of The Helsinki<br />
Corpus have been included in <strong>the</strong> analysis, which corresponds to early Middle<br />
English and comprises texts written between 1150 and 1250. The inclusion of additional<br />
subperiods would have added a fur<strong>the</strong>r dimension to <strong>the</strong> task of analysis<br />
and interpretation, that is, <strong>the</strong> dimension of time or chronology and might, <strong>the</strong>refore,<br />
have biased <strong>the</strong> results obtained and <strong>the</strong> conclusions arrived at on dialectal<br />
variation; thus, <strong>the</strong> changes observed would be attributed to both dialectal and<br />
chronological differences. This subperiod of early English has also been chosen<br />
in order to make comparisons with <strong>the</strong> situation in late Old English, a period<br />
whose descriptive syntax on relativization and relativizers is based on <strong>the</strong> standard<br />
variety. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, <strong>the</strong> position of <strong>the</strong> relative clause is not informative<br />
after early Middle English onwards, as <strong>the</strong> process of clausal incorporation was<br />
highly operative in late Old English and less so in early Middle English, following<br />
<strong>the</strong> parataxis-to-hypotaxis hypo<strong>the</strong>sis (see O’Neil 1976; Hopper & Traugott 2003:<br />
chapter 7; Suárez-Gómez 2006: 51–75).<br />
Table 1 illustrates <strong>the</strong> distribution of <strong>the</strong> data used in this research:<br />
Table 1. Description of <strong>the</strong> corpus 3<br />
Dialect Text Nr of words Nr of tokens<br />
West-Midlands Ancrene Wisse 9,320 139<br />
Hali Meidhad 8,820 142<br />
Sawles Warde 3,820 64<br />
Lambeth Homilies 9,900 172<br />
East-Midlands Trinity Homilies 5,070 121<br />
Vices and Virtues 10,230 289<br />
South-West Bodley Homilies 5,880 87<br />
The Holy Rood Tree 6,920 117<br />
South-East Vespasian Homilies 5,880 47<br />
Total 65,840 1,178<br />
3. No texts <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> nor<strong>the</strong>rn dialect are available in this sub-period of The Helsinki Corpus.<br />
Therefore, <strong>the</strong> South will comprise both Southwestern and Sou<strong>the</strong>astern dialects, and <strong>the</strong> North<br />
both East and West-Midlands dialects.
144 Cristina Suárez-Gómez<br />
The corpus contains ca. 65,000 words and has rendered 1,178 examples of relative<br />
clauses. The texts submitted to analysis belong to <strong>the</strong> following dialects: West-<br />
Midlands, East-Midlands, Southwestern and Sou<strong>the</strong>astern. The overall number of<br />
tokens is dialectally classified as follows: 517 tokens belong to <strong>the</strong> West-Midlands<br />
dialect; 410 to <strong>the</strong> East-Midlands; 204 to <strong>the</strong> Southwestern dialect and only 47 to <strong>the</strong><br />
Sou<strong>the</strong>astern one. Since sample sizes vary with respect to dialect, not only in terms of<br />
<strong>the</strong> number of relative clauses, but also in terms of <strong>the</strong> number of words, normalized<br />
frequencies were used in <strong>the</strong> analysis in order to correct <strong>the</strong> unbalanced distribution<br />
of words per dialect. Frequencies have been normalized per 10,000 words.<br />
3. Syntactic dialectology in Middle English<br />
Five major dialectal areas exist in <strong>the</strong> Middle English period, which are <strong>the</strong> direct<br />
inheritors of those corresponding to Old English (see Milroy 1992: 172):<br />
– Nor<strong>the</strong>rn (descendant of Old English Northumbrian);<br />
– East-Midland (descendant of Old English Mercian);<br />
– West-Midland (descendant of Old English Mercian);<br />
– Southwestern, also referred to as Sou<strong>the</strong>rn (descendant of Old English<br />
West-Saxon);<br />
– Sou<strong>the</strong>astern, or Kentish (descendant of Old English Kentish).<br />
Middle English dialectology has been a favourite topic of research, and a whole<br />
bundle of distinctive features characterizing <strong>the</strong> different dialects has been recognized.<br />
Such distinctive features are mainly concerned with spelling and phonology,<br />
lexicon and morphology. In fact, most available regional indicators pertain<br />
to any of <strong>the</strong>se three levels of <strong>the</strong> language. Although five main dialects are distinguished<br />
in Middle English, <strong>the</strong> most revealing regional indicators group <strong>the</strong>m into<br />
two macro-dialects: (i) Nor<strong>the</strong>rn, which comprises <strong>the</strong> inheritors of Old English<br />
Northumbrian and Mercian, namely, Middle English Nor<strong>the</strong>rn, East-Midland, and<br />
West-Midland; and (ii) Sou<strong>the</strong>rn, which comprises <strong>the</strong> descendants of Old English<br />
West-Saxon and Kentish, namely Middle English Southwestern and Sou<strong>the</strong>astern<br />
(or Kentish), a classification which will be adopted in this chapter.<br />
Studies on Middle English dialectology provide comprehensive lists of regional<br />
indicators (Milroy 1992: 174–180; Fernández Cuesta & Rodríguez Ledesma<br />
2004), which lend support to <strong>the</strong> above mentioned North-South divide. As already<br />
mentioned, most of <strong>the</strong>se indicators affect phonology and orthography, lexis and,<br />
less frequently, but still very revealing, morphology. A common tendency is to divide<br />
<strong>the</strong> dialectal areas into two: <strong>the</strong> North, displaying earlier innovations, and <strong>the</strong>
Syntactic dialectal variation in Middle English 145<br />
South, being more conservative, keeping <strong>the</strong> linguistic features of Old English and<br />
only displaying <strong>the</strong> innovative traces later. West-Saxon, <strong>the</strong> better known variety<br />
of Old English, is taken as <strong>the</strong> historical dialect of comparison and all innovative<br />
and conservative traces are determined with respect to this model.<br />
Unfortunately, fewer regional indicators have been ga<strong>the</strong>red in <strong>the</strong> field<br />
of syntax. Although little is known about its contribution to Middle English<br />
dialectology, one may assume that, in a situation of language contact, grammatical<br />
differences would also be observed at <strong>the</strong> level of syntax, 4 and that this<br />
neglected field of study probably had an important part to play. In o<strong>the</strong>r words, we<br />
should expect a state-of-affairs of differentiation (with respect to West-Saxon) in<br />
those dialects which may have been influenced by language contact situations, and<br />
a state-of-affairs of similarity (also with respect to West-Saxon) in those dialects<br />
outside such language contact situations.<br />
To <strong>the</strong> best of my knowledge, <strong>the</strong> only corpus study conducted so far on historical<br />
dialectology at <strong>the</strong> level of syntax is about word-order patterns in Middle English and,<br />
more precisely, <strong>the</strong> way in which <strong>the</strong> different dialects of Middle English implement<br />
<strong>the</strong> verb-second constraint. In <strong>the</strong> South, <strong>the</strong> Middle English verb-second constraint<br />
behaves as it had in OE, that is, as a variant of <strong>the</strong> IP-V2 5 type (like modern Yiddish<br />
and Icelandic), since movement of <strong>the</strong> finite verb to <strong>the</strong> second position of <strong>the</strong> clause<br />
is observed both in main and subordinate clauses (Kroch and Taylor 1997, 2000;<br />
Kroch, Taylor & Ringe 2000). In <strong>the</strong> North, however, <strong>the</strong> verb-second constraint is<br />
of <strong>the</strong> CP-V2 6 type, as in modern mainland Scandinavian, German or Dutch, in <strong>the</strong><br />
sense that movement of <strong>the</strong> finite verb to <strong>the</strong> second position of <strong>the</strong> clause is only<br />
allowed in main clauses. Kroch, Taylor and Ringe hypo<strong>the</strong>size that such a difference<br />
in <strong>the</strong> implementation of <strong>the</strong> verb-second constraint is a consequence of contactinduced<br />
simplification in <strong>the</strong> verbal agreement paradigm of <strong>the</strong> nor<strong>the</strong>rn dialect.<br />
Regarding relativization, some sparse notes are found in Kivimaa (1966:<br />
129–134), but <strong>the</strong>se have not been supported by numbers. She observed that<br />
<strong>the</strong>re are in fact traces of variation in <strong>the</strong> use of relativizers in Early Middle<br />
4. A similar process is observed in pidgin languages, whose grammatical specifications are<br />
in many cases determined after a process of language contact (Holmes 2001: 81, 83). See for<br />
instance <strong>the</strong> development of relativizers in Tok Pisin, <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> deictic marker ia to a function<br />
word (Romaine 1984).<br />
5. IP-V2 = inflectional phrase, verb second language. In Government and Binding <strong>the</strong>ory IP<br />
refers to a maximal projection and represents <strong>the</strong> position to which <strong>the</strong> verb moves in IP-V2<br />
languages.<br />
6. CP-V2 = complementizer phrase, verb second language. In Government and Binding CP<br />
refers to <strong>the</strong> largest unit of grammatical analysis and represents <strong>the</strong> position to which <strong>the</strong> verb<br />
moves in CP-V2 languages.
146 Cristina Suárez-Gómez<br />
English <strong>from</strong> dialect to dialect. With respect to <strong>the</strong> declined relativizers of Old<br />
English (se/seo/þæt), Kivimaa observes that <strong>the</strong>y can still be found in <strong>the</strong> South<br />
and East Midlands in <strong>the</strong> twelfth century. They are however very sparingly used<br />
in <strong>the</strong> West-Midlands. This finding is very surprising, for it is generally agreed that<br />
<strong>the</strong> East-Midlands is among <strong>the</strong> linguistically advanced areas (in comparison<br />
with <strong>the</strong> South), and <strong>the</strong>refore, declined relativizers are expected to recede earlier<br />
in <strong>the</strong> less conservative areas than in <strong>the</strong> more advanced ones. Compound relativizers<br />
(seþe/seoþe/þætþe) are very quickly levelled out and can only be found in <strong>the</strong><br />
South-West Midlands texts and sparingly in Kent, that is, in <strong>the</strong> most conservative<br />
linguistic areas. As for wh-relativizers, <strong>the</strong>se occur very occasionally all throughout<br />
this period according to Kivimaa, but she does not provide any information<br />
concerning <strong>the</strong> dialectal distribution of <strong>the</strong>se relativizers, which in <strong>the</strong> early Middle<br />
English period were just beginning to make <strong>the</strong>ir first timid appearance.<br />
Concerning invariable relativizers, Kivimaa notices that invariable þe disappears<br />
first in <strong>the</strong> North and <strong>the</strong> East-Midlands. Around 1200, this relativizer was<br />
almost extinct also in Kent and, at this time, only survives in <strong>the</strong> Southwest. The<br />
distribution of this relativizer supports <strong>the</strong> characterization of <strong>the</strong> South as a conservative<br />
dialect, and of <strong>the</strong> North and Midlands, as advanced areas. Relativizer þat,<br />
as an invariable word, is more frequently found where þe is receding. Therefore,<br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> previous conclusion, it can be ga<strong>the</strong>red that it is favoured in <strong>the</strong> North and<br />
<strong>the</strong> East-Midlands, <strong>the</strong> areas where þe disappeared first.<br />
My intention in <strong>the</strong> corpus analysis is to compare my results with <strong>the</strong> observations<br />
ga<strong>the</strong>red by Kivimaa and, ultimately, to find out whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> North-South<br />
divide observed at <strong>the</strong> level of spelling and phonology, lexicon, and morphology is<br />
also operative in processes of relativization, both in <strong>the</strong> selection and distribution<br />
of relativizers and in <strong>the</strong> position adopted by <strong>the</strong> relative clause with respect to <strong>the</strong><br />
main clause, whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong>y are extraposed, intraposed or left-dislocated.<br />
4. Relativization strategies<br />
4.1 Description<br />
Three main relativization strategies have been available throughout <strong>the</strong> history of<br />
<strong>the</strong> English language, 7 which allows us to establish a formal distinction into <strong>the</strong><br />
following types of relative clauses in Present-day English:<br />
7. See Keenan (1985: 146 –155) and Givón (1993: 124 –127) for a complete classification of<br />
relativization strategies.
Syntactic dialectal variation in Middle English 147<br />
− Wh-relatives (illustrating <strong>the</strong> pronominal relativization strategy), introduced<br />
by a form of <strong>the</strong> paradigm of <strong>the</strong> pronominal relativizers, as in:<br />
(1) The person [ RC with whom I usually go to exotic countries] is a box of surprises.<br />
− That relatives (illustrating <strong>the</strong> invariable relativization strategy), introduced<br />
by an invariable complementizer:<br />
(2) The class [ RC that I have enjoyed most] was about relative clauses in early<br />
English.<br />
− Zero or unintroduced relatives (illustrating <strong>the</strong> gap relativization strategy):<br />
(3) The song [ RC Ø I was thinking about] suddenly started to play in my favourite<br />
station.<br />
The same three relativization strategies were present in Old English (Traugott<br />
1992: 224–228 and Fischer et al. 2000: 58–61). These are:<br />
• Pronominal relativization strategy, represented by se (4) and seþe (5) relative<br />
clauses:<br />
(4) Eower Fæder [ RC se on heofenum is], wat hwæs eow<br />
Your Fa<strong>the</strong>r Rel in heaven is knew what your<br />
þearf biþ<br />
necessity is<br />
“Your Fa<strong>the</strong>r who is in heaven knows what is necessary for you’.”<br />
[Q O2/3 IR HOM BLICK 6: 103]<br />
(5) Ða fif bec [ RC on ðam ðe is Godes æ]<br />
<strong>the</strong> five books in Rel is God’s law<br />
“<strong>the</strong> five books in which God´s law is found’.” [Q O3 IR RELT LWSTAN 1: 10]<br />
The relative pronoun is moved to <strong>the</strong> front of <strong>the</strong> relative clause irrespective of <strong>the</strong><br />
syntactic function it plays (subject in (4) or complement of a pied-piped preposition<br />
in (5)). It agrees in gender and number with <strong>the</strong> antecedent it resumes, and its case<br />
depends on <strong>the</strong> syntactic function it realizes in <strong>the</strong> relative clause.<br />
• Invariable relativization strategy, represented by þe and þat relative clauses, as<br />
<strong>the</strong> following examples illustrate:<br />
(6) Forþon þære burge nama [ RC þe is nemmed<br />
Because <strong>the</strong> city name Rel is called<br />
Gerusalem] is gereht sibbe gesyhþ<br />
Jesuralem means of-peace sight<br />
“For <strong>the</strong> name of <strong>the</strong> city which is called Jerusalem signifies ‘sight of peace.’’’<br />
[Q O2/3 IR HOM BLICK 6: 25]
148 Cristina Suárez-Gómez<br />
(7) se þridda sinoð wæs eft, [ RC þæt wæs twa<br />
<strong>the</strong> third synod was again Rel was two hund<br />
bisceopa], under þam gingran þeodosige.<br />
hundred bishops under <strong>the</strong> young Theodosius<br />
“The third synod, which had two hundred bishops, was celebrated again under<br />
<strong>the</strong> young Theodosius.’ [Q O3 IR RELT LWSTAN 1: 59]<br />
• Gap relativization strategy, represented by zero relative clauses, as in (8):<br />
(8) & on somnunge wæs monn [ RC Ø hæfde ðone<br />
& in congregation was man Rel had <strong>the</strong><br />
dioul unclæne].<br />
soul unclean<br />
“There was a man in <strong>the</strong> congregation who had <strong>the</strong> soul unclean.”<br />
[Q O3 XX NEWT LIND 4.33]<br />
Relativizer zero existed in Old English, but such relative clauses were very uncommon.<br />
In most cases <strong>the</strong> relativized item functions as subject.<br />
Middle English keeps <strong>the</strong> same three-fold formal distinction of relative clauses. In<br />
fact, Middle English displays <strong>the</strong> same relativizers as West-Saxon: invariable relativizers<br />
þe and þat; relativizer zero; and, finally, pronominal relativizers, represented by<br />
<strong>the</strong> demonstrative elements se and seþe. To <strong>the</strong>se relativizers, it is necessary to add <strong>the</strong><br />
wh- pronominal set that emerged in this period (Fischer 1992: 199), illustrated in (9):<br />
(9) And him behoten ðat an scolde cumen of his<br />
and him promised that one should come <strong>from</strong> his<br />
kenne [ RC ðurh hwam all mankenn scolde bien<br />
family through rel all mankind should be<br />
iblesced]<br />
blessed<br />
“And it was promised to him that one should not come <strong>from</strong> this family through<br />
whom all manking should be blessed.” [Q M1 IR RELT VICES1 3: 109]<br />
The most important differences between Old and Middle English lie in <strong>the</strong> distribution<br />
and frequency of each relativization strategy, which are <strong>the</strong> object of study<br />
in <strong>the</strong> following section.<br />
4.2 Distribution<br />
Relative clauses introduced by <strong>the</strong> invariable relativizer þe are by far <strong>the</strong> most frequently<br />
used in late Old English, as illustrated in Table 2 (see Suárez Gómez 2004: 216),<br />
introducing almost 80 per cent of <strong>the</strong> relative clauses of this period. Clauses introduced<br />
by pronominal relativizers, ei<strong>the</strong>r simple or compound, represent <strong>the</strong> second most<br />
frequent group of relative clauses, with much less frequency than þe relative clauses<br />
(18.7 per cent). In this period <strong>the</strong>re are only a few sporadic instances of þat used
Syntactic dialectal variation in Middle English 149<br />
invariantly (2 per cent). In sum, <strong>the</strong> situation found in late Old English is that of one<br />
clear favourite relativizer (invariable þe), a decline in <strong>the</strong> use of pronominal relativizers<br />
(se and seþe) and a very timid presence of invariable þat.<br />
Regarding <strong>the</strong> distribution of relativizers in early Middle English, Table 2 reveals<br />
that while invariable þe remains <strong>the</strong> favourite relativizer, it has undergone a significant<br />
reduction in frequency, compared to its position in late Old English, <strong>from</strong> 79 per cent<br />
to 66.2 per cent. By contrast, invariable þat, sparingly used in late Old English, shows<br />
a striking increase in frequency <strong>from</strong> late Old English to early Middle English <strong>from</strong><br />
2 per cent to 30 per cent. Pronominal relativizers decline sharply after Old English<br />
<strong>from</strong> 18.7 per cent to 3 per cent, almost verging on ‘danger of extinction’. Finally,<br />
<strong>the</strong> results <strong>from</strong> Table 3 also reveal <strong>the</strong> first appearance of a new set of pronominal<br />
relativizers in <strong>the</strong> English language, represented by wh-words as adnominal relativizers.<br />
This function was non-existent in late Old English, and still infrequent in this<br />
early period, but already present in <strong>the</strong> English language.<br />
Table 2. Distribution of relativizers in late Old (adapted <strong>from</strong> Suárez Gómez 2004: 216)<br />
and Middle English 8<br />
Late Old English Þe 526 (79.3%)<br />
Se and seþe 124 (18.7%)<br />
Þat 13 (2%)<br />
Total 663<br />
Early Middle English Þe 780 (66.2%)<br />
Þat 354 (30%)<br />
Se and seþe 36 (3%)<br />
Wh- 8 (0.8%)<br />
Total 1,178<br />
Table 3. Distribution of relativizers according to dialect in Middle English<br />
East-Midlands West-Midlands South Kent Total<br />
Þe 347 (226.8) 238 (74.7) 165 (128.9) 30 (51) 780<br />
Þat 57 (37.2) 265 (83.2) 26 (20.3) 6 (10.2) 354<br />
Se/seþe 2 (1.3) 10 (3.1) 13 (10.1) 11 (18.7) 36<br />
Wh- 4 (2.6) 4 (1.3) – – 8<br />
Total 410 517 204 47 1,178<br />
8. Zero relativizers have not been included in <strong>the</strong> analysis of relativizers because of <strong>the</strong> low<br />
number of examples. Only 8 instances of zero relative clauses have been found in <strong>the</strong> corpus<br />
under analysis.
150 Cristina Suárez-Gómez<br />
For <strong>the</strong> purposes of this study, more revealing information is provided in<br />
Table 3, which contains <strong>the</strong> distribution of relativizers in early Middle English<br />
according to <strong>the</strong> dialectal area in which <strong>the</strong>y appear. This table includes raw numbers<br />
and normalized frequencies per ten thousand words. The four dialectal areas<br />
represent <strong>the</strong> classification displayed in The Helsinki Corpus.<br />
Invariable þe, <strong>the</strong> most commonly used relativizer in late Old English and in<br />
early Middle English, gained preference in <strong>the</strong> linguistically conservative areas of<br />
<strong>the</strong> South and Kent. More surprisingly, it also became <strong>the</strong> relativizer of choice in<br />
<strong>the</strong> East-Midlands, showing an even higher frequency than in late Old English.<br />
This contradicts Kivimaa (1966), who observed that this relativizer first levelled<br />
out in this dialectal area (and <strong>the</strong> North). Taking into account <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong><br />
sou<strong>the</strong>rn dialect is <strong>the</strong> direct inheritor of <strong>the</strong> West-Saxon dialect of Old English,<br />
<strong>the</strong> predominance of þe in <strong>the</strong> South and Kent is only to be expected, given that it<br />
is a representative of a conservative dialect. What is much harder to account for is<br />
its continued high frequency in <strong>the</strong> East-Midlands, a linguistically advanced area,<br />
where one would accordingly expect integration and innovations ra<strong>the</strong>r than <strong>the</strong><br />
retention of earlier traditions.<br />
A very different siuation prevailed in <strong>the</strong> West-Midlands where <strong>the</strong> invariable<br />
þat, which although present, was very rarely used in late Old English (see Table 2),<br />
became <strong>the</strong> preferred invariable relativizer. This situation deserves special attention<br />
because here <strong>the</strong> frequency of invariable þat is even greater than that of invariable<br />
þe (94.8 vs 63.7 respectively), and thus constitutes an innovative trace with respect<br />
to late Old English. This distribution confirms Kivimaa’s observation that þat is<br />
more frequent where þe disappears first, but contradicts her conclusions in that<br />
þat is not favoured in <strong>the</strong> East-Midlands.<br />
Regarding Old English pronominal relativizers (se and seþe), <strong>the</strong> numbers lend<br />
support to Kivimaa’s conclusions. My results show that Old English pronominal<br />
relativizers are in decline and almost in ‘danger of extinction’, especially in <strong>the</strong> East-<br />
and West-Midlands (3.1 and 1.3 occurrences per ten thousand words respectively).<br />
Surprisingly, <strong>the</strong>y appear more frequently in <strong>the</strong> generally most conservative area<br />
linguistically speaking, namely Kent (18.7), in which <strong>the</strong>y are even more frequent<br />
than <strong>the</strong> innovative þat.<br />
Finally, <strong>the</strong> dialectal distribution shows that <strong>the</strong> new pronominal relativizers<br />
represented by wh-words which were introduced into <strong>the</strong> English language in this<br />
period (cf. Table 2), are only present in <strong>the</strong> Midlands, both East and West, which<br />
are precisely those dialects in which <strong>the</strong> frequency of pronominal relativizers inherited<br />
<strong>from</strong> Old English (se and seþe) decreased earlier. This substitution effect<br />
seems to have acted as a compensation strategy, so as not to leave a functional<br />
gap vacant, a phenomemon which would agree with one of Maxwell’s diachronic
Syntactic dialectal variation in Middle English 151<br />
generalizations, whereby “two strategies in a given language tend to complement<br />
each o<strong>the</strong>r; as one advances, <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r recedes” (Maxwell 1982: 150). Adapted to<br />
this context in particular, members of a relativization strategy – in this case se/seþe<br />
and wh- – complement each o<strong>the</strong>r: as se/seþe recede, wh- advances. The same effect<br />
can easily be applied to <strong>the</strong> substitution of invariable þe by þat, especially in<br />
<strong>the</strong> case of <strong>the</strong> West-Midlands, where invariable þat seems to be substituting <strong>the</strong><br />
decreasing þe, and it already outnumbers it (Suárez-Gómez, forthcoming).<br />
5. Position of <strong>the</strong> relative clause<br />
5.1 Description<br />
One important aspect of variation in Old English relative clauses is <strong>the</strong> position<br />
that <strong>the</strong> relative clause occupies with respect to <strong>the</strong> main clause. There seems<br />
to be agreement that Old English syntax was characteristically paratactic, and<br />
<strong>the</strong> number of subordinate structures arose after <strong>the</strong> reinterpretation and subsequent<br />
reanalysis of originally paratactic structures (see Hopper and Traugott<br />
2003: chapter 7). In fact, a number of strategies were available in Old English<br />
to avoid embedded relative clauses within <strong>the</strong> main clause. The most relevant<br />
strategies are <strong>the</strong> extraposition of <strong>the</strong> relative clause towards <strong>the</strong> end of <strong>the</strong><br />
main clause, or by moving <strong>the</strong> relative clause to <strong>the</strong> front by a rule of copying <strong>the</strong><br />
antecedent (Carkeet 1976: 45). Through this strategy, <strong>the</strong> antecedent (normally <strong>the</strong><br />
subject) and <strong>the</strong> relative clause are topicalized, and resumed again by means of<br />
a copy pronoun (cases of left-dislocation), so that <strong>the</strong> subject is not separated<br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> main verb. This parataxis-to-hypotaxis hypo<strong>the</strong>sis is also reflected<br />
in <strong>the</strong> evolution of <strong>the</strong> position that <strong>the</strong> relative clause adopts with respect<br />
to <strong>the</strong> main clause. In Present-day English, relative clauses tend to follow <strong>the</strong><br />
antecedent <strong>the</strong>y modify, irrespective of <strong>the</strong> function this realizes in <strong>the</strong> main<br />
clause. Therefore, if <strong>the</strong> antecedent functions as subject, <strong>the</strong> relative clause will<br />
most likely be embedded, as in (10), and if <strong>the</strong> antecedent functions as direct<br />
object, <strong>the</strong> relative clause will not be embedded, as in (11).<br />
(10) The house [ RC that I rent] has amazing views.<br />
(11) I rent a house [ RC that has amazing views].<br />
In earlier English, and especially in Old and early Middle English (O’Neil 1976),<br />
constructions such as (10) were available, but rarer than in Present-day English. In<br />
fact, <strong>the</strong>re was a series of strategies available in <strong>the</strong>se early periods of <strong>the</strong> English<br />
language which avoided embedding. The most common alternative strategies were
152 Cristina Suárez-Gómez<br />
ei<strong>the</strong>r to extrapose <strong>the</strong> relative clause, or to left-dislocate <strong>the</strong> antecedent and <strong>the</strong><br />
relative clause A three-fold classification regarding <strong>the</strong> position of <strong>the</strong> relative<br />
clause in Old English is summarized below (O’Neil 1976; Hopper & Traugott 2003:<br />
chapter 7; Suárez-Gómez 2006: 39– 42):<br />
• Extraposed relative clauses, in which <strong>the</strong> relative clause is separated <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
antecedent it resumes and moved to <strong>the</strong> end of <strong>the</strong> main clause, as <strong>the</strong> following<br />
example illustrates:<br />
(12) We sceolon urne Hælend i gladian mid<br />
we must our Saviour gratify with<br />
sumre godnysse, [ RC se i ðe æfre wile us<br />
certain goodness Rel ever wants us<br />
mannum mildsian]<br />
to men show mercy<br />
“We must gratify our Saviour with certain goodness, who always wants us to<br />
show mercy to men.” [Q O3 IR HOM AELFR15: 47]<br />
• Left-dislocated relative clauses, in which a relative clause is displaced to <strong>the</strong> front<br />
of <strong>the</strong> main clause, toge<strong>the</strong>r with <strong>the</strong> antecedent it resumes. The antecedent is<br />
<strong>the</strong>n repeated in <strong>the</strong> main clause, as below in (13):<br />
(13) Ac se i [ RC þe (i) god onginneþ and on<br />
but he Rel good begins and in<br />
þon þurhwunaþ oþ ende of his lifes], se<br />
this way continues until end of his life this<br />
bið hal geworden.<br />
is hale been<br />
“But he who begins good and continues <strong>the</strong>rein until <strong>the</strong> end of his life shall<br />
be saved.” [Q O2/3 IR HOM BLICK2: 139]<br />
In example (13), <strong>the</strong> relative clause þe god onginneþ and on þon þurhwunaþ oþ<br />
ende of his lifes is moved to <strong>the</strong> front of <strong>the</strong> main clause preceded by <strong>the</strong> antecedent<br />
se. This antecedent is <strong>the</strong>n copied (‘copy-pronoun’) and functions as <strong>the</strong><br />
subject of <strong>the</strong> main clause.<br />
• Intraposed relative clauses, in which <strong>the</strong> relative clause and <strong>the</strong> antecedent are<br />
toge<strong>the</strong>r, and <strong>the</strong> relative clause is embedded within <strong>the</strong> main clause, as in (14):<br />
(14) Eower Fæder i [ RC se i on heofenum is], wat<br />
your Fa<strong>the</strong>r Rel in heaven is knew<br />
hwæs eow þearf biþ<br />
what your necessity is<br />
“Your Fa<strong>the</strong>r who is in heaven knows what is necessary for you.”<br />
[Q O2/3 IR HOM BLICK2: 103]
5.2 Distribution<br />
Syntactic dialectal variation in Middle English 153<br />
Before dealing with <strong>the</strong> results of my analysis, I would like to point out that, in order<br />
to analyze position, many examples were filtered out, leaving only those which<br />
can potentially show variation in position. In fact most of <strong>the</strong> selected tokens are<br />
examples in which <strong>the</strong> relativized item is <strong>the</strong> subject, as in example (4) above, or a<br />
topicalized complement, as wið wifa earfoðnyssum in example (15).<br />
(15) Wið wifa i earfoðnyssum [ RC þe (i) on heora<br />
against women pain Rel in <strong>the</strong>ir<br />
inwerdlicum stowum earfeþu þrowiað], foxes<br />
internal places trouble suffer of-foxes<br />
leoþu & his smeoru mid ealdon ele &<br />
joint & his grease with old oil &<br />
mid tyrwan wyrc him to sealfe do on<br />
with tar work him to unguent do on<br />
wifa stowe.<br />
of-women places<br />
“Against <strong>the</strong> pain of women who had trouble on <strong>the</strong>ir internal parts, mix tar<br />
with old oil and foxes’ joints until it becomes an unguent and put it on those<br />
female parts’.” [Q O2/3 IS HANDM QUADR 234]<br />
By contrast, examples such as (8) and (9) had to be excluded <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> count of relative<br />
clause position. Although <strong>the</strong> antecedent of example (8) functions as subject,<br />
it resorts to Subject-Verb inversion, so as not to separate <strong>the</strong> antecedent <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
relativized item (sum mon and se) thus avoiding embedding. In instances similar<br />
to (9), also left out of <strong>the</strong> count, <strong>the</strong> antecedent functioning as prepositional object<br />
of <strong>the</strong> main verb appears in final position of <strong>the</strong> main clause, leaving no alternative<br />
position for <strong>the</strong> relative clause. The exclusion of such examples explains <strong>the</strong> reduced<br />
number of examples in <strong>the</strong> following tables in comparison with previous ones.<br />
The results <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> position in late Old English and early Middle English are<br />
included in Table 4:<br />
Table 4. Distribution of position in late Old English (Suárez-Gómez 2006: 80) and early<br />
Middle English<br />
Late Old English Extraposition 105 (30.3)<br />
Left-Dislocation 81 (23.3)<br />
Intraposition 57 (16.4)<br />
Total 243<br />
Early Middle English Extraposition 97 (14.7)<br />
Left-Dislocation 56 (8.5)<br />
Intraposition 106 (16.1)<br />
Total 259
154 Cristina Suárez-Gómez<br />
The results shown in Table 4 confirm <strong>the</strong> tendency for relative clauses to be<br />
non-intraposed (or non-embedded) in Late Old English, ei<strong>the</strong>r by resorting to extraposition<br />
or left-dislocation, but especially to <strong>the</strong> former, which is <strong>the</strong> preferred<br />
position adopted by relative clauses with respect to <strong>the</strong> main clause. However, <strong>the</strong><br />
total count reveals intraposition as <strong>the</strong> preferred option in early Middle English,<br />
over both extraposition and left-dislocation.<br />
In terms of dialects, <strong>the</strong> distribution of <strong>the</strong> position of <strong>the</strong> relative clause has<br />
rendered <strong>the</strong> results included in Table 5:<br />
Table 5. Distribution of position according to dialect in Middle English<br />
The results in Table 5 reveal that extraposition – <strong>the</strong> favourite position in late<br />
Old English – is retained as <strong>the</strong> favourite alternative in <strong>the</strong> dialectal variety of<br />
Kent and <strong>the</strong> South. By contrast, intraposition becomes <strong>the</strong> favourite option in<br />
<strong>the</strong> East- and West-Midlands dialects, especially, in <strong>the</strong> former. The increase in<br />
intraposition in both <strong>the</strong>se linguistically innovative areas is of utmost importance<br />
since it helps confirm <strong>the</strong> results obtained regarding <strong>the</strong> distribution of relativizers.<br />
6. Conclusions<br />
East-Midlands West-Midlands South Kent Total<br />
Extraposition 30 (19.6) 35 (11) 21 (16.4) 11 (18.7) 97<br />
Left-Dislocation 20 (13.1) 21 (6.6) 15 (11.7) – 56<br />
Intraposition 43 (28.1) 49 (15.4) 11 (8.6) 3 (5.1) 106<br />
TOTAL 93 105 47 14 259<br />
In this chapter I have analyzed <strong>the</strong> distribution of relativizers and <strong>the</strong> position<br />
that <strong>the</strong> relative clause occupies with respect to <strong>the</strong> main clause in order to ascertain<br />
whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> North-South divide attested in Middle English for some levels of<br />
analysis such as morphology, phonology and lexis, also holds true at <strong>the</strong> syntactic<br />
level. My analysis of an early Middle English corpus shows that, regarding <strong>the</strong><br />
paradigm of relativizers, <strong>the</strong> innovative invariable þat gains in prominence and<br />
preference over <strong>the</strong> traditional and archaic þe in both <strong>the</strong> West- and East-Midland<br />
in comparison with its distribution in late Old English. As regards <strong>the</strong> paradigm<br />
of <strong>the</strong> pronominal relativizers, wh- words start to be used first in <strong>the</strong> most innovative<br />
areas, which happen to be <strong>the</strong> same areas that had earlier ceased to use <strong>the</strong><br />
Old English pronominal relativizers se and seþe. The South manifests itself as <strong>the</strong><br />
most conservative area, showing a very similar distribution to late Old English:<br />
pronominal se and seþe relativizers are still used with some frequency and <strong>the</strong> only<br />
available invariable relativizer with some productivity is þe.
Syntactic dialectal variation in Middle English 155<br />
Regarding <strong>the</strong> position occupied by <strong>the</strong> relative clause, it has been observed<br />
that <strong>the</strong> less-preferred structural technique of Old English, namely intraposition,<br />
becomes <strong>the</strong> preferred form in <strong>the</strong> East- and <strong>the</strong> West-Midlands in early Middle<br />
English, <strong>the</strong> most advanced areas. By contrast, <strong>the</strong> dialects <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> South, both<br />
Southwestern and Kent, avoid <strong>the</strong> use of embedded structures and instead favour<br />
extraposition and also, in <strong>the</strong> Southwest, left-dislocation.<br />
The analysis of <strong>the</strong> distribution of relativizers and <strong>the</strong> position adopted by <strong>the</strong><br />
relative clause with respect to <strong>the</strong> main clause provides relevant evidence of geographical<br />
variation in early Middle English, agreeing with <strong>the</strong> evidence provided<br />
at o<strong>the</strong>r linguistic levels, as is <strong>the</strong> case of orthography and pronunciation, lexis and<br />
morphology. The evidence seems to suggest that more advanced dialects (such<br />
as those in <strong>the</strong> East- and West-Midlands) innovate earlier than less advanced or<br />
more conservative dialects (Southwestern and Kentish), and thus confirm <strong>the</strong><br />
North-South divide.<br />
References<br />
Carkeet, David. 1976. Old English correlatives: an exercise of internal syntactic reconstruction.<br />
Glossa 10:1. 44–63.<br />
Fernández Cuesta, Julia & María Nieves Rodríguez Ledesma. 2004. Nor<strong>the</strong>rn Features in 15th<br />
and 16th-Century Legal Documents From Yorkshire. Methods and Data in English Historical<br />
Dialectology ed. by Marina Dossena & Roger Lass, 287–308. Bern: Peter Lang.<br />
Fischer, Olga. 1992. Syntax. The Cambridge History of <strong>the</strong> English Language, vol. II, 1066–1476<br />
ed. by Norman Blake, 207–408. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br />
Fischer, Olga, Ans van Kemenade, Willem Koopman & Win van der Wurff. 2000. The Syntax of<br />
Early English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br />
Givón, Talmy. 1993. A Function-Based Introduction. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.<br />
Holmes, Janet. 2001. An Introduction to Socio-Linguistics. 2nd edition. London: Longman.<br />
Hopper, Paul & Elizabeth Closs Traugott. 2003. Grammaticalization. Cambridge: Cambridge<br />
University Press.<br />
Keenan, Edward. 1985. Relative clauses. Language typology and syntactic description, vol. II:<br />
complex constructions ed. by Timothy Shopen, 141–170. Cambrige: Cambridge University Press.<br />
Kivimaa, Kirsti. 1966. þe and þat as clause connectives in early Middle Enlgish with special consideration<br />
of <strong>the</strong> emergence of <strong>the</strong> pleonastic þat. (Commentations Humanarum Litterarum 39, 1).<br />
Helsinki: Societas Scientarum Fennica.<br />
Kroch, Anthony & Ann Taylor. 1997. Verb movement in Old and Middle English: dialect<br />
variation and language contact. Parameters of Morphosyntactic Change ed. by Ans van<br />
Kemenade & Nigel Vincent, 297–325. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br />
Kroch, Anthony & Ann Taylor. 2000. Verb-Object order in early Middle English. Diachronic<br />
Syntax. Models and Mechanims ed. by Susan Pintzuk, George Tsoulas & Antony Warner,<br />
132–163. Oxford: Oxford University Press.<br />
Kroch, Anthony, Ann Taylor & Donald Ringe. 2000. The Middle English Verb-Second Constraint:<br />
A Case Study in Language Contact and Language Change. Textual Parameters in
156 Cristina Suárez-Gómez<br />
Older Languages ed. by Susan Herring, Pieter von Reenen & Lene Scholsler, 353–391.<br />
Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.<br />
Maxwell, Dan. 1982. Implications of NP accessibility for diachronic syntax. Folia Linguistica<br />
Historica III:2. 135–52.<br />
Milroy, James. 1992. Middle English dialectology. The Cambridge History of <strong>the</strong> English Language,<br />
vol. II, 1066–1476 ed. by Norman Blake, 156–206. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br />
O’Neil, Wayne. 1976. Clause adjunction in Old English. General Linguistics 17: 199–211.<br />
Romaine, Suzanne. 1984. Relative clauses in child language, pidgins and creoles. Australian<br />
Journal of Linguistics 4: 257–281.<br />
Strang, Barbara. 1970. A History of English. London: Methuen.<br />
Suárez-Gómez, Cristina. 2004. Relativisation in Early English (with special reference to <strong>the</strong> distribution<br />
of relativisers and <strong>the</strong> position of relative clauses). Ph.Dissertation [CD-ROM].<br />
University of Santiago de Compostela.<br />
Suárez-Gómez, Cristina. 2006. Relativization in Early English (950–1050): <strong>the</strong> Position of Relative<br />
Clauses. Bern: Peter Lang.<br />
Suárez-Gómez, Cristina. Forthcoming. Strategies in competition: demonstratives and interrogatives<br />
as relativizers in <strong>the</strong> history of English. English Studies.<br />
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 1992. Syntax. The Cambridge History of <strong>the</strong> English Language, vol. I, <strong>the</strong><br />
Beginnings to 1066 ed. by Richard Hogg, 168–229. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Particles as grammaticalized complex<br />
predicates<br />
Bettelou Los<br />
Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen<br />
This paper argues that English phrasal verbs represent a grammaticalization,<br />
<strong>from</strong> Phrase to Head, of a complex predicate construction. Predicates and <strong>the</strong><br />
particles of phrasal verbs share a number of striking quirks: syntactically, both<br />
may appear with “unselected objects” and, semantically, both may form idioms of<br />
which <strong>the</strong> meaning cannot be predicted <strong>from</strong> its separate parts. Particles cannot<br />
be analyzed as predicates synchronically, however, because <strong>the</strong>y allow two word<br />
orders: V – NP – particle and V – particle – NP, whereas predicates only allow <strong>the</strong><br />
first of <strong>the</strong>se, and not <strong>the</strong> second; fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, <strong>the</strong> particle appears to “bleach”<br />
much more easily than predicates, probably because <strong>the</strong> prototypical predicates,<br />
adjectives, express properties, whereas particles (prepositions) express paths.<br />
EModE marks a significant point in <strong>the</strong> development of <strong>the</strong> particle verb system<br />
in that <strong>the</strong> verbs participating in <strong>the</strong> combination are no longer restricted to<br />
‘light’ verbs but include deadjectival and denominal verbs, unergatives, and<br />
‘manner-of-motion’ verbs.<br />
1. Introduction<br />
This paper investigates <strong>the</strong> origins of English phrasal verbs. These verbs consist<br />
of a verb and an adverbial or prepositional element traditionally referred to as<br />
a particle. The observation that particles share many characteristics with complex<br />
predicates has a long history in <strong>the</strong> literature <strong>from</strong> at least <strong>the</strong> early fifties<br />
onwards (Anthony 1953: 86). It has been observed, for instance, that <strong>the</strong> two<br />
orders famously exhibited by phrasal verbs, V – NP – Particle (as in (1a)), and<br />
V – Particle – NP (as in (1b)), are also found with complex predicates (cf. (1c)<br />
with (1a), and (1d) with (1b)).<br />
(1) a. He threw <strong>the</strong> remains of his dinner away.<br />
b. He threw away <strong>the</strong> remains of his dinner.<br />
c. He threw <strong>the</strong> documents in <strong>the</strong> dustbin.<br />
d. *He threw in <strong>the</strong> dustbin <strong>the</strong> documents.
158 Bettelou Los<br />
e. He threw all <strong>the</strong> documents containing incriminating evidence in <strong>the</strong><br />
dustbin.<br />
f. He threw in <strong>the</strong> dustbin all <strong>the</strong> documents containing incriminating<br />
evidence.<br />
The fact that <strong>the</strong> particle away derives <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Prepostitional Phrase on weg and<br />
was <strong>the</strong>refore of <strong>the</strong> same category as <strong>the</strong> predicate in <strong>the</strong> dustbin fur<strong>the</strong>r supports<br />
a diachronic link, as we will discuss in <strong>the</strong> next section. The main difference<br />
between <strong>the</strong> particle and predicate constructions in (1) is <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong> second<br />
order, V – Predicate – NP, as in (1d), is a marked one, and most probably <strong>the</strong> result<br />
of extraposition of <strong>the</strong> NP. Biber et al. (1999: 930) note that (1c) is <strong>the</strong> regular order<br />
(“by far <strong>the</strong> most common option”), and we will refer to this order as <strong>the</strong> ‘predicate<br />
order’. Biber et al. conclude that <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r order, as in (1d and 1f), is triggered<br />
by considerations of end-weight; note that (1f), with its long NP, is acceptable,<br />
whereas (1d) is not. In <strong>the</strong> case of particles, however, it is <strong>the</strong> V – Particle – NP<br />
order that is <strong>the</strong> most frequent one. We will refer to this order as <strong>the</strong> ‘particle<br />
order’, and alternations such as (1a)–(1b), where end-weight is not a trigger, as<br />
‘particle syntax’. Biber et al. note that <strong>the</strong>re is no single factor that governs <strong>the</strong><br />
selection of one particular order over <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r: end-weight is one, but <strong>the</strong>re are<br />
o<strong>the</strong>rs. They note that <strong>the</strong> ‘particle order’ is linked with a high degree of idiomaticity<br />
of <strong>the</strong> combination, as in (2a), whereas <strong>the</strong> ‘predicate order’ tends to occur<br />
primarily with particles with literal, spatial meanings, as in (2b) (both examples<br />
<strong>from</strong> Biber et al. 1999: 933):<br />
(2) a. Now carry out <strong>the</strong> instructions. (Fiction)<br />
b. The Germans carried <strong>the</strong> corpse out. (Fiction)<br />
They note that in (2b) “<strong>the</strong> result of <strong>the</strong> action is that ‘<strong>the</strong> corpse is out’, while it<br />
certainly is not true that ‘<strong>the</strong> instructions are out’ as a result of <strong>the</strong> action in idiomatic<br />
[(1a)]” (Biber et al. 1999: 933). Such resultative meanings are typical of predicates,<br />
as we will see below, which explains <strong>the</strong> tendency for such spatial particles to<br />
have ‘predicate’ orders. I will argue in this chapter that <strong>the</strong>se, and o<strong>the</strong>r similarities<br />
between particles and predicates point to a diachronic relationship. The ‘particle<br />
order’ of (1b) is a morphosyntactic sign that <strong>the</strong> predicate has grammaticalized:<br />
<strong>from</strong> a phrase (XP), it has become a head (X 0 ), allowing incorporation into <strong>the</strong><br />
verb so that verb and particle express a single verbal action and function as a single<br />
lexeme. ‘Particle syntax’ is not restricted to particle verb combinations but may<br />
include V + AP and V + PP combinations as illustrated in (3) (see also Fraser 1965:<br />
82ff, Bolinger 1971: 37ff, Quirk et al. 1985: 734, 1167; Claridge 2000: 66–70, 153<br />
& Denison 1981: 36–37). The items in (4), once PPs, now appear to be adverbs or<br />
adjectives. Such a lexicalisation <strong>from</strong> phrase to head of <strong>the</strong> predicate shows that<br />
<strong>the</strong> complex predicate construction is grammaticalizing.
Particles as grammaticalized complex predicates 159<br />
(3) a. break/blow/blast/cut/fling/push/rake/whisk open, cut/stop short, bleach<br />
white, blow/keep/make/sift clear, put straight, let/set free, think fit, cast/let/<br />
pry/shake/wrestle loose, strip naked etc.<br />
b. bring to light, put in execution, take in hand, call to mind, call in question,<br />
take into consideration etc.<br />
(4) carry aloft (< on loft), set alight (< on light), take apart (< on part), put awry<br />
(< on wry), carry around (< on round), keep asunder (< on sunder), set afoot<br />
(< on foot), etc.<br />
The arguments advanced against identifying particles as grammaticalized predicates<br />
focus on <strong>the</strong> failure of many particles (most notoriously up) to function as independent<br />
predicates (He phoned me up versus *I am up), <strong>the</strong> lack of telicity in many cases<br />
(though telicity would be expected if particles were grammaticalized predicates,<br />
which are as a rule resultative), and <strong>the</strong> failure of constituency tests and topicalization.<br />
I will argue in this chapter that <strong>the</strong>se same quirks are exhibited by predicates.<br />
Resultative complex predicates show various degrees of productivity, transparency<br />
and idiosyncrasy which mirror those of particle verbs, and easily acquire idiomatic<br />
meanings that only work in combination with specific verbs: cf. drink NP under <strong>the</strong><br />
table versus *he is under <strong>the</strong> table (Goldberg & Jackendoff 2004).<br />
If <strong>the</strong> similarity in behaviour of predicates and particles can be taken as a<br />
pointer to a shared diachronic origin, it is all <strong>the</strong> more interesting that clear signs<br />
of this affinity between <strong>the</strong> two do not emerge until EModE. The affinity can be<br />
traced into OE, but <strong>the</strong>n only with prefixes, which were still productive in that<br />
stage of <strong>the</strong> language, and not with particles.<br />
2. Particles and predicates<br />
2.1 Origin of particles<br />
Bolinger (1971: 18) provides this list of particles:<br />
(5) aback, about, above, across, after, again, aground, ahead, along, alongside, aloud,<br />
apart, around, aside, askew, astray, astride, atop, asunder, athwart, away, back,<br />
before, behind, below, between, by, down, forth, forward, home, in, off, on, out,<br />
over, past, round, through, to, toge<strong>the</strong>r, under, underground, underneath, up.<br />
The great majority represent grammaticalized (or better, lexicalized) prepositional<br />
phrases. 1 Underground is a clear example, but <strong>the</strong>re are many o<strong>the</strong>rs: away<br />
<strong>from</strong> onweg, down <strong>from</strong> adown > ofdune. O<strong>the</strong>rs are homophonous with PE<br />
1. For a discussion of <strong>the</strong> relationship between grammaticalization and lexicalization, see e.g.,<br />
Brinton (2002).
160 Bettelou Los<br />
prepositions (by, in, off, on, over, through, to, under, up) so <strong>the</strong>y are probably prepositional<br />
in origin, but have lost <strong>the</strong>ir NP complement. A popular synchronic view<br />
is to label particles ‘intransitive prepositions’ (Emonds 1976) or to say that <strong>the</strong>ir<br />
NP-complement has become ‘defocused’ and remains implicit for that reason<br />
(McIntyre 2004), or to talk about ‘reduced prepositional phrases’ (Lipka 1972: 17);<br />
examples are (6a–d), <strong>from</strong> Lipka (1972: 17):<br />
(6) a. He put <strong>the</strong> kettle on [<strong>the</strong> fire]<br />
b. He took <strong>the</strong> ring off [his finger]<br />
c. He ran up [<strong>the</strong> stairs]<br />
d. She took <strong>the</strong> book out [of <strong>the</strong> pocket]<br />
Some of <strong>the</strong>se items are possibly more adverbial than prepositional (especially<br />
out), and this has been remarked on many times in <strong>the</strong> literature (e.g., Sroka<br />
1972 who distinguishes ‘adverbs’, ‘prepositions’ and ‘adverb-prepositions’). Fraser<br />
(1965) & Fairclough (1965) use ‘particle’ precisely because it is difficult to draw a<br />
clear line (see also Lipka 1972: 19). The problem of classification in a way reflects<br />
<strong>the</strong> status of <strong>the</strong> preposition, or broader, <strong>the</strong> adposition, as a syntactic category. Is<br />
it a lexical or functional category, is it analogous with V? V and P can both assign<br />
case, whereas N and A cannot; and classifications like intransitive/transitive can<br />
be argued to apply not only to V but also to P. Prepositions are said to express case<br />
realisations (Emonds 1985) and as such to appear in <strong>the</strong> extended projection of<br />
N ra<strong>the</strong>r than in a projection of <strong>the</strong>ir own. Adpositions and morphological case<br />
would <strong>the</strong>n be expressions of <strong>the</strong> same functional category. 2<br />
A third group seems definitely adverbial in origin, but even here we find a trace<br />
of a preposition: forth, forward, out; possibly also home (= homeward). Finally, past<br />
and round are in origin a past participle and an adjective, respectively. If particles<br />
originate in a syntactic construction as complex predicates, this explains why <strong>the</strong>y<br />
are mainly of <strong>the</strong> categories P and A: 3 <strong>the</strong>y are in origin predicates (PP and AP are<br />
typically predicate categories) but have grammaticalized (after having lexicalized, in<br />
<strong>the</strong> case of some PPs) into particles and prefixes.<br />
2.2 Can particles be analysed as predicates?<br />
The examples in (7) list some PDE instances of complex predicates collected by<br />
Rappaport Hovav & Levin (2001).<br />
(7) a. Last night, <strong>the</strong> dog poked me [ PRED awake] every hour to go outside<br />
(The Toronto Sun, 27 Nov. 1994, p. 6)<br />
2. See also Asbury (2005) for a discussion of Hungarian, where <strong>the</strong> often-assumed dichotomy of<br />
adpositions-are-free and case-suffixes-are-bound is not as clearcut as in many o<strong>the</strong>r languages.<br />
. P(articiples) are a special case of A(djectives).
Particles as grammaticalized complex predicates 161<br />
b. Sudse cooked <strong>the</strong>m all [ PRED into a premature death] with her wild food.<br />
(P. Chute. 1987. Castine. Garden City, NY: Doubleday, p. 78)<br />
c. She might employ it [her body] as a weapon – fall forward and flatten<br />
me [ PRED wafer-thin].<br />
(Delia Ephron. 2000. Big City Eyes, New York: Bantam, p. 92)<br />
At an abstract level, <strong>the</strong>re is a subject-predicate relationship between <strong>the</strong> accusative<br />
object and <strong>the</strong> complex predicate or object complement, i.e., between me<br />
and awake, <strong>the</strong>m and a premature death, and me and wafer-thin. A simplified representation<br />
is <strong>the</strong> structure in (8), with an Agreement Phrase, with <strong>the</strong> empty head<br />
Agr mediating between <strong>the</strong> object as <strong>the</strong> subject of <strong>the</strong> Agreement Phrase and its<br />
adjectival predicate:<br />
(8) VP<br />
V AgrP<br />
NP<br />
me<br />
Agr'<br />
Agr AP<br />
awake<br />
Note that <strong>the</strong> NP me (<strong>the</strong> object) receives its <strong>the</strong>matic role <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> predicate in<br />
this representation, and has accusative case not because that case is assigned by<br />
<strong>the</strong> verb but because <strong>the</strong> NP is <strong>the</strong> subject of <strong>the</strong> Agreement Phrase and accusative<br />
is <strong>the</strong> default case for subjects in verbless or non-finite constructions. This means<br />
that it is <strong>the</strong> predicate that licenses <strong>the</strong> object and not <strong>the</strong> verb, and this accounts<br />
for <strong>the</strong> phenomenon of ‘unselected’ objects, i.e., cases where <strong>the</strong> verb on its own,<br />
without <strong>the</strong> predicate, could not appear with <strong>the</strong> object (more about this phenomenon<br />
in <strong>the</strong> next section).<br />
The failure of most particles to function as a predicate in a copular construction<br />
is often noted in <strong>the</strong> literature, e.g., Zeller (1999): *he is up/it is up (cf. phone<br />
John up/eat up all <strong>the</strong> food etc.), but many predicates similarly fail to appear<br />
straightforwardly in a copular construction; cf. <strong>the</strong> variability of (9a–f), rewriting<br />
<strong>the</strong> predicates of (7) and (13) below as copular constructions:<br />
(9) a. I am awake.<br />
b. *They were into a premature death.<br />
c. I am wafer-thin.<br />
d. *The pub is dry.<br />
e. *The daylights were out of <strong>the</strong> campers.<br />
f. The dust is out of <strong>the</strong> sofa.
162 Bettelou Los<br />
The non-acceptability of <strong>the</strong>se predicates in copular constructions does not in<br />
itself, however, constitute a counterargument to an analysis along <strong>the</strong> lines of (8)<br />
for predicates, in which <strong>the</strong> predicate selects <strong>the</strong> object. McIntyre (2001) provides<br />
a number of o<strong>the</strong>r meanings that are “idiosyncratically restricted to a particular<br />
structural environment”: <strong>the</strong> malefactive use of on in my cat died on me, my<br />
car broke down on me is not possible as a postnominal modifier (*an accident on<br />
me). Goldberg & Jackendoff (2004: 560–562, and references cited <strong>the</strong>re)) provide<br />
many more examples (e.g., under <strong>the</strong> table in drink NP under <strong>the</strong> table), and set<br />
out in detail <strong>the</strong> idiosyncrasy of o<strong>the</strong>r predicates, particularly <strong>the</strong> choice of PP<br />
or AP: stab/bat/put/batter/frighten/crush/scare/burn NP to death versus *dead, but<br />
he sang himself hoarse versus *to hoarseness or he ate himself sick versus *to sickness;<br />
and he sang himself to exhaustion versus *exhausted. Note that even semantically<br />
transparent, relatively non-idiomaticized predicates like into shape and to<br />
death cannot function as independent predicates: *he is into shape, he is to death.<br />
McIntyre (2004: 546) points out that directional PPs and continuous state-of-change<br />
comparatives (i.e., inherently eventive PPs/APs) are incompatible with copulas<br />
although <strong>the</strong>y uncontroversially predicate over NPs: *I am to <strong>the</strong> station/colder and<br />
colder versus I walked to <strong>the</strong> station/I got colder and colder. He concludes that <strong>the</strong><br />
copula is untrustworthy as a test for complex predicates (McIntyre 2004: 547), and<br />
we conclude that it does not constitute counterevidence to our claim that <strong>the</strong>re is<br />
a diachronic relationship between predicates and particles.<br />
The reason that (7) is less likely to be <strong>the</strong> correct analysis for verb-particle constructions<br />
is <strong>the</strong> fact that particles have undergone grammaticalization and have<br />
started to form a single unit with <strong>the</strong> verb. The order in (1b), <strong>the</strong> ‘particle order’,<br />
appears to require a morphological analysis in which particle and verb form a unit,<br />
in its most extreme form along <strong>the</strong> lines of (10):<br />
(10) VP<br />
Vmax NP<br />
Vmin particle<br />
An analysis as in (10) can account for formations like get-at-able and knockerupper,<br />
but is, in this most extreme form, ultimately untenable without special<br />
stipulations because verbal inflectional endings still attach to V min and not to<br />
V max (= <strong>the</strong> V + particle compound). Blom (2005: 104) notes that <strong>the</strong> combination<br />
of <strong>the</strong> properties compositionality, conventionality, and productivity, all strikingly<br />
present in particle verbs, is in fact very reminiscent of word formation, especially<br />
in derivation. Particles are much like derivational morphemes in that it is possible<br />
to see patterns, but <strong>the</strong>se patterns or rules do not apply with strict regularity
Particles as grammaticalized complex predicates 16<br />
but show idiosyncracies of various kinds (see Riehemann 1998 for German<br />
bar-derivation). Particles could be described as free derivational morphemes.<br />
Particles, <strong>the</strong>n, show evidence in Modern English both of being phrasal (as in<br />
(9)) and of being heads (as in (10)). They are fascinating as a field of study precisely<br />
because <strong>the</strong>y seem to straddle <strong>the</strong> no-man’s land between syntax and morphology:<br />
separable, but in combination input to word formation processes. A unitary analysis<br />
that generates both orders (1a) and (1b) and still makes intuitive sense is almost<br />
impossible (see Elenbaas 2007 for a proposal, and for discussion).<br />
The ‘particle order’ as in (1b) precludes a predicate analysis along <strong>the</strong> lines of<br />
(8) as <strong>the</strong> only option for particle-verbs, but does not preclude a complex predicate<br />
origin of <strong>the</strong> construction, with <strong>the</strong> ‘particle syntax’ <strong>the</strong> result of grammaticalization.<br />
We will discuss <strong>the</strong> parallels between particles and predicates in <strong>the</strong> next<br />
sections.<br />
2. Predicate quirks<br />
2. .1 Unselected objects<br />
Lipka (1972: 197–212) lists <strong>the</strong> various meanings of phrasal verbs with out and up,<br />
of which (11) and (12) represent a selection, and notes that “[s]ince <strong>the</strong> particle<br />
is omitted for reasons of brevity, it is readily apparent that many collocations<br />
which are possible with <strong>the</strong> V[erb]P[article]C[ombination] are excluded for <strong>the</strong><br />
simplex verb” (1972: 215): <strong>the</strong> object cannot in many cases be selected by <strong>the</strong><br />
verb on its own.<br />
(11) with out: cause + be + / + apparent/<br />
blurt (secret), bring (meaning of a passage/young lady, book), dig (book),<br />
dope (specifications), drag (reason), draw (scarf), ferret (secret), figure<br />
(problem), find (sb/sth – Deleted), fish (coin), flush (dollars/tax evaders),<br />
hunt (old diary, hat), haul (old essay), jerk (fish, pistol), lay (cold meal,<br />
evening clo<strong>the</strong>s), nose (rat, trail/scandal, evidence), point (pictures, <strong>the</strong><br />
man/mistake/that …), puzzle (sth), rake (scandal), reckon (how much<br />
we will need), root (truffles/possessions), rout (bottle), scare (partridge),<br />
search (friend/insincerity), seek (sb, place, book, keymen, enemy bombers),<br />
smell (sb, witch/secret, opposition), smoke (intentions), sound (sb),<br />
spell (views), spy (secrets/land), track (development), trot (horse/knowledge,<br />
excuse), whip (knife, wallet), worm (secret). (Lipka 1972: 200)<br />
(12) with up: cause + be + / + apparent/<br />
Call (scenes <strong>from</strong> childhood), conjure (spirits, visions of <strong>the</strong> past), cough<br />
(sth), dig (statue), fetch (anecdotes), hunt (old records, references, quotations),<br />
look (fast train), plow (arrowheads/secrets), raise (prophet), rake
164 Bettelou Los<br />
(diary/scandal, old quarrels, past), reckon (bill), root (sb), scare (game),<br />
scout (clients), (dog) scratch (bone), show (fraud, ignorance/rogue, impostor),<br />
turn (facts in an encyclopedia). (Lipka 1972: 206–207)<br />
The same phenomenon of <strong>the</strong> unselected object is seen in complex predication:<br />
cases in which V + predicate select a different set of objects than V would<br />
do on its own. An example is (7b) above: <strong>the</strong>m does not have <strong>the</strong> same <strong>the</strong>matic<br />
relationship to cook as <strong>the</strong> objects have that cook selects outside of a resultative<br />
construction: a meal etc. O<strong>the</strong>r examples are presented in (13):<br />
(13) a. They drank <strong>the</strong> pub dry (Spencer & Zaretskaya 1998).<br />
b. The bears frightened <strong>the</strong> daylights out of <strong>the</strong> campers (McIntyre 2001: 144)<br />
c. I beat <strong>the</strong> dust out of <strong>the</strong> sofa (McIntyre 2001: 144)<br />
d. He worked his fingers to <strong>the</strong> bone.<br />
2. .2 Idiomaticity<br />
The idiomaticity of phrasal verbs, and <strong>the</strong>ir very variable degrees of transparency<br />
and productivity, is often noted in <strong>the</strong> literature (e.g., Lüdeling 2001; see also <strong>the</strong><br />
findings in Biber et al. 1999: 412–413). What is less well known is that <strong>the</strong>y share<br />
<strong>the</strong>se features with complex predicates: pry and come will only combine with<br />
complex predicates that mean something like ‘apart,’ drive will only combine with<br />
complex predicates denoting “negative and extreme mental states” (Goldberg &<br />
Jackendoff 2004: 559):<br />
(14) a. He pried it apart/open/loose/free/*flat/*straight<br />
b. It came apart/open/loose/free/*flat/*straight<br />
(Goldberg & Jackendoff 2004: 559)<br />
(15) a. He drove her crazy/nuts/bananas/to desperation/to drink/up <strong>the</strong> wall/<br />
meshuga/ frantic<br />
b. *He drove her happy/sick/silly/clean/calm/thin/sober<br />
(Goldberg & Jackendoff 2004: 559)<br />
2. . Telicity<br />
Ano<strong>the</strong>r insight <strong>from</strong> Goldberg & Jackendoff ’s (2004) article is that resultative<br />
complex predicates need not be telic. They distinguish four types of complex predicate<br />
(538, 540):<br />
(16) a. Noncausative property resultative (e.g., The pond froze solid)<br />
Syntax: NP 1 V AP/PP 2<br />
Semantics: X 1 BECOME Y 2<br />
MEANS: [verbal subevent]<br />
b. Causative property resultative (e.g., Willy watered <strong>the</strong> plants flat)<br />
Syntax: NP 1 V NP 2 AP 3<br />
Semantics: X 1 CAUSE [Y 2 BECOME Z 3 ]<br />
MEANS: [verbal subevent, here: Willy watered <strong>the</strong> plants]
Particles as grammaticalized complex predicates 165<br />
c. Noncausative path resultative (e.g., The ball rolled down <strong>the</strong> hill)<br />
Syntax: NP 1 GO Path 2<br />
Semantics: X 1 GO Path 2<br />
MEANS: [verbal subevent]<br />
d. Causative path resultative (e.g., Bill rolled <strong>the</strong> ball down <strong>the</strong> hill)<br />
Syntax: NP 1 V NP 2 PP 3<br />
Semantics: X 1 CAUSE [Y 2 GO Path 3 ]<br />
MEANS: [verbal subevent, here: Bill rolled <strong>the</strong> ball]<br />
Although only <strong>the</strong> two causative types of (16b) and (16d) would traditionally be<br />
termed complex predicates, <strong>the</strong>y are clearly related to <strong>the</strong>ir noncausative counterparts<br />
(16a) and (16c). 4 The types that grammaticalize, however, are <strong>the</strong> paths<br />
(c–d), expressed by prepositions, ra<strong>the</strong>r than <strong>the</strong> properties (solid, flat) expressed<br />
by adjectives.<br />
Goldberg & Jackendoff (2004) demonstrate that <strong>the</strong> aspect and/or aktionsart<br />
of <strong>the</strong> complex predicate is determined by that of <strong>the</strong> causative subevent, which in<br />
turn hinges on whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> predicate sets up an endpoint to <strong>the</strong> event or not. As<br />
<strong>the</strong>re are predicates that do not set up an endpoint, resultatives are not necessarily<br />
always telic; cf. John went along <strong>the</strong> river, where along <strong>the</strong> river expresses a path<br />
without a specific endpoint (2004: 543). This means that <strong>the</strong>re are also stative and<br />
atelic resultatives, and, after grammaticalization, stative and atelic particle-verb<br />
combinations (e.g., look on, float by etc.). The fact that <strong>the</strong>re are particles that are<br />
not resultative does not argue against a predicate origin: complex predicates do<br />
not need to be resultative ei<strong>the</strong>r. Prototypical predicates and particles, however,<br />
are resultative.<br />
Farrell (2005: 118) notes that “[t]he resultative V-DP-Adj construction<br />
appears to have <strong>the</strong> same basic structure as <strong>the</strong> V-DP-P construction. The key difference<br />
is that only <strong>the</strong> latter typically has a compound-verb paraphrase (i.e., turn<br />
on <strong>the</strong> lights as well as turn <strong>the</strong> lights on)”, – i.e., <strong>the</strong> difference between <strong>the</strong> ‘particle<br />
order’ as in (1a) above, and <strong>the</strong> predicate order as in (1b). That difference is, however,<br />
crucial. If some aspects of particle verbs can be said to have been inherited<br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir predicate origins, <strong>the</strong>ir grammaticalization has led to <strong>the</strong>m being different<br />
in o<strong>the</strong>r respects, most importantly in <strong>the</strong> ‘particle order’, bleached meanings<br />
and <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong>y make reference to a very abstract ‘Path’, <strong>the</strong> precise semantics<br />
of which are filled in pragmatically. We will discuss this in <strong>the</strong> next section.<br />
4. See also Lipka’s semantic types of phrasal verbs where <strong>the</strong> CAUSE types are usually matched<br />
by a BECOME type. To take an example, <strong>the</strong> BECOME counterpart of (11) consists of verbs like<br />
(sun/news, truth/daughter in photograph) come out, (news) filter out, (anger) flame out, (news)<br />
leak out, (moon/ancient belief) peep out (Lipka 1972: 197–198).
166 Bettelou Los<br />
. Grammaticalization<br />
.1 Path predicates grammaticalize<br />
One aspect in which particles do differ <strong>from</strong> predicates, and which must be of<br />
primary importance in charting <strong>the</strong> grammaticalization process <strong>the</strong>y have undergone,<br />
is <strong>the</strong> fact that particles show extensive semantic bleaching compared<br />
to predicates. Consider <strong>the</strong> following Lexical Conceptual Structure as typical<br />
of (resultative) predicates (<strong>from</strong> Spencer & Zaretskaya 1998, in turn based on<br />
Jackendoff 1990), with (17) illustrating a predicate construction as in (7a):<br />
(17) [CAUSE [ACT (x)], BECOME [W(y)]], by [V(x)]<br />
(18) [CAUSE [ACT (<strong>the</strong> dog)], BECOME [awake(me)]], by [poking(<strong>the</strong> dog)]<br />
The by-phrase in this notation equals <strong>the</strong> verbal subevent in Goldberg & Jackendoff<br />
’s (2004) notation above (in (15)), and particle verbs fit into this means or<br />
manner phrase with varying degrees of acceptability, in a large part depending on<br />
<strong>the</strong> verb (for non-causative verbs, e.g., unaccusatives, <strong>the</strong> LCS needs to be pruned<br />
somewhat (cf. (16a)–(16c) above)). If we classify <strong>the</strong> verbs that occur in particleverb<br />
combinations in terms of whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong>y make <strong>the</strong> best fit in an LCS like (16)<br />
or (17), we find that verbs expressing manner make <strong>the</strong> best fit:<br />
(19) i. transitives<br />
ii. unergatives: chop, knock, laugh, sing, work<br />
iii. ‘Manner of motion’ unaccusatives: run, lope, sprint, dash, rush, hurry,<br />
scurry, scramble (Slobin 2005: 316)<br />
iv. denominal verbs, derived <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> instrument used in causing <strong>the</strong> object<br />
y to reach <strong>the</strong> state W: boot out, bowl over, branch out, brick up, buckle up,<br />
elbow out, fork out, hand over, pan out, patch up<br />
v. deadjectival/ denominal verbs constituting a conversion of <strong>the</strong> state W<br />
itself: back off/away, brazen out, cheer up, clear up/out/off/away, crack up,<br />
free up, gloss over, open up/out, parcel out, pretty up, round up/off 5<br />
vi. ‘Light’ verbs:<br />
a. transitive: get, keep, let, make, place, put, set<br />
b. unaccusative: come, go<br />
Many transitives that express some activity like cooking and poking in (7) fit nonproblematically<br />
in <strong>the</strong> manner slot, and <strong>the</strong> same goes for <strong>the</strong> intransitive unergatives,<br />
in (ii).<br />
(20) a. He chopped <strong>the</strong> tree down<br />
b. [CAUSE [ACT (he)], BECOME [down (tree)]], by [chopping(he)]<br />
5. Conversions as in (iv) and (v) are a much-noted phenomenon with particle-verbs; see e.g.,<br />
Lipka (1972: 98–114).
Particles as grammaticalized complex predicates 167<br />
Manner-of-motion verbs in (iii) make good fits, too (in <strong>the</strong> non-causative pruned<br />
version of <strong>the</strong> LCS). The denominal verbs in (iv) specify manner too, but do not<br />
have an independent existence outside <strong>the</strong> particle verb combination, and <strong>the</strong>y fit<br />
<strong>the</strong> LCS less well for that reason (e.g., (21)):<br />
(21) a. They elbowed me out<br />
b. [CAUSE [ACT (They)], BECOME [out (me)]], by [elbowing(They)]<br />
When <strong>the</strong> verb does not specify manner, but is a conversion of <strong>the</strong> state W itself<br />
(<strong>the</strong> verbs in (v)) or a ‘light’ verb, as in (vi), <strong>the</strong>y do not fit <strong>the</strong> LCS. The fact that<br />
specifying manner is apparently important for a good fit is interesting, as <strong>the</strong><br />
manner-of-motion verbs in (iii) and <strong>the</strong> denominal verbs in (iv) are only robustly<br />
attested <strong>from</strong> EModE onwards, as we will see in section 4.3.<br />
The point to note is that <strong>the</strong> less than perfect fit of some of <strong>the</strong>se particle<br />
verbs also comes to <strong>the</strong> fore when <strong>the</strong>se same verbs appear with genuine syntactic<br />
predicates, and is due to <strong>the</strong> contribution of <strong>the</strong> verb ra<strong>the</strong>r than to that<br />
of particle or predicate. What is different between particles and predicates is <strong>the</strong><br />
degree of explicitness of W. The particle appears to be bleached to a degree that<br />
does not seem possible with genuine predicates. Adjectives, expressing properties,<br />
are less likely to bleach; but paths, with or without endpoints, may do<br />
so very easily. There is a clear link here with productivity: spatial resultatives<br />
appear to be totally productive in that any spatial PP that can be construed as<br />
a path can be used as a complex predicate (Goldberg & Jackendoff 2004: 558);<br />
APs such as free (of NP), clear (of NP), apart, open and shut, i.e., exactly <strong>the</strong> set<br />
of APs that may grammaticalize (see (3a)), are also fairly freely productive and<br />
are argued to be interpreted as “spatial being open configurations with some<br />
force-dynamic overtones” (Goldberg & Jackendoff 2004: 558). They do not only<br />
represent a property but a spatial configuration “affording free passage between<br />
<strong>the</strong> interior and exterior of <strong>the</strong> object” (Goldberg & Jackendoff 2004: 559). This<br />
insight, <strong>the</strong>n, allows us to postulate <strong>the</strong> generalization that only path-predicates<br />
will grammaticalize.<br />
.2 The defocused complement of Prt<br />
Paths leave much more room for pragmatic interpretation than properties, and<br />
part of <strong>the</strong> grammaticalization process is <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong> complement of <strong>the</strong> preposition<br />
becomes, in McIntyre’s (2004) words, ‘defocused’: in he took <strong>the</strong> ring off, <strong>the</strong><br />
object can be pragmatically reconstructed with ease given our knowledge of rings<br />
and fingers; in o<strong>the</strong>r cases, <strong>the</strong> exact identification or reconstruction of <strong>the</strong> ground<br />
is ei<strong>the</strong>r unimportant or infelicitous (cf. also <strong>the</strong> examples in (6) above):<br />
(22) a. She took a newspaper in (= into <strong>the</strong> house).<br />
b. She threw <strong>the</strong> remains of <strong>the</strong> dinner out (= out of <strong>the</strong> house).
168 Bettelou Los<br />
c. Bill pushed Harry along (= along <strong>the</strong> trail)<br />
(Goldberg & Jackendoff 2004: 543)<br />
d. Wait Long by <strong>the</strong> River and <strong>the</strong> Bodies of Your Enemies Will Float By<br />
(= by one’s position; title of CD album by The Drones)<br />
This phenomenon could be interpreted as loss of argument structure, on a par<br />
with <strong>the</strong> loss of argument structure we observe in <strong>the</strong> grammaticalization of verbs<br />
into auxiliaries. There is, however, a caveat here in that prepositions may not have<br />
a syntactic argument at an earlier stage but were located in <strong>the</strong> specifier of an NP in<br />
<strong>the</strong> local cases (instrumental, ablative, locative). They developed into prepositions<br />
only later (Vincent 1999):<br />
(23) KP<br />
Spec K'<br />
K NP<br />
Spec<br />
adposition<br />
N<br />
N'<br />
Particles may well have split off <strong>from</strong> prepositions when <strong>the</strong> latter were still in<br />
<strong>the</strong> ‘adposition’ stage, and may never have had proper syntactic arguments – <strong>the</strong>y<br />
were associated with a particular NP by virtue of occupying its specifier position.<br />
Particles like down, out, off and up may have acquired <strong>the</strong>ir prepositional use only<br />
recently: down is originally a PP that grammaticalized to a head, while OE ut and<br />
up do not show clear prepositional uses but are usually followed by prepositional<br />
phrases. 6 What is clear is that <strong>the</strong> defocusing of <strong>the</strong> object allows <strong>the</strong> particle to be<br />
analysed as a Head ra<strong>the</strong>r than a Phrase, a typical grammaticalization effect.<br />
Because <strong>the</strong> syntactic status of some of <strong>the</strong>se NP complements of path-Ps is<br />
unclear, I will refer to this NP as <strong>the</strong> ground, a semantic ra<strong>the</strong>r than syntactic term,<br />
and to <strong>the</strong> object NP of <strong>the</strong> particle verb combination as <strong>the</strong> figure, following Svenonius<br />
(2003), after Talmy (1978). In a sentence like he took <strong>the</strong> ring off his finger,<br />
<strong>the</strong>n, <strong>the</strong> ring is <strong>the</strong> figure and his finger is <strong>the</strong> ground of <strong>the</strong> particle off.<br />
(25) he took <strong>the</strong> ring off his finger<br />
figure prt ground<br />
(24) PP<br />
Spec P'<br />
P<br />
preposition<br />
NP<br />
Spec N'<br />
6. Eg. in examples like Hi eodon up to þære dune (Num. 14: 40), He eode ut on ðæt land (Gen.<br />
24, 63). Ut and up in such phrases are ei<strong>the</strong>r adverbs in <strong>the</strong> spec of a PP or heads <strong>the</strong>mselves<br />
postmodified or complemented by a PP. See Elenbaas (2007) for a discussion.<br />
N
Particles as grammaticalized complex predicates 169<br />
In particle verbs that result <strong>from</strong> a grammaticalization process of complex predicates,<br />
it is <strong>the</strong> figure that becomes <strong>the</strong> fully affected object of <strong>the</strong> particle verb<br />
combination; that figure traverses <strong>the</strong> path expressed by <strong>the</strong> particle.<br />
. Grounds as fully affected objects<br />
In addition to <strong>the</strong> figure of <strong>the</strong> path becoming <strong>the</strong> object, <strong>the</strong>re is ano<strong>the</strong>r pattern<br />
in which it is <strong>the</strong> ground that surfaces as <strong>the</strong> object of <strong>the</strong> particle verb combination.<br />
An example is (26), which was discussed by Denison (2004) as an example<br />
of reanalysis: <strong>the</strong> preposition increasingly attaches itself to <strong>the</strong> verb, and its former<br />
complement (<strong>the</strong> ground) becomes <strong>the</strong> object of <strong>the</strong> particle verb combination.<br />
(26) My car ran over a bottle (lying in <strong>the</strong> road)<br />
a. [ VP ran intr [ PP over [ NP a bottle]]]<br />
b. [ VP ran trans [ part over] [ NP a bottle]] (Denison 2004: 18)<br />
It is ano<strong>the</strong>r resultative predicate pattern, with its unaccusative verb conforming to<br />
<strong>the</strong> LCS in (16c), Goldberg and Jackendoff ’s noncausative path resultative. My car<br />
is here <strong>the</strong> figure, and starts out initially as <strong>the</strong> object of <strong>the</strong> verb (because <strong>the</strong> verb<br />
is an unaccusative). 7 The earliest literature on particle verbs mention <strong>the</strong> phenomenon<br />
of object transfer (‘Subjektvertauschung’, ‘Objektvertauschung’: Hundsnurscher<br />
1968: 124ff quoted in Lipka 1972: 94). Compare <strong>the</strong> object of <strong>the</strong> first and<br />
second of <strong>the</strong> following pairs, of which <strong>the</strong> first one is <strong>the</strong> figure of <strong>the</strong> particle, but<br />
<strong>the</strong> second one is <strong>the</strong> ground: water runs or pours out of <strong>the</strong> bucket, we brush <strong>the</strong><br />
lint off a coat, rinse <strong>the</strong> dirt off <strong>the</strong> plates.<br />
(27) a. das Wasser läuft aus/der Eimer läuft aus (Lipka 1972: 94)<br />
<strong>the</strong> water runs out/<strong>the</strong> bucket runs out<br />
b. John poured out <strong>the</strong> water/John poured out <strong>the</strong> bucket (McIntyre 2001)<br />
c. Clear out mud (<strong>from</strong> a river)/clear out a river (by removing mud)<br />
(Lipka 1972: 94)<br />
d. Brush <strong>the</strong> lint off/brush <strong>the</strong> coat off (Farrell 2004: 110)<br />
e. Het vuil afspoelen/ de borden afspoelen (Blom 2005: 190)<br />
<strong>the</strong> dirt off-rinse <strong>the</strong> plates off-rinse<br />
‘rinse off <strong>the</strong> dirt’ ‘rinse off <strong>the</strong> plates’<br />
Synchronic similarities point to an affinity between particles and predicates. Could<br />
<strong>the</strong>y point to a diachronic relationship? We will now look at <strong>the</strong> situation in earlier<br />
English.<br />
7. The causative variant would be I ran my car over a bottle.
170 Bettelou Los<br />
4. Earlier English<br />
4.1 Evidence for grammaticalization<br />
OE particle verbs generally fit <strong>the</strong> resultative semantics of predicates, even more<br />
so than <strong>the</strong>ir PE counterparts because <strong>the</strong>y are almost invariably transparent combinations<br />
of (transitive and unaccusative) verbs and particles, as in <strong>the</strong> following<br />
examples (both <strong>from</strong> Elenbaas 2007):<br />
(28) þæt hi hine ut sceoldon wurpan (coeust, LS 8 (Eust) 168.173)<br />
that <strong>the</strong>y him out should throw<br />
‘that <strong>the</strong>y should throw him out’<br />
(29) & ærn swa feor up swa næfre ær ne dyde<br />
(ChronE (Plummer) 1014.28.1906)<br />
and ran as far up as never before not did<br />
‘and ran up as far as he never did before’<br />
Of all <strong>the</strong> verb groups listed in (19) only those in (vi) ‘light’ verbs, both transitive<br />
and unaccusative, occur robustly with particles in OE. Notably absent are <strong>the</strong> denominal<br />
or deadjectival conversions, and <strong>the</strong> finer-grained ‘manner-of-motion’<br />
like run, jog, lope, sprint, dash, rush, hurry, scurry, scramble (Slobin 2005: 316). We<br />
will see that <strong>the</strong>y only start to appear in EModE (Section 4.3).<br />
Saying anything definite about <strong>the</strong> grammaticalization process is not easy. If<br />
we interpret particles that are heads ra<strong>the</strong>r than phrases as <strong>the</strong> result of grammaticalization,<br />
we could try to find evidence that <strong>the</strong>y are exclusively phrases in OE<br />
and become heads only later on. Example (29) with up being premodified by swa<br />
feor ‘so far’ shows that OE particles certainly allow a phrasal analysis, but it cannot<br />
be established on <strong>the</strong> available data that <strong>the</strong>y are exclusively phrasal. Even for PDE,<br />
most analyses acknowledge that particles can be heads and phrases (as evidenced<br />
by <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong>y often allow premodification by elements like just and right<br />
in <strong>the</strong> ‘predicate order’ but not in <strong>the</strong> ‘particle order’). Evidence of verb raising<br />
clusters, where we might adduce head status if <strong>the</strong> particle is found adjacent to<br />
its verb (i.e., orders like þæt hi hine sceoldon ut wurpan, cf. (28) above), cannot be<br />
conclusive because of <strong>the</strong> possibility of Verb Projection Raising in OE. The only<br />
firm evidence for grammaticalization of predicate phrases into heads comes <strong>from</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong> EModE examples of PPs like those in (3b) grammaticalizing. Claridge (2000:<br />
138–140; 158) has some examples in her EModE corpus of <strong>the</strong> NP in <strong>the</strong>se grammaticalizing<br />
PPs still occurring with some degree of premodification: take NP into<br />
[your most grave and wise] consideration.<br />
If <strong>the</strong> order of (1b) with <strong>the</strong> verb and <strong>the</strong> particle adjacent can be analysed as a<br />
grammaticalized order in PE (with <strong>the</strong> particle as a head), can we perhaps deduce<br />
anything <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> occurrence of this order? The grammaticalized ‘particle order’<br />
is already <strong>the</strong> most frequent order in <strong>the</strong> first subperiod of <strong>the</strong> Middle English part
Particles as grammaticalized complex predicates 171<br />
of <strong>the</strong> Helsinki Corpus, and becomes even more frequent in <strong>the</strong> subsequent ones<br />
(Elenbaas 2007: 260). Biber et al. (1999: 932) report that with full noun phrases,<br />
<strong>the</strong> ‘particle order’ in written registers occurs in over 90% of all cases; in conversation,<br />
<strong>the</strong> rate is much lower (about 60%), although it is still <strong>the</strong> most frequent<br />
order. There are many o<strong>the</strong>r factors governing <strong>the</strong> selection of <strong>the</strong> ‘particle’ or<br />
‘predicate order’, including focus (see also Dehé 2002), end-weight (extraposition<br />
of heavy objects) and idiomaticity (as was discussed in Section 1 above), whereas<br />
<strong>the</strong> extraposition of genuine syntactic predicates (as in (1d)) appears to be governed<br />
by only one factor, namely end-weight (Biber et al. 1999: 931). In all, <strong>the</strong><br />
word order findings appear to tally with <strong>the</strong> hypo<strong>the</strong>sis that <strong>the</strong> (1b) order is <strong>the</strong><br />
result of grammaticalization. The fact that particle verb combinations with e.g., up<br />
and ut are invariably transparent and spatial in OE (e.g., Denison 1985 & Elenbaas<br />
2007), <strong>the</strong>n, probably means that <strong>the</strong>y are phrases ra<strong>the</strong>r than heads. 8<br />
4.2 No predicate quirks in OE and ME?<br />
A typical ‘quirk’ of particles and predicates that we discussed in section 2.3.1 was<br />
that of <strong>the</strong> ‘unselected object’, a very creative use of <strong>the</strong> resultative construction<br />
that we saw in (13a–c) where <strong>the</strong> particle-verb or predicate-verb combination<br />
occurs with an object that could not occur with <strong>the</strong> verb on its own. No cases of unselected<br />
objects in OE were found, but this is not surprising in view of <strong>the</strong> fact that<br />
for languages without native speakers we cannot rely on our intuitions of which<br />
objects verbs typically take and which objects are unselected, as we did in <strong>the</strong> case<br />
of (13a–c) where we know that <strong>the</strong> objects are unselected because you can’t drink<br />
pubs, frighten daylights, or beat dust. To identify unequivocal unselected objects<br />
in a dead language like OE we have to rely on unergative (i.e., truly intransitive)<br />
verbs that cannot take any object on <strong>the</strong>ir own (as PDE work in (13d), which,<br />
though unergative, occurs with an object when <strong>the</strong>re is a particle or predicate present:<br />
he worked out a solution, he worked his fingers to <strong>the</strong> bone). Unfortunately, OE<br />
particles seem to occur exclusively with unaccusative and transitive verbs, as we<br />
saw in <strong>the</strong> previous section, and I was not able to identify any cases of particles and<br />
objects occurring with unergative verbs. Unselected objects, <strong>the</strong>n, are not a feature<br />
of OE particle verbs, but, interestingly, <strong>the</strong>y are not a feature of genuine syntactic<br />
predicates in OE ei<strong>the</strong>r – <strong>the</strong>se, too, occur, as far as I have been able to establish,<br />
8. Non-spatial uses are found with e.g., forth, but here <strong>the</strong> particle is an event-modifier, and<br />
does not conform to ei<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> LCS in (17) or those in (16):<br />
(i) Peter cnucode forð oð þæt hi hine inn leton<br />
(Hml. Th. i. 396, 34; Wlfst. 222 33)<br />
Peter knocked forth until <strong>the</strong>y him in let<br />
‘Peter kept on knocking until <strong>the</strong>y let him in’<br />
For such event-modifiers, see McIntyre (2001) & Los (2004).
172 Bettelou Los<br />
mainly with ‘light’ verbs (<strong>the</strong> OE counterparts of PDE come, get, go, keep, let, make,<br />
place, put, set – see Section 3.1 above). 9 In (30) we have <strong>the</strong> light verb gedon ‘do’:<br />
(30) þu ne miht ænne locc gedon hwitne oððe blacne (Mt (WSCp) 5: 36)<br />
Lat. non potes unum capillum album facere aut nigrum<br />
‘you cannot turn one hair white or black’<br />
A search of typical unergatives (<strong>the</strong> OE counterparts of verbs like dream, laugh,<br />
sing and work) did not bring up any combinations with predicates. Nei<strong>the</strong>r predicates<br />
nor particles, <strong>the</strong>n, are used as creatively as <strong>the</strong>y are in PDE.<br />
Nor does ME yield much evidence of unergative verbs with ei<strong>the</strong>r a complex<br />
predicate or a particle; nei<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> Middle English part of <strong>the</strong> Helsinki Corpus, <strong>the</strong><br />
Middle English Dictionary or <strong>the</strong> OED offer any examples under unergatives like<br />
dream, laugh, sing and work, apart <strong>from</strong> variations on <strong>the</strong> idiom laugh NP to scorn<br />
(to hokere, to bismare, til/at/into hething), and <strong>the</strong> instance in (31) <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> OED<br />
and <strong>the</strong> MED: 10<br />
(31) þey haue an herbe … þat makeþ men laughe hem selue to deþ<br />
(Trevisa Higden (Rolls) I. 305)<br />
We do get instances like (32), but <strong>the</strong>y are probably postpositional ra<strong>the</strong>r than true<br />
particle-verbs:<br />
(32) ofte he hire loh to (a1225 (?a1200) Lay. Brut 18542)<br />
often he her laughed to<br />
‘he often laughed at her’ 11<br />
9. Non-light verbs are rarer, but <strong>the</strong>y do exist; e.g., (i), with formian ‘scour’:<br />
(i) formige man þone pytt clæne (Conf 3.1.1, 4.56)<br />
scour one <strong>the</strong> well cleane<br />
‘scour <strong>the</strong> well clean, scour out <strong>the</strong> well’<br />
10. Verbs like sing and work have of course not been dealt with yet in <strong>the</strong> MED.<br />
11. Example (32) is probably <strong>the</strong> same construction as <strong>the</strong> OE example of (i):<br />
(i) þa englas cwædon him to (Gen 19.17)<br />
<strong>the</strong> angels spoke him to<br />
‘The angels spoke to him’<br />
Structures like (32) and (i) are very reminiscent of complex verbs in Modern Dutch and German<br />
that appear to be postpositions ra<strong>the</strong>r than <strong>the</strong> result of grammaticalized complex predicates.<br />
German examples that ultimately derive <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> same pattern are what Blom (2005) has<br />
termed “postpositional particle verbs” like anstarren ‘stare at’, and zulachen ‘smile at’. As German<br />
has preserved its case endings, we can tell <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> dative case of <strong>the</strong> objects of <strong>the</strong>se verbs<br />
that <strong>the</strong>y are <strong>the</strong> complement of <strong>the</strong> postposition ra<strong>the</strong>r than <strong>the</strong> object of <strong>the</strong> particle-verb<br />
combination.
Particles as grammaticalized complex predicates 17<br />
The phenomenon of unselected objects can be found, but in <strong>the</strong> prefixed verb in<br />
OE, not in <strong>the</strong> particle verb. Prefixes represent an older layer of grammaticalization,<br />
very much akin to <strong>the</strong> later particle system (see also Claridge 2000: 87), in<br />
which <strong>the</strong> grammaticalized element has become a bound morpheme, inseparable<br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> verb. It has ‘frozen’ in preverbal ra<strong>the</strong>r than postverbal position because<br />
early Germanic was an OV-language which at that stage probably did not have<br />
<strong>the</strong> verb-second operation that separate particle and verb in OE, Modern Dutch<br />
and Modern German. This allowed <strong>the</strong> grammaticalization process to proceed to<br />
its logical conclusion: <strong>the</strong> predicate and verb became a single lexical item (van<br />
Kemenade & Los 2003). These verbal prefixes have long been recognized as<br />
‘transitivizing’ and even changing <strong>the</strong> case of <strong>the</strong> object. Compare for instance<br />
hliehhan ‘laugh’ which is an unergative verb but may occur with <strong>the</strong> object that<br />
is laughed at in <strong>the</strong> genitive, as in (33), with behliehhan ‘deride’ (lit. ‘be-laugh’)<br />
which is a fully transitive verb with its object in <strong>the</strong> accusative (as in (34)).<br />
(33) ðonne we hliehað gligmonna unnyttes cræftes. (CP 34.231.4)<br />
when we laugh jesters-gen useless tricks<br />
‘when we laugh at <strong>the</strong> useless tricks of jesters’<br />
(34) Huru, ic swiðe ne þearf hinsiþ behlehhan (Guthlac 87: 1356–1357)<br />
Indeed, I much not want departure-acc deride<br />
‘Indeed, I do not want to laugh at his death’<br />
If we assume that <strong>the</strong> prefix be- was once <strong>the</strong> predicate of an Agreement Phrase in<br />
a structure like (8), with its subject (which later became <strong>the</strong> object of <strong>the</strong> prefixed<br />
verb) in <strong>the</strong> specifier, this subject would have had accusative case (<strong>the</strong> default case<br />
of subjects of verbless or non-finite constructions). This case is not mediated by<br />
<strong>the</strong> verb but by <strong>the</strong> predicate. The transitivizing effect of <strong>the</strong>se prefixes, <strong>the</strong>n, is an<br />
inheritance <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir predicate origins. Deadjectival and denominal verbs, as in<br />
(21), which often do not have a simplex, are also a feature of prefixed verbs (van<br />
Kemenade and Los 2003), though not of OE or ME particle verbs.<br />
We must conclude that predicate and particle quirks are not much in evidence<br />
in OE and ME. The first blossomings of both appear to date <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> EModE<br />
period.<br />
4. Particle verbs in EModE<br />
Historical studies on particle-verb combinations in English seem to agree that <strong>the</strong><br />
PDE situation with respect to particle verb combinations is reached in <strong>the</strong> EModE<br />
period, with <strong>the</strong> 16th and 17th centuries representing a high point in <strong>the</strong>ir development<br />
(e.g., Brinton 1988; for phrasal verbs in Shakespeare, see Castillo 1994; see<br />
also Claridge 2000: 96–98 and <strong>the</strong> studies cited <strong>the</strong>re). A marked difference with<br />
OE and ME is <strong>the</strong> appearance of o<strong>the</strong>r groups of verbs than transitives or ‘light’
174 Bettelou Los<br />
verbs (e.g., groups (i) and (vi) listed in (19). In (35) and (36) we have EModE<br />
examples of denominal verbs and in (37) an example of a deadjectival verb:<br />
(35) Goe, sayes hee; trusse up your trinkets and be gone. The cooke, seeing no remedy,<br />
departed. (Helsinki Corpus: Robert Armin, A nest of Ninnies, p. 14, 1608)<br />
(36) There was in <strong>the</strong> time of Will Sommers ano<strong>the</strong>r artificiall foole, or jester, in<br />
<strong>the</strong> court, whose subtiltie heapt up wealth by gifts giuen him, for which Will<br />
Sommers could neuer abide him<br />
(Helsinki Corpus: Richard Madox’s diary, p. 47, 1582)<br />
(37) At 12 <strong>the</strong> east wynd began to fresh up which caused us to way upon <strong>the</strong> eb,<br />
but before we wer passed a lege yt faynted and we wer fayn to cast Anchor.<br />
(Helsinki Corpus: Richard Madox’s diary, p. 135, 1582)<br />
O<strong>the</strong>r examples of such verbs appearing in combination with <strong>the</strong> particle up in <strong>the</strong><br />
EModE part of <strong>the</strong> Helsinki Corpus were:<br />
(38) clitch up, clap up, sprout up, reckon up, block up, treasure up, burble up, nuzzle<br />
up (‘indulged’), prune up, knit up (‘joined toge<strong>the</strong>r in friendship’), mould up,<br />
dry up, rip up (‘?think up’), dress up, work up, seal up, pluck up, clamber up.<br />
Chronologically, <strong>the</strong>n, <strong>the</strong>re is a difference between <strong>the</strong> appearance of sets (vi) of<br />
<strong>the</strong> list in (19) (‘light’ verbs like <strong>the</strong> transitives set, turn, make, let etc.) and unaccusatives<br />
that can be described as ‘core’ motion verbs like rise, come, go etc. and <strong>the</strong><br />
o<strong>the</strong>r sets. Set (vi) has appeared in particle-verb combinations since OE. The o<strong>the</strong>r<br />
sets, (i)–(v) – most notably manner of motion verbs like clamber, trip, wander,<br />
unergatives like work, sing, laugh, play, and denominal/deadjectival verbs – are<br />
very rarely found in OE in a particle verb combination, if at all, and <strong>the</strong>y are <strong>the</strong><br />
ones that exhibit <strong>the</strong> predicate quirks to <strong>the</strong> greatest advantage: unselected objects,<br />
verbs that are only attested in <strong>the</strong> particle-verb combination but have no independent<br />
existence, denominal and deadjectival verbs, idiomatic combinations. I<br />
have split <strong>the</strong>se verbs up into 2 groups: Category 1 comprises set (vi), <strong>the</strong> set that<br />
has been attested with particles <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> earliest period, whereas Category 2 comprises<br />
sets (i–v) that only start to appear robustly with particles in EModE. If we<br />
look at occurrences with <strong>the</strong> particle up in <strong>the</strong> EModE part of <strong>the</strong> Helsinki Corpus,<br />
we find both categories well represented in all three periods, although <strong>the</strong> share of<br />
Category 2 verbs goes up slightly (29.6% of <strong>the</strong> total in E1, 30% in E2 and 32.3%<br />
in E3). There is an increase in <strong>the</strong> overall numbers, too (Figure 1).<br />
The denominal and deadjectival verbs of Category 2 were found in travel writings,<br />
diaries, plays, autobiographies and in one text on education, which seems to<br />
indicate that <strong>the</strong>y are more prominent in informal genres; <strong>the</strong> size of <strong>the</strong> corpora<br />
are too small, however, to say anything definite. Biber et al. (1999: 407–413) focus<br />
primarily on <strong>the</strong> verbs and particles that have <strong>the</strong> highest frequencies, and
120<br />
100<br />
80<br />
60<br />
40<br />
20<br />
0<br />
Cat.1 Cat.2<br />
Figure 1. Category 1 and Category 2 verbs with <strong>the</strong> particle up.<br />
Particles as grammaticalized complex predicates 175<br />
are <strong>the</strong>refore almost exclusively Category 1 verbs, 12 so that <strong>the</strong>se tentative register<br />
findings for EModE cannot be compared to <strong>the</strong> PDE situation.<br />
With respect to predicates <strong>the</strong> findings were consistent with <strong>the</strong> earlier situation<br />
in OE and ME: <strong>the</strong>re were very few genuine syntactic predicates with verbs<br />
o<strong>the</strong>r than light verbs (turn, make etc.); I was unable to find any examples of <strong>the</strong><br />
more adventurous complex predicates as discussed in Goldberg & Jackendoff<br />
(2004), or Rappaport Hovav & Levin (2001) (see (7) above). Whe<strong>the</strong>r it is <strong>the</strong> size<br />
of <strong>the</strong> corpus (with over 900,000 words about twice <strong>the</strong> size of <strong>the</strong> EModE part of<br />
<strong>the</strong> Helsinki Corpus), or <strong>the</strong> authorship (a creative writer taking a syntactic construction<br />
to extremes), <strong>the</strong> situation is very different in Shakespeare’s plays. Imaginative<br />
examples of various constructions abound. 13 A search for <strong>the</strong> usual suspects<br />
(<strong>the</strong> unergative intransitive verbs dream, laugh, sing, work) immediately turns up<br />
genuine syntactic predicates with unergatives like <strong>the</strong> ones in (39):<br />
(39) CLEOPATRA·<br />
That time, – O times! –<br />
I laugh’d him out of patience; and that night<br />
I laugh’d him into patience; and next morn,<br />
Ere <strong>the</strong> ninth hour, I drunk him to his bed;<br />
Then put my tires and mantles on him, whilst<br />
I wore his sword Philippan. (Shakespeare, Anthony and Cleopatra, Act II, Sc. v).<br />
12. The particle-verbs shut up, carry out, pick up and point out are <strong>the</strong> only Category 2 verb combinations<br />
in <strong>the</strong>ir list of <strong>the</strong> phrasal verbs with <strong>the</strong> highest frequency (Biber et al. 1999: 410).<br />
1 . Example (i), for instance, is an instance of <strong>the</strong> way-construction (Goldberg 1995):<br />
(i) REGAN<br />
Go thrust him out at gates, and let him smell his way to Dover. (Shakespeare, King Lear,<br />
Act III, Sc. vii)<br />
E1<br />
E2<br />
E3
176 Bettelou Los<br />
It seems, <strong>the</strong>n, that <strong>the</strong> more striking parallels between predicates and particles<br />
that can be gleaned <strong>from</strong> Goldberg & Jackendoff (2004), particularly <strong>the</strong> phenomenon<br />
of <strong>the</strong> unselected object, are only in evidence <strong>from</strong> EModE onwards. Lipka<br />
(1972) states that not all languages that have particle verb combinations have deadjectival<br />
and denominal verbs; some, like Japanese, only have deverbal verbs, and<br />
OE seems similar in having only verbs that are attested as verbs independently,<br />
i.e., also as a ‘simplex’; it is one of <strong>the</strong> peculiarities of PE (and <strong>the</strong> modern West-<br />
Germanic languages in general) that many particle verbs have no simplex (e.g.,<br />
peter out, brazen out, pretty up and many o<strong>the</strong>rs). It looks as if English was more<br />
like Japanese in this respect in earlier times, as it is not until EModE that we start<br />
to find unergatives, manner of motion verbs, denominal and deadjectival verbs in<br />
any large numbers.<br />
Talmy (1985) has proposed a binary typology along <strong>the</strong> dimension path-<br />
expressions. There are, he claims, verb-framed languages and satellite-framed<br />
languages; <strong>the</strong> former describes paths by a ‘path’ verb like exit while <strong>the</strong> latter<br />
describes paths by an element associated with <strong>the</strong> verb, like a particle or prefix;<br />
this explains why some languages have particle or prefix verbs and o<strong>the</strong>rs do<br />
not. Slobin (2005, 2006) argues that satellite-framed languages typically have<br />
many more types of manner verbs than verb-framed languages, and that <strong>the</strong>re<br />
may well be a diachronic dimension: because ‘manner’ is so easily encoded in<br />
<strong>the</strong>se languages, <strong>the</strong>re is “over time – a predisposition to attend to this domain”<br />
(Slobin 2005: 316). The more fine-grained <strong>the</strong> distinctions become, <strong>the</strong> more<br />
learners are geared to making <strong>the</strong>se fine distinctions, which ultimately leads to<br />
impressive lists for, say, “types of rapid bipedal motion” like run, jog, lope, sprint,<br />
dash, rush, hurry, scurry, scramble etc. (Slobin 2005: 316). A count of innovative<br />
manner of motion verbs per century, based on <strong>the</strong> OED, seems to show an<br />
increase <strong>from</strong> 1500 onwards, but such results are difficult to interpret correctly<br />
because English was so intensely relexified (see Slobin 2006: 72). Manner of motion<br />
verbs are a good fit in an LCS like (17), and lead to expressive particle-verbs;<br />
<strong>the</strong>y may account to some degree for <strong>the</strong> marked difference between <strong>the</strong> ME and<br />
<strong>the</strong> EModE periods. Although <strong>the</strong> origin of <strong>the</strong> rising popularity of <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r<br />
Category 2 verbs seems less clear, many of <strong>the</strong>m also encode ‘manner’, as we<br />
discussed in Section 3.1, and are consequently good fits in <strong>the</strong> LCS. It is this that<br />
may hold <strong>the</strong> key to <strong>the</strong>ir appearance in EModE.<br />
5. Conclusion<br />
The semantic and syntactic similarities of complex predicates and particles point<br />
to a common origin, with particles having grammaticalized <strong>from</strong> phrase to head.
Particles as grammaticalized complex predicates 177<br />
The order V – prt – NP shows this grammaticalization most clearly. The most<br />
striking quirks of <strong>the</strong> complex predicate construction, as observed by Goldberg<br />
and Jackendoff, i.e., unselected objects and idiomaticity (fixed combinations of<br />
verb and predicate), are also shared by particle verbs. The conclusion that <strong>the</strong>se<br />
shared quirks are similarly <strong>the</strong> result of shared diachronic origins is problematic<br />
because <strong>the</strong>y appear late, in EModE, both in particle verbs as in complex predicates.<br />
EModE seems to mark a significant point in <strong>the</strong> development of <strong>the</strong> particle<br />
verb system in that <strong>the</strong> verbs participating in <strong>the</strong> combination are no longer restricted<br />
to ‘light’ verbs but include deadjectival and denominal verbs, unergatives,<br />
and ‘manner-of-motion’ verbs.<br />
References<br />
Anthony, E.M. Jr. (1953). Test frames for structures with UP in modern American English. Ann<br />
Arbor: University Microfilms.<br />
Asbury, Anna. (2005). Adpositions as case-realisations. Leiden <strong>Papers</strong> in Linguistics 2.3, edited<br />
by Martin Salzmann and Luis Vicente, 69–92.<br />
Biber, D., S. Johannsson, G. Leech, S. Conrad & E. Finnegan (1999). The Longman Grammar of<br />
Spoken and Written English. Harlow: Longman.<br />
Blom, C. (2005). Complex Predicates in Dutch: Synchrony and Diachrony. LOT: Utrecht.<br />
Bolinger, D. (1971). The Phrasal Verb in English. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.<br />
Brinton, L.J. (1988). The Development of <strong>the</strong> English Aspectual system: Aspectualizers and Postverbal<br />
Particles. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br />
Brinton, L.J. (2002). Grammaticalization versus lexicalization reconsidered. In: English Historical<br />
Syntax and Morphology (Current Issues in Linguistic Theory Series 223), edited<br />
by Teresa Fanego, María José López-Couso and Javier Pérez-Guerra, 67–97. Amsterdam/<br />
Philadelphia: Benjamins.<br />
Castillo, C. (1994). Verb-particle combinations in Shakespearean English: A syntactic study.<br />
Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 95: 439–51.<br />
Claridge, C. (2000). Multi-Word Verbs in Early Modern English: A Corpus-Based Study. Amsterdam:<br />
Rodopi.<br />
Dehé, N. (2002). Particle Verbs in English: Syntax, Information Structure, and Intonation. Amsterdam:<br />
John Benjamins.<br />
Denison, D. (1981). Aspects of <strong>the</strong> History of English Group-verbs, with particular Attention to <strong>the</strong><br />
Syntax of <strong>the</strong> Ormulum, diss. Oxford University.<br />
Denison, D. (1985). The origins of completive up in English. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen<br />
86: 37–61.<br />
Denison, D. (2004). Do grammars change when <strong>the</strong>y leak? In: New Perspectives on English Historical<br />
Linguistics, Vol. I: Syntax and Morphology, edited by Christian Kay, Simon Horobin<br />
and Jeremy Smith, 15–29. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.<br />
Elenbaas, M. (2007). The Synchronic and Diachronic Syntax of <strong>the</strong> English Verb-Particle Combination.<br />
Utrecht: LOT.<br />
Emonds, J. (1976). A Transformational Approach to English Syntax. New York: Academic<br />
Press.
178 Bettelou Los<br />
Emonds, J. (1985). A Unified Theory of Syntactic Categories. Dordrecht: Foris.<br />
Fairclough, N.L. (1965). Studies in <strong>the</strong> Collocation of lexical Items with Prepositions and<br />
Adverbs in a Corpus of spoken and written Present-day English. MA <strong>the</strong>sis, University<br />
College London.<br />
Farrell, D. (2005). English verb-preposition constructions: constituency and order. Language<br />
80: 96–137.<br />
Fraser, B. (1965). An Examination of <strong>the</strong> Verb-particle Construction in English. Dissertation<br />
MIT.<br />
Goldberg, Adele E. (1995). Constructions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.<br />
Goldberg, Adele E., & Jackendoff, R. (2004). The English resultative as a family of constructions.<br />
Language 80: 532–568.<br />
Hundschnurscher, F. (1968). Das System der Partikelverben mit AUS in der Gegenwartsprache.<br />
Dissertation Universität Tübingen.<br />
Jackendoff, R. (1990). Semantic Structures. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.<br />
Kemenade, A. van & B. Los (2003). Particles and prefixes in Dutch and English. In: Yearbook of<br />
Morphology 2003, edited by G.E. Booij & J. van Marle, 79–117. Dordrecht: Kluwer.<br />
Lipka, L. (1972). Semantic Structure and Word Formation: Verb-particle Constructions in Contemporary<br />
English. München: Wilhelm Fink.<br />
Los, B. (2004). From resultative predicate to event-modifier: The case of forth and on. In: Proceedings<br />
of <strong>the</strong> 12th <strong>International</strong> Conference on English Historical Linguistics, edited by<br />
Christian Kay, Simon Horobin & Jeremy Smith, 83–102. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.<br />
Lüdeling, A. (2001). On Particle Verbs and Similar Constructions in German. University of Chicago<br />
Press: Chicago.<br />
McIntyre, Andrew. (2001). Argument blockages induced by verb particles in English and<br />
German: Event modification and secondary predication. In: Structural Aspects of Semantically<br />
Complex Verbs, edited by N. Dehé & A. Wanner, 131–164. Berlin: Peter Lang.<br />
McIntyre, Andrew. (2004). Event paths, conflation, argument structure, and VP shells. Linguistics<br />
42: 523–571.<br />
The Middle English Dictionary (1952–). Edited by Hans Kurath. Ann Arbor: University of<br />
Michigan Press.<br />
The Oxford English Dictionary on CD-ROM (1989). 2nd edition. Ed. by J.A. Simpson & E.S.C.<br />
Weiner. Oxford: Oxford University Press.<br />
Quirk, R., S. Greenbaum, G. Leech & J. Svartvik (1985). A Comprehensive Grammar of <strong>the</strong> English<br />
Language. London: Longman.<br />
Rappaport Hovav, M., & B. Levin (2001). An event structure account of English resultatives.<br />
Language 77: 766–797.<br />
Riehemann, S, Z. (1998). Type-based derivational morphology. Journal of Comparative Germanic<br />
Linguistics 2: 49–77.<br />
Slobin, D.I. (2005). Linguistic representations of motion events: What is signifier and what<br />
is signified? In: Outside-In – Inside-Out, edited by Costantino Maeder, Olga Fischer &<br />
William J. Herlofsky, 307–322. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.<br />
Slobin, D.I. (2006). What makes manner of motion salient? Explorations in linguistic typology,<br />
discourse and cognition. In: Space in Languages: Linguistic Systems and Cognitive Categories,<br />
edited by Maya Hickmann & Stéphane Robert, 59–81. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.<br />
Spencer, A. & Zaretskaya, M. (1998). Verb prefixation in Russian as lexical subordination.<br />
Linguistics 36: 1–39.
Particles as grammaticalized complex predicates 179<br />
Sroka, K.A. (1972). The Syntax of English Phrasal Verbs. (Janua Linguarum 129).The Hague:<br />
Mouton.<br />
Svenonius, P. (2003). Limits on P: Filling in holes vs. falling in holes. In Proceedings of <strong>the</strong> 19th Scandinavian<br />
Conference on Linguistics (Nordlyd 32), edited by Anne Dahl, Kristine Bentzen and<br />
Peter Svenonius, 431–445.<br />
Talmy, L. (1978). Figure and Ground in complex sentences. In: Universals of Human Language,<br />
edited by Joseph Greenberg, 625–649. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.<br />
Talmy, L. (1985). Lexicalization patterns: Semantic structure in lexical forms. In: Language<br />
Typology and Lexical Description, Vol. 3, Grammatical Categories and <strong>the</strong> Lexicon, edited by<br />
T. Shopen, 36–149. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br />
Vincent, N. (1999). The evolution of c-structure: Prepositions and PPs <strong>from</strong> Indo-European to<br />
Romance. Linguistics 37: 1111–1153.<br />
Zeller, J. (1999). Particle verbs, Local Domains, and a Theory of Lexical Licensing. Diss. Johann-<br />
Wolfgang-Goe<strong>the</strong>-Universität, Frankfurt am Main.
part ii<br />
Early and Late Modern English
Adverb-marking patterns in Earlier Modern<br />
English coordinate constructions<br />
Amanda Pounder<br />
In addition to <strong>the</strong> common pattern of X-ly and Y-ly in <strong>the</strong> coordination of<br />
adverbs, minority patterns such as X and Y-ly have also been observed in Early<br />
Modern and Modern English texts. While <strong>the</strong> pattern is thought typical of<br />
seventeenth- and eighteenth-century texts, examples can be found in current<br />
English as well. This paper explores <strong>the</strong> question of whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> choice between<br />
<strong>the</strong> patterns is due to aes<strong>the</strong>tic criteria such as eurythmy, <strong>the</strong> maintenance of<br />
symmetry, or a desire to avoid repetition. It concludes that all three may play a<br />
role. After considering <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>oretical alternatives of paradigmatic selection and<br />
morphological ellipsis in <strong>the</strong> analysis of <strong>the</strong> choice of <strong>the</strong> non-suffixed adverb in<br />
coordinate constructions, it seems that both strategies are available to English<br />
speakers. The morphological ellipsis strategy aligns English with a variety of o<strong>the</strong>r<br />
languages which use zero morphology in similar constructions.<br />
1. Introduction<br />
The history of <strong>the</strong> marking of deadjectival adverbs in <strong>the</strong> English language is very<br />
much still obscured by <strong>the</strong> interplay between written text and <strong>the</strong> spoken medium.<br />
For example, it is hardly likely that <strong>the</strong> zero-form of <strong>the</strong> derived adverb as verbal<br />
modifier (as in He handled that situation excellent) is a recent innovation, yet it appears<br />
only very rarely in texts of any kind appearing before <strong>the</strong> twentieth century<br />
(cf. e.g., Nevalainen 1994, 1997 & Pounder 2001, 2004). It would seem, fur<strong>the</strong>r, that<br />
a restriction of <strong>the</strong> zero-adverb in written text predates <strong>the</strong> period normally associated<br />
with intense prescriptive pressure (Pounder 2007). It seems safe to propose<br />
that <strong>the</strong> zero-form has long been typical of <strong>the</strong> spoken language, whe<strong>the</strong>r socially<br />
stigmatized or not, or restricted to informal registers or not. Occasional occurrences<br />
of <strong>the</strong> zero adverb in Early Modern English and Late Modern English texts<br />
hint at a possible preferential selection of <strong>the</strong> zero adverb in a particular syntactic<br />
context, namely in conjunction with ano<strong>the</strong>r adverb. The present paper attempts<br />
to account for such a preference with reference to both <strong>the</strong> word-formation system<br />
1. I thank all referees for <strong>the</strong>ir helpful comments. The research on which this paper was based was<br />
supported by <strong>the</strong> University of Calgary and <strong>the</strong> Universität Konstanz, for which I am very grateful.
184 Amanda Pounder<br />
of English and cross-linguistic patterns of “suspended” morphology in coordinate<br />
constructions. With respect to <strong>the</strong> latter, some languages allow or prefer morphological<br />
marking on an element of just one conjunct, where <strong>the</strong>re are parallel elements<br />
in <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r conjuncts, as in Turkish noun inflection (1).<br />
(1) a. ev-ler-de ve dükkan-lar-da<br />
house-pl-loc and shop-pl-loc<br />
‘in houses and shops’<br />
b. ev ve dükkan-lar-da<br />
house- and shop-pl-loc<br />
‘in houses and shops’ (based on Kabak 2007: 335)<br />
Closer to linguistic home, one can observe this phenomenon in English compounding<br />
and derivation, as shown in (2).<br />
(2) a. we can’t choose between socio- and psycholinguistics<br />
b. a heart- and soulless organization<br />
The paper will conclude that where in Early or Late Modern English structures<br />
such as (3) occur, <strong>the</strong>y can be similarly motivated.<br />
(3) My soul, I resign into <strong>the</strong> hands of my Almighty Creator, whose tender mercies are<br />
over all His works who hateth nothing that He hath made and to <strong>the</strong> Justice and<br />
Wisdom of whose dispensation I willing and cheerfully submit (Mason 1792)<br />
Whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong>se zero adverbs can and should be analyzed <strong>the</strong> same way as <strong>the</strong><br />
Turkish inflection or English word-formation examples, however, is ano<strong>the</strong>r<br />
question. The chapter will suggest that while both a paradigmatic selection analysis<br />
(Pounder 2004) and a suspended affixation analysis (Kabak 2007) could be applied,<br />
<strong>the</strong> systemic availability of <strong>the</strong> zero-derived adverb makes <strong>the</strong> former <strong>the</strong>oretically<br />
preferable. However, <strong>the</strong> available data shows that <strong>the</strong>re are some cases in which a<br />
suspended affixation or morphological ellipsis analysis must be invoked.<br />
Section 2 of <strong>the</strong> paper will review <strong>the</strong> historically available options for deadjectival<br />
adverb formation, while Section 3 will focus on <strong>the</strong> available patterns<br />
of morphological marking of derived adverbs in coordinate constructions in<br />
Early and Late Modern English. The chronological focus is placed on English<br />
<strong>from</strong> about 1600 to about 1800, although excursions are made in both directions<br />
where relevant. The data is selected <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> sources listed in <strong>the</strong> References<br />
section; <strong>the</strong> investigation is based on <strong>the</strong> corpora and works listed <strong>the</strong>re in <strong>the</strong>ir<br />
entirety, as well as many additional literary and non-literary texts which provided<br />
no examples of adverbs in coordination at all or none of <strong>the</strong> minority types<br />
outlined in Sections 2 and 3. In <strong>the</strong> subsequent sections, our attention turns to<br />
<strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>oretical issues of how to interpret <strong>the</strong> use of zero forms in coordinate<br />
constructions in English adverb-formation (Section 4) and what relation it bears
Adverb-marking in coordinate constructions 185<br />
to <strong>the</strong> phenomenon of zero morphology in coordinate constructions in o<strong>the</strong>r<br />
languages (Section 5).<br />
2. Structural types in English deadjectival adverb formation<br />
The historical development of deadjectival adverb formation in English has been<br />
outlined in e.g., Nevalainen (1994, 1997) and Pounder (2001). If we restrict ourselves<br />
to conversion and derivation, considering e.g., -wise to be a serial compounding<br />
element and thus ignoring it, <strong>the</strong>n this development involves <strong>the</strong> relative<br />
prominence of two alternatives: conversion as in QUICK ADJ → QUICK ADV ,<br />
originally <strong>the</strong> reflex of suffixation by -e, and derivation by means of <strong>the</strong> suffix -ly.<br />
We will call <strong>the</strong> conversion product a “zero adverb” for <strong>the</strong> sake of convenience,<br />
without any implication that suffixation of a zero-affix is involved. There have<br />
been, throughout Early Modern and Modern English, restrictions of various sorts<br />
on both conversion and ly-suffixation, outlined in e.g., Pounder (2001), and both<br />
lexical and systemic preferences. One very clear and consistent preference is for<br />
ly-suffixation in written texts of all types (Nevalainen 1994, 1997); presumably, use<br />
of conversion in at least some registers of spoken English has been consistently<br />
healthy. The following outlines <strong>the</strong> syntactic contexts in which zero adverbs as well<br />
as ly-suffixations may be found in Early Modern and Late Modern English.<br />
To begin with, sentence adverbs are generally ly-suffixed, with some exceptions,<br />
notably sure as in this example <strong>from</strong> play dialogue (4):<br />
(4) She won’t tell my wife sure, I’m ruined if she does … (Carroll 1700)<br />
Given that <strong>the</strong> zero postverbal modifier is generally associated with <strong>the</strong> spoken<br />
mode and informal registers in Present-day English, we do not expect to see it<br />
in recent written texts, and indeed, it is rare in texts of any type in Early or Late<br />
Modern English. However, it is occasionally found with verbs such as write, speak,<br />
behave, an example of which is shown in (5). O<strong>the</strong>rwise, <strong>the</strong> ly-adverb occurs.<br />
(5) To write English anything tollerable, <strong>the</strong> distinct sound of each Syllable is most<br />
carefully to be attended to? [sic] (Saxon 1737: 20)<br />
Until <strong>the</strong> nineteenth century, <strong>the</strong> most favourable syntactic context for <strong>the</strong> zero<br />
adverb in written texts is that of <strong>the</strong> adverbial or adjectival modifier, as shown in (6),<br />
where we see both alternatives in one text. In this context as well, <strong>the</strong> ly-adverbs<br />
are much more frequent in texts.<br />
(6) a. She seemed extream careful …<br />
b. … and so withdrew extreamly touched with her way … (Aulnoy 1708: 114)
186 Amanda Pounder<br />
(7) shows <strong>the</strong> zero adverb as a modifier of an adverb; this is <strong>the</strong> context in which<br />
eighteenth- and nineteenth-century grammarians urge <strong>the</strong> avoidance of two lyadverbs<br />
in sequence (e.g., Sedger 1798: 71; Lennie 1815 3 : 76), as here <strong>the</strong> potential<br />
hugely nobly, remarking on <strong>the</strong> negative aes<strong>the</strong>tics of <strong>the</strong> repeated affix:<br />
(7) … <strong>the</strong> Captain would by all means have me up to his cabin; and <strong>the</strong>re treated me<br />
huge nobly, giving me a barrel of pickled oysters (Pepys diary 4/21–22/1660)<br />
In (8), on <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, <strong>the</strong> sequence of two ly-adverbs, as in shockingly badly, is<br />
avoided in <strong>the</strong> choosing of a zero adverb for <strong>the</strong> second one.<br />
(8) … he came and drew my tooth, but shockingly bad indeed, he broke away a great<br />
piece of my gum (Woodforde 1775)<br />
Finally, we find <strong>the</strong> zero adverb in coordinate constructions, where two adverbs or<br />
adverb phrases are conjoined. The various possibilities are shown in (9).<br />
(9) a. And I confess it is very highly and basely done of him.<br />
(Pepys diary Vol III: 249, 11/4/1662)<br />
b. … and I fell to writing of it very neatly, and it was very handsome and<br />
concisely done. 2 (Pepys diary Vol. III: 138, 7/16/1662)<br />
c. … that <strong>the</strong>y behave <strong>the</strong>mselves dutifully and obedient (J. Evelyn 1704)<br />
d. … talked exceedingly civil and obliging (Woodforde 1777)<br />
In (9a), we see <strong>the</strong> coordinate structure which at all times throughout Early Modern<br />
English, Late Modern English, and Present-day English is by far <strong>the</strong> best represented,<br />
<strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>rs all being very rarely encountered: two ly-suffixed adverbs, which<br />
we may generalize as <strong>the</strong> type X-ly and Y-ly. 3 (9b) shows, by <strong>the</strong> same writer,<br />
what appears to be <strong>the</strong> next most frequently-occurring pattern, 4 namely one in<br />
which <strong>the</strong> adverb in <strong>the</strong> first conjunct is <strong>the</strong> product of a conversion process, while<br />
<strong>the</strong> adverb in <strong>the</strong> second conjunct is <strong>the</strong> product of ly-suffixation, <strong>the</strong> type here<br />
2. It is conceivable, though in my opinion unlikely, based on <strong>the</strong> context, that <strong>the</strong> diarist intended<br />
[it is handsome] and [it is concisely done]. I have endeavoured in this paper to select<br />
examples in which ambiguity of this sort is minimal.<br />
. Note that AND stands for any conjunction, in principle; most examples here in fact use and,<br />
but but and or also occur.<br />
4. No attempt to calculate statistical frequencies was made in this investigation. Ly-adverbs<br />
so vastly outnumber zero adverbs in coordination contexts as to make statistical comparison<br />
meaningless; most writers do not use zero adverbs at all in this context, and if <strong>the</strong>y do use<br />
<strong>the</strong>m, <strong>the</strong> frequency will still be extremely low. Given <strong>the</strong> rarity of zero adverbs in coordination<br />
contexts, it is not meaningful to use statistics to compare <strong>the</strong> minority patterns. I have found no<br />
example where one writer uses more than one minority pattern in a given type. Therefore, references<br />
to frequency in this paper are impressionistic. It is to be hoped that more attestations will<br />
be found, so that a meaningful statistical description can be made.
Adverb-marking in coordinate constructions 187<br />
being represented as X and Y-ly. In X-ly and Y, <strong>the</strong> type represented by (9c), it is<br />
now <strong>the</strong> second adverb that has <strong>the</strong> zero form and <strong>the</strong> first that is suffixed. Finally,<br />
in a context similar to that found in (5) and (9c), we find in (9d) <strong>the</strong> type X and<br />
Y, where <strong>the</strong> adverbs in both conjuncts are of <strong>the</strong> zero or conversion form. It is<br />
<strong>the</strong> syntactic context found in (9) that will form <strong>the</strong> focus of <strong>the</strong> chapter <strong>from</strong> this<br />
point on; <strong>the</strong> following section will discuss <strong>the</strong> alternatives of adverb formationtype<br />
in more detail.<br />
. Patterns of adverbial coordination in Early and Late Modern English<br />
.1 X-ly and Y-ly<br />
As stated in Section 2, when two adverbs or adverb phrases are conjoined in written<br />
text, <strong>the</strong>y are most likely to follow <strong>the</strong> formation pattern X-ly and Y-ly. This is<br />
true throughout <strong>the</strong> Modern period; examples typical of usage <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> sixteenth<br />
to <strong>the</strong> eighteenth century follow in (10).<br />
(10) a. And both roundlye and frankley <strong>the</strong>y goe to worke …<br />
b.<br />
(Leicester 12/31/1585)<br />
From hence it is that Dutch Merchants Wives frequently, when <strong>the</strong>ir<br />
Husbands are abroad in Trade, or any o<strong>the</strong>r business, order and govern <strong>the</strong>ir<br />
Trades as diligently and discreetly as if <strong>the</strong>y were at home (Coke 1670)<br />
c. …<strong>the</strong> different Species and Sizes of Buggs, as well as one correctly<br />
and finely magnified. (Southall 1730)<br />
The coordination of ly-adverbs is a salient feature of some formal text types, such<br />
as <strong>the</strong> legal or religious text. In trial proceedings, for example, this type of adverb<br />
coordination appears formulaically in <strong>the</strong> statement of accusation, as in (11), as<br />
well as in o<strong>the</strong>r portrayals of <strong>the</strong> accused’s conduct. Similarly, <strong>the</strong> oath required of<br />
<strong>the</strong> recruit (12) contains such a structure.<br />
(11) Nicholas Throckmorton Knighte, hold vp thy hande, Thou art before this<br />
time indited of High Treason, &c. that thou <strong>the</strong>n and <strong>the</strong>re didst falsly and<br />
traiterously, &c. conspire and imagine <strong>the</strong> Death of <strong>the</strong> Queenes Majestie …<br />
And it please you, my Lords, I doubt not to proue euidently and manifestly, that<br />
Throckmorton is wor<strong>the</strong>ly and rightly indicted and araigned of <strong>the</strong>se Treasons …<br />
(Throckmorton 1554)<br />
(12) I swear or affirm (as <strong>the</strong> case may be) to be true to <strong>the</strong> UNITED STATES OF<br />
AMERICA, and to serve <strong>the</strong>m honestly and faithfully against all <strong>the</strong>ir enemies<br />
or opposers whatsoever; and to observe and obey <strong>the</strong> Orders of <strong>the</strong> Continental<br />
Congress and <strong>the</strong> Orders of <strong>the</strong> General, and officers set over me by <strong>the</strong>m.<br />
(Recruit 1776)
188 Amanda Pounder<br />
It is likely that in such contexts, <strong>the</strong> symmetry of form provided by <strong>the</strong> conjoined<br />
ly-adverbs provides a certain emphatic quality to <strong>the</strong> utterance reported or text,<br />
just as <strong>the</strong> coordinate structure itself is a beloved emphatic device whose appeal is<br />
presumably symmetry: see some examples in (13) with conjoined nouns.<br />
(13) But by cause <strong>the</strong>n we wer sent for to come to th’emperor commissionars,<br />
and our Lettres wer redy written contenyng a longe discurse and declaration off<br />
many mattres … th’emperor entendeth to resigne <strong>the</strong> Empire unto your Grace,<br />
and to obten your Election by hys procurement and sollicitinge off <strong>the</strong> Electors<br />
<strong>the</strong>runto … your Grace hath also shewyd so largely your bounteousnes and<br />
liberalite anenst me that I ougth mo to desire <strong>the</strong> incresement and augmentation<br />
off your Graces honor … (Tunstall 1517)<br />
This symmetry of form might indeed be one motivation for <strong>the</strong> appeal of <strong>the</strong><br />
type X-ly and Y-ly in o<strong>the</strong>r text types as well; this idea is supported by Görlach<br />
(2004: 104), who claims that symmetry, along with rhythm, does play a role in <strong>the</strong><br />
choice between alternative structures.<br />
.2 X and Y-ly<br />
The pattern X and Y-ly as in (9b) and examples to follow is mentioned by Knorrek<br />
(1938: 103) as an “occasional pattern” in <strong>the</strong> seventeenth century. She provides <strong>the</strong><br />
examples in (14), all <strong>from</strong> literary sources.<br />
(14) a. … and <strong>the</strong>n he faithfully and boldly supplieth it, yet seasonable and discreetly<br />
by taking aside <strong>the</strong> lord or lady (Herbert)<br />
b. … nor I to sell my honour, by living poor and sparingly (Shirley)<br />
c. … for though <strong>the</strong> satisfaction may be somewhat Drowsy … it strikes smooth<br />
and gently upon <strong>the</strong> sense (Collier)<br />
To <strong>the</strong>se can be added examples <strong>from</strong> non-fiction (15) and personal writing (16):<br />
(15) … and he says he is a fish that feeds clean and purely (Walton 1676)<br />
(16) That I am charged, and that deep and widely, with great offence … (Butler 1697)<br />
It is not apparent that this pattern favours any particular text type. It is found in<br />
texts written prior to <strong>the</strong> seventeenth century as well, and is attested into <strong>the</strong> nineteenth<br />
century; no obvious dynamics are observable, due to <strong>the</strong> true occasionality<br />
of use. (17) presents additional examples in chronological order. In all cases, <strong>the</strong><br />
writers also use <strong>the</strong> type X-ly and Y-ly, as indicated previously.<br />
(17) a. I have nought trespassed ageyn noon of <strong>the</strong>se iii, God knowith; and yet I am<br />
foule and noysyngly vexed with hem to my gret unease, and al for my lordes<br />
and frendes (William Paston 3/1/1426)
Adverb-marking in coordinate constructions 189<br />
b. …if he could were a gowne and a tipet cumlie, and haue hys crowne shorne<br />
faire and roundlie … (Ascham 1570)<br />
c. …but Na<strong>the</strong>les he would <strong>the</strong> point should be lesse & more fauorably handled,<br />
not euen fully plain & directly, but that <strong>the</strong> matter should be touched a slope<br />
craftely (More 1513)<br />
d. …Therefore whensoeuer your words will not make a smooth dactil, ye must<br />
alter <strong>the</strong>m or <strong>the</strong>ir situations … or if <strong>the</strong> word be polysillable to deuide him,<br />
and to make him serue by peeces, that he could not do whole and entierly.<br />
(Puttenham 1589)<br />
e. And thus by maister Edward Diar, vehement swift & passionatly.<br />
(Puttenham 1589)<br />
f. … and many times this Silver Lace is not onely slightly and deceitfully made<br />
… and <strong>the</strong> silk false and deceitfully dyed, which makes <strong>the</strong> Lace turne black<br />
and tarnish (Violet 1661)<br />
g. That <strong>the</strong> Coronation Oath makes <strong>the</strong> King; which is a most gross as well as<br />
dangerous Mistake; <strong>the</strong> King being as perfect and compleatly King before his<br />
Coronation as after (Apology 1684)<br />
Some of <strong>the</strong> examples in (17), such as (f), appear ambiguous, possibly allowing<br />
an interpretation adj and adv adj, whereby <strong>the</strong> item in <strong>the</strong> first conjunct is an<br />
adjective ra<strong>the</strong>r than a deadjectival adverb. Given <strong>the</strong> context, however, an adverb<br />
interpretation does seem more likely; highly ambiguous sentences were omitted<br />
<strong>from</strong> this study. In some cases, such as (17c), it may be that <strong>the</strong> writer chose a zero<br />
form in order to avoid three ly-adverbs in sequence; however, <strong>the</strong>re are many o<strong>the</strong>r<br />
instances in texts of sequences of several ly-adverbs. In addition, such a motivation<br />
would not account for <strong>the</strong> very similar (17e). We shall return in Section 3 to<br />
<strong>the</strong> question of motivation for <strong>the</strong> choice of this structural type, but it may be that<br />
just as <strong>the</strong> repetition of -ly was felt to be unpleasing in immediate sequence, it may<br />
have been felt to be unpleasing or at least redundant in coordinate structures. This<br />
principle, if it was indeed operative, would of course have been in direct conflict<br />
with <strong>the</strong> symmetry principle suggested in Section 2.1.<br />
. X-ly and Y<br />
The structure type X-ly and Y has, as far as I know, gone unnoticed in <strong>the</strong> literature,<br />
unlike <strong>the</strong> previous type. In <strong>the</strong> example in (18), one might suspect an attempt<br />
to achieve a pleasing symmetry, in that <strong>the</strong> preceding coordinate structure<br />
wel and ornately is rhythmically almost <strong>the</strong> mirror-image.<br />
(18) And by and by somewhat louder, he rehersed <strong>the</strong>m <strong>the</strong> same matter againe<br />
in o<strong>the</strong>r order and o<strong>the</strong>r wordes, so wel and ornately, & na<strong>the</strong>les so euidently<br />
and plaine (More 1513)
190 Amanda Pounder<br />
The type is attested in texts at least as far back as <strong>the</strong> fifteenth century, into Early<br />
Modern English, and well into <strong>the</strong> eighteenth century; examples follow in (19),<br />
arranged in chronological order.<br />
(19) a. Therfor <strong>the</strong> seyd Mair and Aldirmen, considering how such worthy persones<br />
as <strong>the</strong> same knyght is, thurgh such falsnes in tyme comyng myght lightly and<br />
causeles renne in sclaundre … (Keteringham 1418)<br />
b. … and <strong>the</strong>n cam rydyng maister Clarensshuws with ys target, with ys garter,<br />
and ys sword, gorgyusly and ryche, … (Machyn 7/26/15–)<br />
c. When you angle for Chevin, Roach, or Dace, with <strong>the</strong> fly, you must not<br />
move your fly swiftly; when you see <strong>the</strong> fish coming towards it……draw <strong>the</strong><br />
fly slowly, and not directly upon him, … for, should you move it nimbly and<br />
quick, <strong>the</strong>y will not, being fish of slow motion, follow as <strong>the</strong> Trout will.<br />
(Venables 1662)<br />
d. Excesse in Apparell & chargeable dresses are got into <strong>the</strong> country, especially<br />
among woemen: men go decently & playne enough. (Browne 8/22/1680)<br />
e. Everything was done decently, handsome and well (Woodforde, 1771)<br />
In some of <strong>the</strong>se examples, such as (19c), we see zero adverbs, e.g., QUICK, that<br />
are more frequent than many o<strong>the</strong>rs. However, ly-adverbs were also available and<br />
are likewise attested, so while <strong>the</strong>se zero adverbs are perhaps more likely than<br />
o<strong>the</strong>rs to be chosen in any context, <strong>the</strong>re is still a choice being made here. The<br />
motivation for choosing a zero adverb in <strong>the</strong> final conjunct is likely <strong>the</strong> same as in<br />
<strong>the</strong> preceding type (Section 2.2); moreover, <strong>the</strong> adverbial category is clearly established<br />
in <strong>the</strong> first conjunct, and <strong>the</strong> zero adverb is actually less ambiguous for that<br />
reason than when it appears in <strong>the</strong> first conjunct, as we saw above.<br />
.4 X and Y<br />
The structural type X and Y would be expected to be characteristic of texts closer<br />
to <strong>the</strong> oral mode; it is relatively frequent in Woodforde, and appears with <strong>the</strong> verbs<br />
mentioned in Section 2 as likely partners for zero adverbs, such as BEHAVE. The<br />
type is illustrated in (20); (20c) shows that ly-adverbs may modify BEHAVE also.<br />
(20) a. his Lordship behaved exceedingly handsome and free (Woodforde 1774)<br />
b. The Professor Dr. Bentham behaved very polite and exceedingly civil<br />
to us indeed. (Woodforde 1775)<br />
c. They behaved very respectively towards me. (Woodforde 1768)<br />
We will not consider this type fur<strong>the</strong>r in this paper.<br />
In this section, we have seen that, given two coordinated adverbs or adverb<br />
phrases, every possible combination of formation type is actually attested in Early<br />
Modern and Late Modern English written texts. There is one very strong majority<br />
type, X-ly and Y-ly, and <strong>the</strong> three minority patterns occur very rarely in text
Adverb-marking in coordinate constructions 191<br />
types of any kind. The rarity of occurrence of <strong>the</strong>se minority types prevents any<br />
clear picture of dynamic development being formed at this time. In <strong>the</strong> following<br />
section, we will consider possible analyses of <strong>the</strong> alternative types, focusing on <strong>the</strong><br />
non-symmetric types, X and Y-ly and X-ly and Y.<br />
4. Asymmetric coordination of derived adverbs in (Early)<br />
Modern English<br />
4.1 Status of asymmetric formation patterns in coordination<br />
The occurrence of <strong>the</strong> two asymmetric patterns of formation type in adverbial<br />
coordination being so rare across periods and text types, it is difficult indeed to<br />
determine what <strong>the</strong>ir status might be, beyond, as stated, that <strong>the</strong>se are definitely<br />
minority types in <strong>the</strong> written mode at least. It is also not obvious what <strong>the</strong> chronological<br />
path of development might be, as <strong>the</strong> types are found in (late) Middle<br />
English and attested into <strong>the</strong> Early Modern period (and see below), without any<br />
discernible trends at this point. It is worth remembering that adverbial coordination,<br />
outside of legal texts and o<strong>the</strong>r formal genres, is itself rare, and (deadjectival)<br />
adverbs are <strong>the</strong>mselves quite rare; where space is at a premium, such as in private<br />
correspondence and diaries, <strong>the</strong>y may be lacking altoge<strong>the</strong>r. Based on <strong>the</strong> study<br />
of a large number and broad range of texts, we can at least state some possible<br />
hypo<strong>the</strong>ses regarding <strong>the</strong> status of asymmetric adverbial coordination. Firstly, it is<br />
possible that <strong>the</strong> minority patterns are so rare that <strong>the</strong>y do not constitute part of<br />
<strong>the</strong> norm for speakers/writers at any time; this would mean that each time that an<br />
asymmetric structure is produced, it is <strong>the</strong> result of <strong>the</strong> spontaneous application<br />
of a non-language-specific principle (see 4.2, 4.3). Secondly, it is possible that <strong>the</strong><br />
minority patterns constitute rare reflections of a pattern typical of <strong>the</strong> oral mode,<br />
just as we presume that zero adverbs were much more common in speech than in<br />
writing, based on current frequencies in each mode. As will be suggested below,<br />
<strong>the</strong> motivations for <strong>the</strong> pattern would be <strong>the</strong> same as under <strong>the</strong> first hypo<strong>the</strong>sis<br />
in any case. However, unless an as yet undiscovered treasure-trove of attestations<br />
awaits that would add substance to what has been established so far, <strong>the</strong>re is nothing<br />
concrete that would support one hypo<strong>the</strong>sis over <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r at this time.<br />
It is perhaps instructive to consider, in support of <strong>the</strong> first hypo<strong>the</strong>sis, <strong>the</strong> case<br />
of Present-day English. It would be generally agreed that <strong>the</strong> normal pattern in<br />
Present-day English for adverbial conjunction would be that resulting <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
lexical preference for each adverb in <strong>the</strong> conjunct in question, that is, that <strong>the</strong>re<br />
would be no expectation that adverbs in coordination would behave any differently<br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir single habits. However, a brief Internet search brings up possibly<br />
startling results: while, again, <strong>the</strong> majority pattern is clearly X-ly and Y-ly, <strong>the</strong>
192 Amanda Pounder<br />
minority asymmetric pattern X and Y-ly does occur also. Examples such as (21)<br />
are not infrequent; here we may interpret <strong>the</strong> structure as ly-affixation to <strong>the</strong> phrase<br />
plain and simple.<br />
(21) a. Plain & simply he called you an idiot!<br />
Intelligence 10/27/06 http://www.zdnet.com/<br />
b. Writing Plain and Simply<br />
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-wcag-teamb/2006May/0037.html<br />
c. Plain and Simply Put … (11/3/2006)<br />
http://news.com.com/5208-1028-0.html<br />
To this native speaker ear, at least, ?plainly and simply is indeed jarring. (21) indicates<br />
that <strong>the</strong>re may be a difference between <strong>the</strong> natural, frequent coordination of<br />
a pair of adverbs (cf. Wälchli 2005), and a more arbitrary collocation of a pair, as<br />
in <strong>the</strong> examples in (22).<br />
(22) a. A good analogy would be that of flying a small airplane, if <strong>the</strong> controls<br />
are handled smooth and gently <strong>the</strong> plane moves in a smooth and easy<br />
manner … http://www.physical<strong>the</strong>rapy.org/macy2/<br />
b. Accelerate as smooth and gently as possible, trying to stay below<br />
1800 rpm’s. http://www.hybridcars.com/gas-saving-tips/maximizing-<br />
mileage-ford-escape-hybrid.html<br />
c. The best photojournalists try to work quiet and discreetly. People act more<br />
like <strong>the</strong>mselves when <strong>the</strong>y are unaware that <strong>the</strong>y are being photographed.<br />
http://www.richardrooks.com/<br />
d. A J2ME application that allows to read last news on your mobile phone <strong>from</strong><br />
your preferred site, simple and directly<br />
http://www.symbiangear.com/product.html<br />
e. Both models capture flies, mosquitoes, and o<strong>the</strong>r insects, silent and discreetly<br />
using pheremone impregnated glue pads.<br />
http://www.mosquito-zapper.com/glueboard_flytraps. htm<br />
f. First and foremost, I thank our Entrepreneurship Program Coordinator,<br />
Grace Tan (USF MBA candidate 2007 and deans fellow) who worked<br />
tireless and cheerfully for months preparing <strong>the</strong> logistics for <strong>the</strong> event.<br />
http://www.usfca.edu/sobam/nvc/bpc/<br />
g. Even though she was already serving as our Society’s treasurer last year,<br />
Marie willing and cheerfully assumed <strong>the</strong> responsibility for <strong>the</strong> Newsletter<br />
when that position became vacant. (11/11/2006)<br />
www.geocities.com/mcgstx/Newsletter.pdf<br />
h. … didn’t I willing and cheerfully let <strong>the</strong>m interview me?<br />
http://www.mcli.dist.maricopa.edu/mlx/slip.php?Item=609<br />
The examples in (22) suggest that asymmetric coordination of adverbs may occasionally<br />
occur in spite of <strong>the</strong>re not being a structural norm providing for it in<br />
Present-day English. This in turn suggests that, pending fur<strong>the</strong>r evidence, <strong>the</strong>re
Adverb-marking in coordinate constructions 19<br />
may never have been such a norm in earlier stages ei<strong>the</strong>r and that all incidences of<br />
asymmetric coordination, with <strong>the</strong> possible exception of affixation to a phrase as<br />
in (21), are not norm-driven ei<strong>the</strong>r.<br />
The formal analysis of asymmetric coordination of adverbs is treated in <strong>the</strong><br />
following subsections.<br />
4.2 Choice of formation type in adverbial coordination:<br />
Paradigmatic selection<br />
One way of approaching <strong>the</strong> production of an adverbial coordination structure<br />
is by proposing that, in each conjunct, one member of a derivational paradigm<br />
consisting of two branches (Figure 1), one corresponding to <strong>the</strong> conversion option<br />
and one corresponding to <strong>the</strong> option of ly-suffixation, is selected over <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r:<br />
this is “paradigmatic selection”.<br />
Xadj<br />
X→X<br />
X+ly<br />
where X, a lexical stem<br />
Figure 1. The Derivational Paradigm in Deadjectival Adverb Formation.<br />
The selection process is subject to lexical, phonological, morphological, semantic,<br />
pragmatic, and syntactic constraints (cf. also Pounder 2004); in addition to<br />
those holding when a derived adverb appears singly, <strong>the</strong> process can take account<br />
of <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong> syntactic context includes ano<strong>the</strong>r derived adverb, and can take<br />
its formal structure into account likewise. In addition to determining that this<br />
o<strong>the</strong>r adverb may be “scheduled” to undergo <strong>the</strong> affixation alternative, its prosodic<br />
properties may be assessed. Schlüter (2002) suggests that in adjective phrases<br />
with an adverb modifier, <strong>the</strong> zero member of <strong>the</strong> derivational paradigm tends to<br />
be selected where a desirable metrical pattern would <strong>the</strong>reby be produced, i.e., a<br />
rhythmic alternation of stressed and unstressed syllables. Thus for example exceeding<br />
pretty would be a preferred combination, while extreme clear, with a “stress<br />
clash” of a sequence of two stressed syllables, would be much less so. If we apply<br />
this principle to coordinate constructions, we can see that in most of <strong>the</strong> examples<br />
above, ei<strong>the</strong>r an ideal rhythm is achieved by choosing a zero adverb for <strong>the</strong> first<br />
conjunct (e.g., (14b) poor and sparingly, (14c) smooth and gently, (15) clean and<br />
purely, (16) deep and widely), or, in some cases, at least <strong>the</strong> number of unstressed<br />
syllables is reduced by this choice (e.g., (9b) handsome and concisely, (17e) whole<br />
and entierly, (17h) perfect and compleatly). In <strong>the</strong> first case, of course, <strong>the</strong> base
194 Amanda Pounder<br />
adjective in <strong>the</strong> first conjunct is monosyllabic and <strong>the</strong> adverb in <strong>the</strong> second conjunct<br />
has initial stress, while in <strong>the</strong> second case, <strong>the</strong> base adjective has more than<br />
one syllable and/or <strong>the</strong> adverb in <strong>the</strong> second conjunct has stress on some o<strong>the</strong>r syllable<br />
than <strong>the</strong> first: this is a situation that will be very frequently encountered. Just<br />
as <strong>the</strong>re are many examples running counter to <strong>the</strong> tendency Schlüter observes<br />
(e.g., (6a) extream careful), <strong>the</strong>re are examples in which <strong>the</strong> choice of a zero adverb<br />
in <strong>the</strong> first conjunct does not affect rhythm, that is, <strong>the</strong> rhythmic pattern is <strong>the</strong><br />
same as in <strong>the</strong> majority structure (e.g., (14a) seasonable and discreetly). Rhythmic<br />
considerations do not appear to discourage <strong>the</strong> choice of <strong>the</strong> majority pattern<br />
(e.g., (17g) slightly and deceitfully, (10b) diligently and discreetly), and in <strong>the</strong> case<br />
of <strong>the</strong> zero adverb in <strong>the</strong> second conjunct, as illustrated in Section 3.3., <strong>the</strong>y do not<br />
seem to be applicable. While rhythmic considerations may favour <strong>the</strong> minority<br />
pattern X and Y-ly, <strong>the</strong>y cannot constitute <strong>the</strong> only motivation, <strong>the</strong>refore. One<br />
would expect rhythm to be a greater concern in <strong>the</strong> oral mode, although <strong>the</strong>re is<br />
of course less time for evaluation and revision <strong>the</strong>re. Although we have no direct<br />
evidence of this, it is possible that <strong>the</strong> desire for pleasing rhythmic patterns encourages<br />
<strong>the</strong> use of <strong>the</strong> pattern X and Y-ly in speech.<br />
While we can concede that <strong>the</strong> selection of <strong>the</strong> minority pattern X and Y-ly<br />
may be partially motivated by a preference for rhythmic alternation, it is necessary<br />
to look for o<strong>the</strong>r factors that are likely to play a role. Relatively high lexical<br />
frequency of <strong>the</strong> zero adverb can predispose it to appearing in coordination as well<br />
(e.g., quick, plain, as in (19e) and (17d), (18) respectively). It may also be that <strong>the</strong><br />
aes<strong>the</strong>tic value of rhythmic symmetry, where both adverbs have <strong>the</strong> same number<br />
of syllables and <strong>the</strong> same stress pattern, and/or of structural symmetry, where both<br />
adverbs are of <strong>the</strong> same morphological structure, is at least as high as that placed<br />
on rhythmic alternation.<br />
4. Choice of formation type in adverbial coordination:<br />
Morphological brachylogy/ellipsis<br />
Ano<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong>oretical approach to form types in adverbial coordination structures<br />
involves <strong>the</strong> concept of morphological ellipsis or “brachylogy”. The latter term<br />
refers generally to economy through omission under identity or, more specifically,<br />
<strong>the</strong> non-realization of morphological material where it can be recuperated<br />
through <strong>the</strong> syntactic context. Regarding <strong>the</strong> two asymmetric adverbial coordination<br />
structures, we would consider that <strong>the</strong> adverb marking by means of <strong>the</strong><br />
-ly suffix in <strong>the</strong> left or right conjunct “has scope over” <strong>the</strong> coordinate structure;<br />
by some structure-sharing mechanism, <strong>the</strong> suffix is shared by both conjuncts. In<br />
o<strong>the</strong>r words, <strong>the</strong> zero adverb is only apparently a conversion; ra<strong>the</strong>r, it is in fact<br />
a morphologically incomplete form, namely a stem with a “gapped” suffix. (An<br />
alternative understanding of <strong>the</strong> non-realization of a ly-suffix is that of deletion of
Adverb-marking in coordinate constructions 195<br />
<strong>the</strong> ly-suffix in one conjunct where it occurs in <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r conjunct; this interpretation<br />
has <strong>the</strong> same result.) In (23), for example, anticipating <strong>the</strong> ly-adverb to come,<br />
<strong>the</strong> choice is made not to suffix handsome-, <strong>the</strong> -ly on concisely <strong>the</strong>n fulfilling <strong>the</strong><br />
adverbial marking function for both.<br />
(23(=9b)) and I fell to writing of it very neatly, and it was very handsome and<br />
concisely done.<br />
The general motivation for morphological brachylogy is <strong>the</strong> same as for paradigmatic<br />
selection of <strong>the</strong> zero adverb referring to syntactic context: <strong>the</strong> goal is to<br />
avoid identity or repetition (again, this directly conflicts with <strong>the</strong> motivation for<br />
formal symmetry as in <strong>the</strong> majority pattern). In <strong>the</strong> next subsection, we will consider<br />
<strong>the</strong> question of which provides a more appropriate analysis in <strong>the</strong> case of<br />
(Early) Modern English.<br />
4.4 Paradigmatic selection vs. morphological brachylogy:<br />
Does it have to be ei<strong>the</strong>r/or?<br />
While both phenomena, paradigmatic selection of a zero formation and morphological<br />
brachylogy, are available cross-linguistically, it is not clear at first glance<br />
which is operative in <strong>the</strong> case of (Early) Modern English adverbial coordination.<br />
For one thing, paradigmatic selection is available in <strong>the</strong> system: <strong>the</strong>re are two<br />
choices of formation-type within derivation, outside of coordination structures,<br />
and it seems reasonable to claim that a decision as to what formation process to<br />
follow is made in <strong>the</strong> normal case. Pounder (2004, 2007) proposes that paradigmatic<br />
selection be <strong>the</strong> preferred analysis where this is so, that is, where a zero-form<br />
is an acceptable systemic option. The justification for this is an aes<strong>the</strong>tic one: <strong>the</strong><br />
more economical account makes use of just one mechanism where possible, and<br />
<strong>the</strong> zero-forms must be generatable in any event. However, it seems clear <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
data that morphological brachylogy must also be operative in some cases.<br />
To establish that morphological brachylogy can be invoked in (Early) Modern<br />
English, we must consider <strong>the</strong> syntactic context in which <strong>the</strong> coordination of adverbs<br />
occurs more closely. Section 2 outlines <strong>the</strong> contexts in which zero adverbs<br />
may occur; what goes unmentioned <strong>the</strong>re is <strong>the</strong> contexts in which zero adverbs<br />
may not occur. With very few exceptions (LONG ADV is one), zero adverbs may<br />
not occur in <strong>the</strong> position before <strong>the</strong> lexical verb, particularly not before <strong>the</strong> finite<br />
verb, and this has been in vigour throughout Modern English: I ran fast, Julie sings<br />
loud/loudly but *I fast ran, *Julie loud sings. We should expect, <strong>the</strong>n, that in preverbal<br />
position, <strong>the</strong> only formation type appearing in adverbial coordination will be<br />
X + ly. Some examples seem to support this, for example (24):<br />
(24 (=14a)) …and <strong>the</strong>n he faithfully and boldly supplieth it, yet seasonable and<br />
discreetly by taking aside <strong>the</strong> lord or lady
196 Amanda Pounder<br />
Here, <strong>the</strong> preverbal adverbs have <strong>the</strong> -ly suffix, while <strong>the</strong> second coordination<br />
structure, following <strong>the</strong> verb, allows <strong>the</strong> zero form in <strong>the</strong> first conjunct. However,<br />
we also find examples in which a minority pattern containing a zero adverb is<br />
found in preverbal position, as in (25).<br />
(25) a. (=19a) Therfor <strong>the</strong> seyd Mair and Aldirmen, … thurgh such falsnes in tyme<br />
comyng myght lightly and causeles renne in sclaundre …<br />
b. (=3) … I willing and cheerfully submit<br />
*might causeless ADV run and *I willing ADV submit are not grammatical at any point<br />
in Modern English. The adverbs in question should <strong>the</strong>refore not be available under<br />
paradigmatic selection. Some of <strong>the</strong> Present-day English examples of adverbial<br />
coordination, too, show zero adverbs preverbally, given in (26).<br />
(26) a. (=22e) Both models capture flies, mosquitoes, and o<strong>the</strong>r insects, silent and<br />
discreetly using pheromone impregnated glue pads.<br />
b. (=22g) Even though she was already serving as our Society’s treasurer last<br />
year, Marie willing and cheerfully assumed <strong>the</strong> responsibility for <strong>the</strong><br />
Newsletter when that position became vacant.<br />
c. (=22h) didn’t I willing and cheerfully let <strong>the</strong>m interview me?<br />
Here again, <strong>the</strong> corresponding expressions with one zero adverb are not grammatical:<br />
*Marie willing assumed <strong>the</strong> responsibility, *didn’t I willing let <strong>the</strong>m interview<br />
me?, and <strong>the</strong>n with a participial construction, *silent using pheremone-impregnated<br />
glue pads. These facts point to morphological brachylogy/ellipsis being used at<br />
least some of <strong>the</strong> time.<br />
It is conceivable that <strong>the</strong> paradigmatic selection option would be more likely<br />
where <strong>the</strong> lexical frequency of zero-adverb is high, or in an informal register where<br />
<strong>the</strong> conversion option might be more likely to be taken advantage of generally, but<br />
that in o<strong>the</strong>r cases, brachylogy is invoked. At least for Modern English, it is not<br />
only paradigmatic selection of a zero form that is a systemic possibility: morphological<br />
brachylogy also plays a role in <strong>the</strong> word-formation system. That is, brachylogy<br />
is available for compounds and to some extent in derivational morphology, as<br />
in (27), so it could be suggested that it is used here likewise.<br />
(27 = (2)) a. we can’t choose between socio- and psycholinguistics<br />
b. a heart- and soulless organization<br />
However, I have not as yet been able to establish that brachylogy was common in Early<br />
Modern English; still, it seems to be available for adverbial coordination. Should one<br />
<strong>the</strong>n move completely to <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r side and assume brachylogy in all cases? I think<br />
not, for as already pointed out, paradigmatic selection will be needed in any event.<br />
In <strong>the</strong> following section, we will place <strong>the</strong> phenomenon of asymmetric coordination<br />
of adverbs against a background of asymmetric form in o<strong>the</strong>r languages.
5. Cross-linguistic context<br />
Adverb-marking in coordinate constructions 197<br />
Both paradigmatic selection of a systemically legitimate zero form and morphological<br />
brachylogy are attested in o<strong>the</strong>r languages (Pounder 2007). In <strong>the</strong> deadjectival<br />
adverb domain, asymmetric patterns similar to those discussed here are found in<br />
Romance. (28) illustrates examples <strong>from</strong> older Italian:<br />
(28) a. co’i suoi denari alta e riccamente rimaritar-la<br />
with his money high- and rich-adv remarry her<br />
‘with his money grandly and richly remarry her’<br />
(Grazzini, La gelosia, <strong>from</strong> Migliorini 1952: 377; see also Rohlfs 1954: 129)<br />
b. privata e pubblicamente<br />
private- and public-adv<br />
‘privately and publicly’<br />
(Lombardelli, lettera sulla Gerusalemme, <strong>from</strong> Migliorini 1952: 377)<br />
Here, a brachylogy analysis seems appropriate, as <strong>the</strong> fragments alta and privata,<br />
while legitimate word-forms in Italian, are not appropriate word-level options in<br />
this syntactic context (for example, <strong>the</strong> zero-adverb in <strong>the</strong> (28a) would be alto).<br />
In Modern Spanish (29), we find a similar phenomenon, whereby <strong>the</strong> asymmetric<br />
construction is in fact <strong>the</strong> majority type in <strong>the</strong> standard written language<br />
(but apparently rare in speech) (Butt and Benjamin 2000 3 : 413). In most cases,<br />
<strong>the</strong> fragment does not correspond to a legitimate word-level option, as in Older<br />
Italian, so again, a brachylogy analysis is <strong>the</strong> only one possible here.<br />
(29) se lo dije sincera y llanamente … lo que<br />
I told him sincere- and plain-adv … that which<br />
tradicional y ridiculamente se ha considerado un comportamiento<br />
traditional- and ridiculous-adv has been considered feminine<br />
femenino.<br />
behaviour<br />
‘I told him sincerely and plainly … what has traditionally and ridiculously been<br />
considered feminine behaviour’ (Butt and Benjamin 2000 3 : 413)<br />
While <strong>the</strong> cross-linguistically preferred direction in paradigmatic selection of a<br />
zero form and morphological brachylogy is full or suffixed form in <strong>the</strong> final conjunct,<br />
zero or stem form in <strong>the</strong> initial conjunct(s), this is not <strong>the</strong> only possibility, as we have<br />
seen in English asymmetric adverbial coordination (cf. Section 3.3). Similarly in<br />
Provençal/Modern Catalan, we find that <strong>the</strong> standard direction is right-to-left (30),<br />
<strong>the</strong> reverse of Spanish; here, one assumes, <strong>the</strong> category is established in <strong>the</strong> first<br />
conjunct and a marking on <strong>the</strong> second conjunct is considered superfluous.<br />
(30) francamen e corteza<br />
frank-adv and courteous-<br />
‘frankly and courteously’ (Migliorini 1952: 375)
198 Amanda Pounder<br />
While it is true that -mente and its various Romance reflexes have an autonomous<br />
word, later a compounding element, as its origin, it now functions as a suffix (contra<br />
Zagona 1990). It may be that a syntactic ellipsis structure was once responsible<br />
for <strong>the</strong> formal asymmetry, but for later and modern speakers, it is morphological<br />
ellipsis/brachylogy that is applied here. It is interesting that it is in adverbial coordination<br />
that formal asymmetry obtains, where brachylogy is not a highly salient<br />
device elsewhere in Romance. One reason why this is a ra<strong>the</strong>r favourable context<br />
for brachylogy to occur is that <strong>the</strong> range of formation-type alternatives is smaller<br />
than elsewhere in derivation; in English and Romance, <strong>the</strong>re is generally one, possibly<br />
two, derivational suffix(es) in <strong>the</strong> adverb-formation domain. Therefore, <strong>the</strong><br />
likelihood that given any pair of adjective bases, a -ly or a -mente suffix can be supplied<br />
to fill <strong>the</strong> apparent gap is extremely high, if not absolute. This would not be<br />
<strong>the</strong> case for many o<strong>the</strong>r derivational and inflectional functions.<br />
Formal predictability is a strong factor elsewhere as a facilitator for morphological<br />
brachylogy. In German adjective inflection and comparative/superlative<br />
formation, <strong>the</strong> suffixes responsible are invariant, and in Earlier Modern German,<br />
we find that brachylogy is possible here, as shown in (31).<br />
(31) das … schön= und kost-bar-st-e Bau=Werck<br />
<strong>the</strong>.neut beautiful- and cost-suff-superl-neut.nom building<br />
‘<strong>the</strong> most beautiful and delightful building’ (Abraham a Sancta Clara 1709: 49)<br />
Here, two superlative adjectives are conjoined. The first appears as a bare stem<br />
(and its fragmentary status is marked in <strong>the</strong> printed text with a hyphen), while<br />
<strong>the</strong> second bears both <strong>the</strong> superlative suffix -st and <strong>the</strong> adjectival concord suffix<br />
-e that would o<strong>the</strong>rwise also appear on <strong>the</strong> first adjective (das … schönste und<br />
kostbarste Bauwerck). To interpret <strong>the</strong> structure correctly, <strong>the</strong> hearer/reader must<br />
listen for <strong>the</strong> intonation indicating continuation or note <strong>the</strong> hyphen, wait for <strong>the</strong><br />
appropriate morphology to be supplied, and <strong>the</strong>n reconstitute <strong>the</strong> fragment of <strong>the</strong><br />
first conjunct. This job would be made more difficult if, as well, he had to reconstitute<br />
formally different morphological material. In <strong>the</strong> Turkish example presented<br />
in Section 1, repeated here as (32), we have a similar case.<br />
(32 (=1)) a. ev-ler-de ve dükkan-lar-da<br />
house-pl-loc and shop-pl-loc<br />
‘in houses and shops’<br />
b. ev ve dükkan-lar-da<br />
house- and shop-pl-loc<br />
‘in houses and shops’<br />
The plural and case suffixes are invariant (predictable allomorphy is permitted, as<br />
<strong>the</strong> example shows) in Turkish, and morphological brachylogy, called “suspended<br />
affixation” by Turkologists, is <strong>the</strong> norm in inflection in both spoken and written
Adverb-marking in coordinate constructions 199<br />
modes, with restrictions as described in Kabak (2007). In derivation, where <strong>the</strong>re<br />
is presumably a range of choices of suffix in many cases, morphological brachylogy<br />
does not occur.<br />
It <strong>the</strong>refore seems that while it is less elegant to include morphological brachylogy<br />
amongst <strong>the</strong> operative strategies in English adverb-formation, given that paradigmatic<br />
selection must also be recognized, it is necessary to do so. However, <strong>the</strong><br />
fact that it is a common strategy in various languages of <strong>the</strong> world and <strong>the</strong> fact that<br />
it fits in well with instances of brachylogy observed elsewhere bolster its appeal.<br />
6. Conclusion<br />
In <strong>the</strong> coordination of adverbs in all periods of Modern English, <strong>the</strong>re is one<br />
strongly dominant pattern, X-ly and Y-ly. The minority patterns X and Y-ly and<br />
X-ly and Y are rare in written texts of <strong>the</strong> seventeenth to nineteenth centuries, and<br />
while <strong>the</strong>y are not recognized as standard, apparently do still occasionally occur<br />
as shown by Internet search. Given <strong>the</strong> steadily low rate of occurrence in texts, it<br />
has not yet been possible to discern any clear trends in use in <strong>the</strong> Early and Late<br />
Modern periods, <strong>the</strong> span of focus in this chapter. It is possible that considerations<br />
of symmetry are strongly dominant over <strong>the</strong> desire to avoid repetition of <strong>the</strong> -ly<br />
suffix, which has often been suggested for sequences of adverbs or adverbial modifiers<br />
of adjectives and adverbs in which <strong>the</strong> zero form of <strong>the</strong> modifying adverb<br />
appears. It seems likely that rhythmic considerations play a role in promoting at<br />
least <strong>the</strong> pattern X and Y-ly, and so we would expect this asymmetric pattern to<br />
be a common feature of spoken English. Early Modern and Late Modern texts are<br />
unfortunately not particularly revealing of patterns of adverbial usage in <strong>the</strong> spoken<br />
language, so that this cannot be confirmed. It was shown that both paradigmatic<br />
selection and morphological brachylogy are available strategies for English<br />
speakers in producing asymmetric formal patterns in adverbial coordination, <strong>the</strong><br />
former provided for by <strong>the</strong> systemic availability of conversion in adverb-formation<br />
and <strong>the</strong> latter as a common strategy universally.<br />
References<br />
Primary sources<br />
a Sancta Clara, Abraham. 1709. (facsimile edition 1978). Centi-Folium Stultorum In Quarto.<br />
Oder Hundert Ausbündige Narren in Folio … Dortmund: Harenberg.<br />
[Apology 1684] The Royal Apology: Or, An Answer to <strong>the</strong> Rebels Plea. Schmied et al.<br />
Ascham, Roger. 1570. The Scholemaster. Kytö et al.
200 Amanda Pounder<br />
Aulnoy, Marie. 1708. 7 Transl. T. Brown. The Ladies Travels Into Spain. London.<br />
[Browne, T. 1680] Browne, Thomas. Letter to Edward Browne. Markus et al.<br />
Butler, John. 1697. The True State of <strong>the</strong> Case of John Butler, B.D… London.<br />
Carroll, Susannna. 1700. The Perjur’d Husband: Or, The Adventures of Venice. London.<br />
Coke, Roger. 1670. A Discourse of Trade. http://www.c18.org/li/etext.html<br />
Evelyn, John. 1704. Memoirs for his Grandson. Century of Prose Corpus.<br />
[Keteringham 1418]. Judicium pillorij Nicholai Keteringham pro falsis obligacionibus controfactis.<br />
Kytö et al.<br />
Kytö, Merja et al., compilers. Helsinki Corpus of English Texts, Diachronic Part. Early Modern<br />
English. ICAME.<br />
[Leicester 1585] Earl of Leicester. 1985. Letter to Walsyngham. Nevalainen et al.<br />
[Mason, George. 1792.] Last Will and Testament. http://jcsm.org/AmericasFounders/George-<br />
Mason.htm<br />
Markus, Manfred et al., compilers. Innsbruck Computer Archive of Machine-Readable English<br />
Texts (ICAMET)<br />
More, Thomas. 1513. The History of King Richard <strong>the</strong> thirde. http://www.darkwing.uoregon.<br />
edu/~rbear.htm<br />
Nevalainen, Terttu et al., compilers. Corpus of Early English Correspondence Sampler.<br />
ICAME.<br />
[Willliam Paston 1426] Paston, William. 1426. Letter to W. Worsted and o<strong>the</strong>rs. Markus et al.<br />
[Pepys diary] Latham Robert & William Mat<strong>the</strong>ws, eds. 1976. Diary of Samuel Pepys, Vols. I–V,<br />
IX. Berkeley: University of California Press.<br />
Puttenham, George. 1589. The Art of English Poesie. http://www.gutenberg.org<br />
[Recruit 1776]: Instructions to <strong>the</strong> Officers Appointed to Recruit in New York, For <strong>the</strong> Service of<br />
<strong>the</strong> United States of America. http://www.darkwing.uoregon.edu/~rbear. htm.<br />
Saxon, Samuel. 1737. The English Scholar’s Assistant. Facs. 1971. Menston: Scolar Press.<br />
Schmied, Josef et al., compilers. Lampeter Corpus of Early Modern English Tracts. ICAME.<br />
Southall, John. 1730. A Treatise of Buggs .… Schmied et al.<br />
[Throckmorton 1554]. The Trial of Sir Nicholas Throckmorton … Kytö et al.<br />
[Tunstall, C. 1517]. Tunstall, Cuthbert. 1517. Letter to King Henry VIII. Nevalainen et al.<br />
Venables, Roger. 1662. The Experienced Angler: Or Angling Improved. London.<br />
Walton, Isaak & Charles Cotton. 1676 [1903] The Compleat Angler. http://www.darkwing.oregon.edu/~rbear.htm<br />
[Woodforde 1758–1781] 1924. John Beresford, ed. Diary of a Country Pastor. Oxford: Oxford<br />
University Press.<br />
Secondary sources<br />
Butt, John & Carmen Benjamin. 2000. 3 A New Reference Grammar of Modern Spanish. Chicago:<br />
NTC Publishing Group.<br />
Görlach, Manfred. 2004. Text Types and <strong>the</strong> History of English. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.<br />
Kabak, Barış. 2007. Turkish suspended affixation. Linguistics 45: 311–348.<br />
Knorrek, Marianne. 1938. Der Einfluß des Rationalismus auf die englische Sprache: Beiträge zur<br />
Entwicklungsgeschichte der englischen Syntax im 17. und 18. Jh. Breslau: Priebatsch.<br />
Lennie, William. 1815. 3 The Principles of English Grammar, Comprising <strong>the</strong> Substance of all <strong>the</strong><br />
most approved English Grammars extant … Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.
Adverb-marking in coordinate constructions 201<br />
Migliorini, Bruno. 1952. Coppie avverbiale aplologie in italiano. Mélanges de philologie romane<br />
offerts à M.K. Michaëlsson …, ed. by Gunnar Ahlbor et al., 375–381. Göteborg:<br />
Bergendahl.<br />
Nevalainen, Terttu. 1994. Aspects of Adverbial Change in Early Modern English. Studies in Early<br />
Modern English, ed. by Dieter Kastovsky, 243–259. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.<br />
Nevalainen, Terttu. 1997. The Processes of Adverb Derivation in Late Middle and Early Modern<br />
English. Grammaticalization at Work: Studies of Long-Term Developments in English ed. by<br />
Matti Rissanen et al., 145–189. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.<br />
Pounder, Amanda. 2001. Adverb-Marking in German and English: System and Standardization.<br />
Diachronica 18: 301–358.<br />
Pounder, Amanda. 2004. Haplology in English Adverb Formation. New Perspectives on English<br />
Historical Linguistics. Vol. II: Lexis and Transmission, ed. by Christian Kay et al., 193–211.<br />
Amsterdam: Benjamins.<br />
Pounder, Amanda. 2007. Norm Consciousness and Corpus Constitution in <strong>the</strong> Study of Earlier<br />
Modern Germanic Languages. Germanic Language Histories From Below (1700–2000), ed.<br />
by Stephan Elspass et al., 275–294. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.<br />
Rohlfs, Gerhard. 1954. Historische Grammatik der italienischen Sprache. Vol. III. Bern: Francke.<br />
Sedger, John. 1798. The Structure of <strong>the</strong> English Language. facs. 1970. Menston: Scolar Press.<br />
Schlüter, Julia. 2002. Morphology Recycled: The Principle of Rhythmic Alternation at Work<br />
in Early and Late Modern English Grammatical Variation. English Historical Syntax and<br />
Morphology, ed. by Teresa Fanego et al., 255–281. Amsterdam: Benjamins.<br />
Wälchli, Bernhard. 2005. Co-Compounds and Natural Coordination. Oxford: Oxford University<br />
Press.<br />
Zagona, Karen. 1990. Mente Adverbs, Compound Interpretation and <strong>the</strong> Projection Principle.<br />
Probus 2: 1–30.
’Tis he, ’tis she, ’tis me, ’tis –<br />
I don’t know who …<br />
Cleft and identificational constructions<br />
in 16th to 18th century English plays<br />
Claudia Lange & Ursula Schaefer<br />
Technische Universität Dresden<br />
It is generally assumed that <strong>the</strong> construction It is me emerged in <strong>the</strong> 16th<br />
century as <strong>the</strong> more colloquial alternative to It is I. In this paper, we focus on <strong>the</strong><br />
structure and distribution of two constructions featuring It is I/me, namely cleft<br />
constructions (ClCs) and identificational copular clauses (IdCCs) in plays <strong>from</strong><br />
1600 to 1800. Surprisingly, it turns out that it is I or ra<strong>the</strong>r ‘tis I is <strong>the</strong> general<br />
rule; <strong>the</strong> very limited occurrences of me in <strong>the</strong> relevant constructions are ei<strong>the</strong>r<br />
licensed by <strong>the</strong> syntactic context in ClCs or by referential conditions in IdCCs.<br />
We fur<strong>the</strong>r provide evidence for <strong>the</strong> assumption that IdCCs are historically<br />
prior to ClCs, which in turn are not fully grammaticalized in <strong>the</strong> period under<br />
discussion since <strong>the</strong>y do not unambiguously display <strong>the</strong> biclausal structure which<br />
is a defining property of clefts.<br />
1. Introduction<br />
The quotation in our title is <strong>from</strong> Holcroft’s 1785 translation of Beaumarchais’ 1784<br />
Le Mariage de Figaro. In <strong>the</strong> French original <strong>the</strong> equivalent reads: “On se débat, c’est<br />
vous, c’est lui, c’est moi, c’est toi, non, ce n’est pas nous; eh! mais qui donc?” Holcroft<br />
does not directly translate Beaumarchais – as he rarely does – but mirrors <strong>the</strong><br />
rhythm suggested by c’est moi, c’est toi in <strong>the</strong> English rhyming series ’Tis he, ’tis she,<br />
’tis me. His choice of pronoun forms – <strong>the</strong> first two English forms are in subject case<br />
while <strong>the</strong> first person form is in object case – nicely illustrates an area of English<br />
usage which has been fiercely contested by prescriptive grammarians ever since <strong>the</strong><br />
tradition came into existence, namely <strong>the</strong> ‘pronoun problem’: <strong>the</strong> choice between<br />
subjective and objective case for personal pronouns in specific syntactic contexts.<br />
Visser (1963: 241–243) provides an impressive array of comments on it is I/me,<br />
starting with Ben Jonson in 1640 who simply states <strong>the</strong> Latin-derived rule that<br />
<strong>the</strong> subject pronoun and <strong>the</strong> complement in a copular clause should receive <strong>the</strong>
204 Claudia Lange & Ursula Schaefer<br />
nominative case. 1 It has also frequently been noted that Priestley stood out among<br />
<strong>the</strong> 18th–century prescriptivists (Leonard 1929: 186; Wolf 2005: 175) in advocating<br />
custom ra<strong>the</strong>r than strict adherence to artificial rules which were designed to graft<br />
<strong>the</strong> structure of Latin onto English. Consequently, Priestley’s stance on <strong>the</strong> vexed it is<br />
I/me-question is quoted in all discussions on <strong>the</strong> subject as evidence for actual usage<br />
in <strong>the</strong> 18th century (cf. Leonard 1929: 186; Visser 1963: 241 and Rissanen 1999: 261):<br />
All our grammarians say, that <strong>the</strong> nominative cases of pronouns ought to follow<br />
<strong>the</strong> verb substantive as well as precede it, and <strong>the</strong> example of some of our best<br />
writers would lead us to make a contrary rule; or at least, leave us at liberty to<br />
adopt which we liked best. (Priestley 1762: 47)<br />
In Present Day English (PDE), we encounter “a considerable amount of variation<br />
and instability within <strong>the</strong> [pronoun] system” (Huddleston and Pullum 2002: 459),<br />
but <strong>the</strong> clear complementary distribution between I and me with I at <strong>the</strong> very formal<br />
side and me – and, for that matter him, her, us and <strong>the</strong>m – for ‘everyday usage’, is<br />
generally retained. As Quirk et al. put it:<br />
In <strong>the</strong> main, formal English follows <strong>the</strong> normative grammatical tradition which<br />
associates <strong>the</strong> subjective pronouns with <strong>the</strong> nominative case of pronouns in inflectional<br />
languages such as Latin, and <strong>the</strong> objective case with <strong>the</strong> oblique cases<br />
[in such languages]. (1985: 337)<br />
However, despite <strong>the</strong> sheer bulk of work that is dedicated to arguing for or against<br />
it is me, <strong>the</strong>re is precious little information on <strong>the</strong> actual origin of <strong>the</strong> construction.<br />
The received wisdom on <strong>the</strong> first appearance of it is me in English comes <strong>from</strong><br />
Visser, who states that<br />
In <strong>the</strong> last decade of <strong>the</strong> sixteenth century <strong>the</strong> construction […] appears for <strong>the</strong><br />
first time in print, [. . .] and remains in use in <strong>the</strong> subsequent periods with ever increasing<br />
frequency. [. . .] As to <strong>the</strong> stratum of diction to which this usage belongs<br />
(literary? colloquial? vulgar?) in <strong>the</strong> first centuries of its occurrence, it is difficult<br />
to form an opinion. (1963/73: 239)<br />
In <strong>the</strong> following, we will attempt to elucidate Visser’s observation. We will focus<br />
on <strong>the</strong> wavering between subject and object forms in two different constructions: in<br />
PDE, this personal pronoun alternation occurs in ‘identificational copular clauses’<br />
(IdCCs), as Ball (1991) calls <strong>the</strong> construction<br />
(1) it is I/me<br />
and which Hatcher (1948) called ‘formulas of identification’. Moreover, we find <strong>the</strong><br />
alternation in cleft constructions (ClCs) with a ‘specificational’ subject, such as:<br />
(2) it is I/me that should apologize<br />
1. Visser (1963/73: 241) incorrectly gives <strong>the</strong> date 1637 for Ben Jonson’s English Grammar.
or with a ‘specificational’ object:<br />
(3) it is I/me you saw on <strong>the</strong> balcony last night<br />
Cleft and identificational constructions 205<br />
IdCCs are attested <strong>from</strong> Old English (OE) onwards since we luckily find this typical<br />
interactional formula in biblical translations, e.g.,<br />
(4) But he saith vnto <strong>the</strong>m, It is I, be not afraid. (John VI.20, Authorized Version 1611)<br />
ClCs, with <strong>the</strong>ir biclausal structure, are a syntactic device to express focus, and<br />
<strong>the</strong>ir development in a language is intertwined with <strong>the</strong> fixing of word order.<br />
Hence ClCs of <strong>the</strong> form it is X who did it only emerge in <strong>the</strong> 13th century according<br />
to Ball (1991), who has written <strong>the</strong> only historical study of ClCs in English.<br />
If we assume that <strong>the</strong> Early Modern English (EModE) expression it is me was<br />
as colloquial in <strong>the</strong> late 16th-century when it putatively emerged as it is in <strong>the</strong><br />
present, <strong>the</strong>n we would expect to find it in texts and genres that are less prone to<br />
standardization and more open to variation, that is, in “texts with potential dialect<br />
features (entertainment and private writings; written by men of middle ranks, or<br />
by women)” (Nevalainen and Raumolin-Brunberg 1993: 68). This quote <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
compilers of <strong>the</strong> Helsinki Corpus already indicates helpful parameters of variation<br />
to be investigated in any study of it is I/me. The chronological structure of <strong>the</strong><br />
Helsinki Corpus also provides a convenient frame to study <strong>the</strong> diffusion of change<br />
in <strong>the</strong> EModE period since it is fur<strong>the</strong>r subdivided into three subperiods with<br />
respect to incipient standardization of <strong>the</strong> language (see Table 1).<br />
Table 1. The EModE period of <strong>the</strong> Helsinki Corpus: A quantitative overview<br />
(Nevalainen and Raumolin-Brunberg 1993: 54)<br />
Subperiod Words %<br />
EModE1 1500–1570<br />
“before <strong>the</strong> acceleration of changes” 190,160 34.5<br />
EModE2 1570–1640<br />
“period of <strong>the</strong>ir culmination” 189,800 34.5<br />
EModE3 1640–1710<br />
“eventual stabilization of <strong>the</strong> state of affairs” 171,040 31.0<br />
Total 551,000 100<br />
For our purpose, however, <strong>the</strong> Helsinki Corpus proved disappointing: we<br />
found exactly two examples for it is I, both <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> New Testament in different<br />
versions (Tyndale’s Bible <strong>from</strong> 1534 and <strong>the</strong> Authorized Version <strong>from</strong> 1611, cf.<br />
ex. (4) above). Apart <strong>from</strong> that, <strong>the</strong>re is one fur<strong>the</strong>r example of ’tis I (in <strong>the</strong> play<br />
The Relapse (1696) by Sir John Vanbrugh), but no instances of it is me/’tis me.<br />
As a result, we decided to focus on plays as <strong>the</strong> genre which provides ample opportunities<br />
for using it is I/me. This ‘speech-based register’ in <strong>the</strong> sense of Biber
206 Claudia Lange & Ursula Schaefer<br />
and Finegan (1992: 689) proliferates in <strong>the</strong> EModE period and is well represented<br />
in <strong>the</strong> searchable Chadwyck-Healey English Drama Database (ChHEDD), which<br />
contains 1,224 plays <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> period under discussion. It has to be kept in mind,<br />
however, that <strong>the</strong> ChHEDD is not a balanced corpus in any strict sense of <strong>the</strong> word,<br />
nor is it possible to give anything o<strong>the</strong>r than absolute figures for <strong>the</strong> occurrences<br />
of it is I/me.<br />
A first search within <strong>the</strong> time frame given by <strong>the</strong> Helsinki Corpus subperiods for<br />
EModE was again disappointing: we found no examples for it is me and its variants<br />
in EModE 1 and just three examples in EModE 2; it is only <strong>from</strong> EModE 3 onwards<br />
that we have more than a handful of examples for it is me. We <strong>the</strong>refore extended<br />
our search to include <strong>the</strong> period <strong>from</strong> 1600 to 1800, which is represented in <strong>the</strong><br />
ChHEDD by 1,784 plays. It seems, <strong>the</strong>n, that <strong>the</strong> expression it is me was not established,<br />
or even available in sufficient quantity, at <strong>the</strong> time when <strong>the</strong> “stabilization of<br />
<strong>the</strong> state of affairs” supposedly took place. The actual figures for occurrences of it is<br />
me and related constructions are given in Table 2 below.<br />
Table 2. ClCs and IdCCs in <strong>the</strong> ChHEDD, 1600–1800<br />
Construction<br />
Total no of<br />
examples. IdCC<br />
subject<br />
ClC,<br />
Ø rel.<br />
subject<br />
ClC,<br />
+ rel.<br />
Σ<br />
subject<br />
ClCs<br />
object<br />
ClC,<br />
Ø rel.<br />
it is I 49 20 8 21 29 – –<br />
’twas I 323 81 110 128 238 1 3<br />
’tis I 627 303 212 108 320 3 1<br />
it is not I 11 1 3 7 10 – –<br />
’tis not I 13 9 – 4 4 – –<br />
is it I 9 1 – 7 7 – 1<br />
Σ 1,032 415 333 275 608 4 5<br />
object<br />
ClC,<br />
+ rel.<br />
it is me/it’s me 11 5 – 3 3<br />
it is not me 7 5 – – – 2 –<br />
’tis not me 7 4 – – – 2 1<br />
’twas not me 1 1 – – – – –<br />
not me/be me 2 19 14 – – – 4 1<br />
’tis me 37 13 – – – 21 3<br />
’twas me 15 3 – – – 12 –<br />
it was me 3 2 – – – 1 –<br />
is it me 4 – – – – 2 2<br />
Σ 104 47 – – – 36 10<br />
2. This category comprises tokens where <strong>the</strong> dummy subject it is/’tis is omitted (e.g., why<br />
not me?) and subjunctives or o<strong>the</strong>r modal expressions (e.g., if it be not me, that must be me<br />
(cf. example 21)).
Cleft and identificational constructions 207<br />
The most conspicuous observation to be made is already quite unexpected: it<br />
is I/’tis I/’twas I etc. vastly outnumber <strong>the</strong>ir counterparts with me: 1,032 tokens<br />
against 104, that is, only 9.15% of all relevant tokens contain an object pronoun. If<br />
we focus on <strong>the</strong> most frequent construction, namely ’tis I, <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> ratio becomes<br />
even more unbalanced: <strong>the</strong>re are 627 tokens of ’tis I and 37 tokens of ’tis me (5.9%<br />
of <strong>the</strong> overall count for ’tis I/me). The default expression throughout <strong>the</strong> EModE<br />
period and beyond in plays is ’tis I etc., regardless of <strong>the</strong> rank, position or provenance<br />
of ei<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> actual speaker in <strong>the</strong> play or its author. According to Peitsara,<br />
contracted ’tis emerges in speech-based registers in EModE and “holds its ground<br />
until around 1800 as <strong>the</strong> established form” (2004: 90).<br />
Considering <strong>the</strong>se data, it seems that <strong>the</strong> 18th-century grammarians who<br />
spent so much time and energy on condemning <strong>the</strong> alleged burgeoning of it is<br />
me were fighting a ra<strong>the</strong>r unnecessary battle, and our initial expectation as to<br />
<strong>the</strong> development of ClCs and IdCCs is reversed: it is me seems to be too rare<br />
to be considered a suppressed colloquial form that is <strong>the</strong>n gaining ground in<br />
speech-based registers.<br />
Returning to <strong>the</strong> most frequent relevant construction – ’tis I – we find that<br />
<strong>the</strong> tokens are almost evenly distributed over <strong>the</strong> two main categories IdCC and<br />
ClC – in this case, subject ClCs as in (5) below, where <strong>the</strong> clefted constituent is <strong>the</strong><br />
subject of <strong>the</strong> following relative clause:<br />
(5) But Sir, ’tis I alone am criminal,<br />
And ’twas I,<br />
Justly I thought provok’d him to this hazard.<br />
’Tis I was rude, impatient, insolent,<br />
Did like a mad man animate his anger,<br />
Not like a generous enemy.<br />
(Aphra Behn, The Forc’d Marriage (1671), ChHDD)<br />
Subject ClCs such as <strong>the</strong>se, without an overt relative pronoun to introduce <strong>the</strong><br />
second part of <strong>the</strong> ClC, are also more frequent than subject ClCs with relative<br />
pronouns – and this is not tied to prose vs. verse plays, as one might expect by<br />
looking at <strong>the</strong> example. The situation is slightly different with ’twas I and <strong>the</strong> more<br />
conservative, uncontracted form it is I, but <strong>the</strong> relativizer-less ClCs still make up<br />
a substantial proportion of all subject ClC tokens. Note that this is a syntactic innovation<br />
that is gaining considerable momentum: Ball has stated explicitly that<br />
Late Middle English (LME) “is <strong>the</strong> period in which <strong>the</strong> wh-pronouns and <strong>the</strong> zerocomplementizer<br />
(ø) first appear in <strong>the</strong> it-cleft” (1991: 295): out of 92 tokens in her<br />
LME corpus for subject ClCs, Ball has 81 instances with that as complementizer<br />
and only five with <strong>the</strong> zero option.<br />
Turning to ’tis me and related expressions, we do not find a single subject ClC, but<br />
object ClCs instead – in that respect, ’tis me and ’tis I are almost in complementary
208 Claudia Lange & Ursula Schaefer<br />
distribution, with only nine object ClCs out of 1,032 instances of ’tis I etc. One exceptional<br />
example for a subject ClC featuring it is me comes <strong>from</strong> Sir George E<strong>the</strong>rege’s<br />
play The Comical Revenge; or, Love in a Tub (1664):<br />
(6) Dufoy: ’Tis ver couragious ting to breaké de head of your<br />
Serviteur, is it noté? Begar you vil never keepé<br />
De good Serviteur, had no me love you ver vel. . . .<br />
Sir Fred: I know thou lov’st me.<br />
Dufoy: And darefore you do beaté me, is dat de raison?<br />
Sir Fred: Pre<strong>the</strong>e forbear; I am sorry for’t.<br />
Dufoy: Ver good satisfaction! Begar it is me dat am<br />
Sorrié for’t.<br />
Sir Fred: Well, well.<br />
(Sir George E<strong>the</strong>rege, The Comical Revenge; or,<br />
Love in a Tub (1664); ChHEDD)<br />
Here Dufoy – “a saucy impertinent French-man, servant to Sir Frederick”, as <strong>the</strong><br />
stage directions say – addresses his master, Sir Frederick Frollick, and complains<br />
bitterly in his pronounced French accent for being hit over <strong>the</strong> head by his own<br />
master <strong>the</strong> night before:<br />
(7) Dufoy: De matré! de matré is easie to be perceive;<br />
Dis Bedlamé, Mad-cape, diable de matré, vas<br />
Drunké de last night, and vor no reason, but dat<br />
Me did advisé him go to bed, begar he did<br />
Striké, breaké my headé, Jernie.<br />
(Sir George E<strong>the</strong>rege, The Comical Revenge; or,<br />
Love in a Tub (1664); ChHEDD)<br />
Obviously, one important shibboleth in Dufoy’s ‘stage French’ is <strong>the</strong> consistent<br />
use of me as subject pronoun; we <strong>the</strong>refore do not count this token of it is me as<br />
a ‘natural’ example and have not included it in Table 2 above. Ano<strong>the</strong>r instance<br />
where French forms play a role concerns an IdCC:<br />
(8) Sir Ja: Why do you laugh?<br />
Y. Wild: Ha, ha, ha! It was me.<br />
Sir Ja: You!<br />
Pap: You, Sir!<br />
Y. Wild: Moi . . . me. (Samuel Foote, The Lyar (1764); ChHEDD)<br />
In this scene <strong>from</strong> Samuel Foote’s The Lyar, Young Wilding, a former Oxford student<br />
now ready to hit <strong>the</strong> town toge<strong>the</strong>r with his bilingual French servant Papillion, is in<br />
conversation with Sir James Elliot and is trying to impress him. What <strong>the</strong>se examples<br />
show is that <strong>the</strong>re certainly was an awareness of French as well as attitudes towards<br />
<strong>the</strong> language which could be exploited on <strong>the</strong> stage, but <strong>the</strong>y do not suffice to explain<br />
it is me by claiming that me and <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r object case pronouns in this position
Cleft and identificational constructions 209<br />
were calques of <strong>the</strong> French tonic forms of <strong>the</strong> pronouns. This is ruled out for <strong>the</strong><br />
simple reason that <strong>the</strong> object pronouns in subject complement position creep in at<br />
a time when <strong>the</strong> direct language contact between English and French was long over<br />
(cf. Ball 1991: 280 & Visser 1963: 244), and it would be highly unlikely to assume that<br />
parodies of French on stage could have a bearing on <strong>the</strong> English pronoun system.<br />
Generally, in all <strong>the</strong> me-variants under consideration (except where negation<br />
is involved), object ClCs outnumber IdCCs, for example:<br />
(9) For him you tremble, and ’tis me you fear.<br />
(Abel Boyer, Achilles (1700); ChHEDD)<br />
Now, explaining me in object ClCs is not a difficult task: <strong>the</strong> object pronoun me is<br />
topicalized to clause-initial position for emphasis:<br />
(10) [‘tis] mei you fear __i The majority of it is me-tokens in <strong>the</strong> database is <strong>the</strong>n accounted for: <strong>the</strong>y occur<br />
in object ClCs and are <strong>the</strong>refore determined by <strong>the</strong> syntactic context. Unlike PDE,<br />
where pronoun variation in ClCs is a matter of style (formal vs. informal), <strong>the</strong><br />
decisive factor in EModE is <strong>the</strong> syntactic context alone (subject vs. object ClC).<br />
With <strong>the</strong> fur<strong>the</strong>r development of <strong>the</strong> ClC, it is I came to be used in formal styles<br />
for object ClCs as well.<br />
We will return to identificational it is me below. The next section will be concerned<br />
with some general observations on <strong>the</strong> structure of <strong>the</strong> ClCs in our data.<br />
2. The structure of EModE pronoun-focus it-ClCs<br />
As said above, <strong>the</strong> prescriptive excitement over it is I/me is not matched by a<br />
similar abundance of studies tracing <strong>the</strong> origin of <strong>the</strong> construction, and nei<strong>the</strong>r<br />
has <strong>the</strong> recent interest in focus, information structure and ClCs (cf. Smits 1989,<br />
Lambrecht 1994, 2001; Bosch & van der Sandt 1999; Kiss 1999, Rebushi & Tuller<br />
1999) been extended to <strong>the</strong> development of ClCs in <strong>the</strong> history of English. Our<br />
data seem to suggest that, at least in <strong>the</strong> speech-based register ‘plays’ up to 1800,<br />
<strong>the</strong> structure of <strong>the</strong> ClC has yet to emerge.<br />
The defining property of ClCs is that <strong>the</strong>y “express a simple proposition via<br />
biclausal syntax”, as Lambrecht (2001: 466) put it. More precisely,<br />
A CLEFT CONSTRUCTION (CC) is a complex sentence structure consisting<br />
of a matrix clause headed by a copula and a relative or relative-like clause whose<br />
relativized argument is coindexed with <strong>the</strong> predicative argument of <strong>the</strong> copula.<br />
Taken toge<strong>the</strong>r, <strong>the</strong> matrix and <strong>the</strong> relative express a logically simple proposition,<br />
which can also be expressed in <strong>the</strong> form of a single clause without a change in<br />
truth conditions. (Lambrecht 2001: 467)
210 Claudia Lange & Ursula Schaefer<br />
The exact syntactic status of <strong>the</strong> relative clause in <strong>the</strong> ClC is far <strong>from</strong> settled, 3 but<br />
need not concern us here. We would like to argue that a significant proportion<br />
of our examples does not display biclausal structure. In Lambrecht (2001), an alternative<br />
analysis is referred to: it is is simply a focus marker preceding its focus.<br />
A pronoun-focus subject ClC would <strong>the</strong>n be ambiguous between two different<br />
structural interpretations:<br />
(11) a. [’tis I] [Ø am to blame]<br />
b. [’tis] [I am to blame]<br />
In (11a), <strong>the</strong> biclausal syntax that is generally taken as <strong>the</strong> defining characteristic<br />
of PDE ClCs is represented. The contracted form ’tis for it is introduces <strong>the</strong><br />
focus phrase, <strong>the</strong> relative pronoun is omitted in <strong>the</strong> relative clause. The structure in<br />
(11b), however, expresses a different assumption with regard to <strong>the</strong> overall structure<br />
and <strong>the</strong> function of ’tis: “’tis” is a focus marker preceding its focus “I”, <strong>the</strong><br />
subject of <strong>the</strong> following clause “I am to blame”. This analysis can easily be extended<br />
to object ClCs. In<br />
(12) [’tis] [me she hates __]<br />
’tis is again <strong>the</strong> focus marker, and <strong>the</strong> object pronoun me is topicalized.<br />
Our data strongly support <strong>the</strong> second analysis. For tokens with contracted<br />
’tis, subject ClCs with zero-relative outnumber those with a relative pronoun<br />
(212 vs 108). 4 We would <strong>the</strong>n like to suggest that <strong>the</strong> prototypical pronoun-focus<br />
it-ClC in plays <strong>from</strong> 1600 to 1800 is of <strong>the</strong> second kind. Consider this example<br />
<strong>from</strong> Henry VIII: 5<br />
(13) This Candle burnes not cleere, ’tis I must snuffe it,<br />
Then out it goes. (Shakespeare, Henry VIII, act III, sc. 2; OTA ll. 1953f.)<br />
Taking ’tis as <strong>the</strong> focus marker for <strong>the</strong> clause is much more convincing than assuming<br />
a biclausal structure where <strong>the</strong> relative pronoun has been omitted. Most of<br />
3. Cf. for example Ball (1994), Gundel (1977). We also adopt <strong>the</strong> convention to use ‘relative<br />
pronoun’, ‘relativizer’ and ‘complementizer’ interchangeably for <strong>the</strong> form introducing <strong>the</strong> second<br />
clausal element of a cleft construction; this should not be taken as a commitment to <strong>the</strong> categorical<br />
status of this element. For a discussion of <strong>the</strong> applicability of <strong>the</strong> terms ‘relative pronoun’ and<br />
‘complementizer’ with respect to clefts see Tagliamonte, Smith and Lawrence (2005: 95–97).<br />
4. The case of ‘twas (110 vs. 128 tokens) is, as noted above, clearly different and calls for a more<br />
differentiated analysis in which we shall not engage here. We thank an anonymous referee for<br />
pointing this necessity out to us.<br />
5. We take <strong>the</strong> quotes <strong>from</strong> Shakespeare’s plays <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> electronically searchable edition of<br />
<strong>the</strong> 1623 Folio provided by <strong>the</strong> Oxford Text Archive (OTA).
Cleft and identificational constructions 211<br />
our examples for object ClCs also occur without relative pronoun (40 vs 15), as in<br />
this example with double focus marker:<br />
(14) No, no, Sir, I am <strong>the</strong> Thorn that galls him; ’tis me, ’tis me he hates;<br />
(Colley Cibber, The Non-Juror (1718); ChHEDD)<br />
Support for this analysis comes <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> agreement pattern in <strong>the</strong> following relative<br />
clause: in all except a handful of examples with an overt relative pronoun, <strong>the</strong><br />
verb agrees with <strong>the</strong> first person pronoun and not with <strong>the</strong> relativizer, e.g.,<br />
(15) The Tempter, or <strong>the</strong> Tempted, who sins most? ha?<br />
Not she: nor doth she tempt: but it is I,<br />
That, lying by <strong>the</strong> Violet in <strong>the</strong> Sunne,<br />
Doe as <strong>the</strong> Carrion do’s, not as <strong>the</strong> flowre,<br />
(Shakespeare, Measure for Measure, act II, sc. 2; OTA ll. 927–930)<br />
One fur<strong>the</strong>r piece of evidence concerns <strong>the</strong> overall development of relative marking<br />
in EModE. Beal has pointed out that, with respect to relativization patterns,<br />
“<strong>the</strong> position in 1600 appears to be one of maximal variability, with that, zero and<br />
all wh-relatives available” (Beal 2004: 75). In ClCs, on <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, <strong>the</strong> tendency<br />
to omit <strong>the</strong> relative pronoun altoge<strong>the</strong>r was even more pronounced than in relative<br />
clauses generally (Ball 1994: 185), a fact that is indicative of <strong>the</strong> monoclausal ClC<br />
structure sketched above. 6<br />
This preference for zero relative pronouns in ClCs is still very much alive in<br />
contemporary dialects of British English, as Herrmann (2005:62–70) has shown.<br />
She has classified ClCs as “topicalization structures” which occupy one end of her<br />
“continuum of relative clauses” (2005: 62), with <strong>the</strong> “relative clause proper” being at<br />
<strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r end. This scale is highly relevant for <strong>the</strong> distribution of zero relativizers:<br />
In dialectal speech, <strong>the</strong> constraint on zero subject relative clauses is overridden<br />
<strong>the</strong> more a clause type moves away <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> modification of an antecedental<br />
noun phrase (‘relative clause proper’) toward <strong>the</strong> topicalization of a noun phrase<br />
(topicalization structures). [… Zero subject relative clauses] occur with increasing<br />
ease (in a given dialect or idiolect), as one goes […] to clear topicalization<br />
clauses like clefts and all-pseudo-clefts, while <strong>the</strong>y are very scarce in pure modification<br />
structures (‘relative clauses proper’). (Herrmann 2005: 67)<br />
6. Ball’s figures <strong>from</strong> her corpus study of ‘Relative pronouns in it-clefts’ (1994) may serve as<br />
a first approximation: for <strong>the</strong> 17th century, she counts 18% zero-complementizers in clefts and<br />
none in restrictive relative clauses with a personal subject. In our data, <strong>the</strong>re are 333 subject<br />
ClCs without and 275 with a relative pronoun. The fact that 55% of all ClCs in our corpus have<br />
no overt relative pronoun, three times as many as in Ball’s corpus, is probably also due to <strong>the</strong><br />
genre which reflects “colloquial spoken discourse” (Ball 1994: 185) and has favoured <strong>the</strong> zero<br />
option throughout.
212 Claudia Lange & Ursula Schaefer<br />
There are, however, some objections that might be raised against our analysis<br />
and which should be followed up in fur<strong>the</strong>r research on this curiously under-<br />
researched topic. The first concerns <strong>the</strong> lack of positional variability: unlike focus<br />
markers which precede or follow <strong>the</strong>ir focus regardless of its position in <strong>the</strong> sentence,<br />
’tis is restricted to sentence-initial position (cf. König 1991). *She hates ’tis<br />
me ra<strong>the</strong>r than ’tis me she hates is ungrammatical, <strong>the</strong> focus marker ’tis can only<br />
occur when <strong>the</strong> focus is topicalized to sentence-initial position. The source items<br />
of ’tis (dummy subject it and a form of <strong>the</strong> copula be) <strong>the</strong>n constrain its positional<br />
variability. This leads to ano<strong>the</strong>r objection: focus particles, as <strong>the</strong> name suggests,<br />
are typically uninflected, but <strong>the</strong> copula be gives rise to forms such as ’tis, ’twas,<br />
’twere etc. There is, however, a precedent for inflected focus markers in English:<br />
<strong>the</strong> intensifiers myself, herself, yourselves etc., which came into being when <strong>the</strong><br />
original OE intensifier sylf fused with a stressed form of <strong>the</strong> personal pronoun<br />
in early ME (cf. Lange 2007), whereas reflexivity continued to be expressed by<br />
<strong>the</strong> bare personal pronoun. The new compound forms only became obligatory as<br />
reflexive pronouns in EModE (cf. Peitsara 1997).<br />
Despite <strong>the</strong>se objections, which are based on <strong>the</strong> cross-linguistically attested<br />
behaviour of focus particles in general, we would like to stick to our hypo<strong>the</strong>sis as<br />
indicated above. We think that <strong>the</strong> form of <strong>the</strong> ClC is changing in <strong>the</strong> period and<br />
<strong>the</strong> text type we are discussing, especially it-ClCs with <strong>the</strong> first person pronoun<br />
as focus: it is or ’tis, which is non-referential and semantically empty anyway, is<br />
reinterpreted as a focus marker. The ‘monoclausal’ ClC without relative pronoun<br />
lingers on in colloquial PDE, but has o<strong>the</strong>rwise been erased <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> language by<br />
<strong>the</strong> efforts of 18th-century prescriptive grammarians. The object me-ClCs are fully<br />
‘grammatical’ <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> prescriptive point of view, and subject ClCs with me, as in<br />
it was me who/that did it, have (as our corpus shows) yet to emerge on <strong>the</strong> scene. It<br />
may be that it is me in IdCCs (found in 47 cases in our corpus, compared with 415<br />
with I) was already quite common in <strong>the</strong> spoken language, and that it took some<br />
time before this usage spread to subject ClCs. Indirect evidence for this comes<br />
again <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> grammarian Joseph Priestley:<br />
When <strong>the</strong> word if begins a sentence, it seems pretty clear, that no person, whose<br />
attention to artificial rules did not put a sensible [i.e., noticeable] restraint upon<br />
his language, would ever use <strong>the</strong> nominative case after <strong>the</strong> verb to be. Who would<br />
not say, If it be me, ra<strong>the</strong>r than If it be I? (Priestley 1786: 104)<br />
3. The relation between IdCCs and ClCs<br />
In <strong>the</strong> first section of our chapter we discussed <strong>the</strong> EModE occurrence of it is I/me<br />
both in IdCCs and in it-ClCs in order to see whe<strong>the</strong>r we could find any traces that
Cleft and identificational constructions 213<br />
point towards <strong>the</strong> present day register distribution of <strong>the</strong>se forms. Subsequently<br />
we narrowed <strong>the</strong> scope on <strong>the</strong> structure of it-ClCs. At this point we need to turn to<br />
<strong>the</strong> question whe<strong>the</strong>r IdCCs and it-ClCs are ‘genetically’ related.<br />
When raising <strong>the</strong> question at which point pronouns “began to be used as <strong>the</strong><br />
focus of an it-cleft”, Ball refers to <strong>the</strong> medieval history of <strong>the</strong> IdCC, “for <strong>the</strong> crucial<br />
syntactic environment is <strong>the</strong> same: that is, what is essential is <strong>the</strong> ability of <strong>the</strong> pronoun<br />
to appear as complement of be” (1991: 276). Lambrecht, who treats ClCs on<br />
a cross-linguistic level, at first sight seems more definite about <strong>the</strong> issue:<br />
In <strong>the</strong> case of clefts, <strong>the</strong> ancestor is <strong>the</strong> copular subject-predicate construction,<br />
whose available parts are now used by <strong>the</strong> grammar for a special purpose, that of<br />
focus-marking an argument of ano<strong>the</strong>r proposition. (2001: 472)<br />
Hence Lambrecht seems to claim <strong>the</strong> historical precedence of <strong>the</strong> IdCC.<br />
In <strong>the</strong>ir recent Cambridge Grammar of <strong>the</strong> English Language Huddleston<br />
and Pullum have resumed interpreting IdCCs as it-clefts with an omitted relative<br />
clause; <strong>the</strong> relative clause can be omitted “if it is recoverable <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> prior<br />
context” (2002: 1417). This has been an alluring explanation for many IdCCs as<br />
indeed such a relative clause is easy to recover for a number of examples we looked<br />
into. Thus we have, for instance, found two examples in Shakespeare’s As You Like<br />
It where – at <strong>the</strong> beginning of a scene – an IdCC serves as answer to a question<br />
which in turn is a ClC:<br />
(16) Jaq: Which is he that killed <strong>the</strong> Deare?<br />
Lord. Sir, it was I.<br />
(Shakespeare, As You Like It, act IV, sc. 2; OTA, l. 2128f.)<br />
(17) Cel: Are you his bro<strong>the</strong>r?<br />
Ros: Was‘t you he rescu’d?<br />
Cel: Was’t you that did so oft contriue to kill him?<br />
Oli: ’Twas I: but ’tis not I: I doe not shame<br />
To tell you what I was, since my conuersion<br />
So sweetly tastes, being <strong>the</strong> thing I am.<br />
(Shakespeare, As You Like It, act IV, sc. 3; OTA, l. 2287–2290)<br />
The ‘complete ClC’ would <strong>the</strong>n be it was I that killed <strong>the</strong> Deare and ’twas I (’tis not I)<br />
that did so oft contriue to kill him.<br />
Things are not that obvious when <strong>the</strong> IdCC is <strong>the</strong> answer to a question which<br />
itself is not a ClC. Cf. for instance<br />
(18) Bul: What shrill-voic’d Suppliant, makes this eager cry?<br />
Dut: A woman, and thine Aunt great King ’tis I.<br />
Speake with me, pitty me, open <strong>the</strong> dore, . . .<br />
(Shakespeare, Richard II, act V, sc. 3; OTA, l. 2575–77)
214 Claudia Lange & Ursula Schaefer<br />
Here <strong>the</strong> ‘omitted’ relative clause could be it is I who make(s) <strong>the</strong> eager cry. Yet – here’s<br />
<strong>the</strong> stumbling block: where <strong>the</strong> surface structure makes it obvious, Shakespeare’s<br />
it-ClCs more often than not show <strong>the</strong> present tense verb of <strong>the</strong> relative clause in<br />
‘not-third-person’ inflection. In <strong>the</strong> previous section we attributed this finding to<br />
<strong>the</strong> fact that ’tis was a focus marker ra<strong>the</strong>r than a clause in its own right. If, as<br />
we suppose, <strong>the</strong> biclausal structure of <strong>the</strong> ClC was not yet grammaticalized in<br />
EModE, <strong>the</strong> question as to how <strong>the</strong> verb in <strong>the</strong> ‘relative clause’ would be inflected<br />
would be a moot one to begin with, but which we cannot answer at <strong>the</strong> moment<br />
<strong>from</strong> lack of evidence.<br />
Finally, let us look into an example <strong>from</strong> Shakespeare’s Richard III which does<br />
not provide <strong>the</strong> ‘omitted’ relative clause in <strong>the</strong> immediate linguistic context:<br />
(19) King: Who’s <strong>the</strong>re?<br />
Rat.: Ratcliffe, my Lord, ’tis I: <strong>the</strong> early Village Cock<br />
Hath twice done salutation to <strong>the</strong> Morne,<br />
(Shakespeare, Richard III, act V, sc. 3; OTA, l. 3671–73)<br />
There is no difficulty in thinking of such a relative clause as it is I who / that is <strong>the</strong>re.<br />
And, as a matter of fact, <strong>the</strong> pragmatic situation in this example is exactly <strong>the</strong> one<br />
in which we find today IdCCs of <strong>the</strong> kind it is I/it is me – and so is <strong>the</strong> one <strong>from</strong><br />
ex. (18). While in <strong>the</strong> latter a door separates <strong>the</strong> two characters, no such obstacle<br />
separates <strong>the</strong> king <strong>from</strong> Ratcliffe. 7 However, when Ratcliffe enters Richard’s tent on<br />
Bosworth Field <strong>the</strong> king has just been musing about “tomorrow’s vengeance on <strong>the</strong><br />
head of Richard”, and might have difficulties in reorienting.<br />
Now, when does one use <strong>the</strong> IdCC it is I/me today? A likely context is, for<br />
instance, <strong>the</strong> beginning of a telephone call. When Jill Smith calls somebody she<br />
knows scarcely or not at all, she will usually identify herself as “Hello, this is Jill<br />
Smith (calling)”, while in o<strong>the</strong>r instances a simple “Hi, it’s me” would probably do,<br />
provided that Jill can count on <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong> person answering <strong>the</strong> phone could<br />
easily recognize her voice.<br />
In terms of <strong>the</strong> concept of ‘truncated it-clefts’ as suggested by Huddleston and<br />
Pullum (2002: 1417) one could interpret <strong>the</strong> telephone it’s I/me as <strong>the</strong> answer to an<br />
inferred question of <strong>the</strong> sort “Who may be calling?” asked – usually in thought, we<br />
would suppose – by <strong>the</strong> person whose number Jill has dialled, when first hearing<br />
<strong>the</strong> phone ringing. The more old-fashioned identification “Hello, this is Jill Smith<br />
calling” would <strong>the</strong>n witness to (a) answering an inferred question and (b) some<br />
kind of abridged version of <strong>the</strong> ClC “It/This is Jill Smith who is calling”.<br />
In our plays we find a somewhat reverse situation where eavesdropping<br />
characters speak to <strong>the</strong>mselves – or, for that matter, in asides. Our first example is<br />
7. Cf. Hatcher (1948: 1085f.) for similar remarks.
Cleft and identificational constructions 215<br />
a passage <strong>from</strong> Twelfth Night in which Sir Andrew Aguecheek overhears Malvolio<br />
who rehearses how he would ask Sir Toby Belch for Olivia’s hand:<br />
(20) Mal: Besides you waste <strong>the</strong> treasure of your time, with a foolish knight.<br />
And: That’s mee I warrant you.<br />
Mal: One sir Andrew.<br />
And: I knew ’twas I, for many do call mee foole.<br />
(Shakespeare, Twelfth Night, act II, sc. 5; OTA, ll. 1091–95)<br />
To begin with, <strong>the</strong> identificational that’s mee is technically no IdCC as <strong>the</strong> that is<br />
not empty, while <strong>the</strong> ’t- <strong>from</strong> ’twas I certainly is. However, here <strong>the</strong> interpretation<br />
as a “truncated it-cleft” only functions with great difficulty. Nothing in <strong>the</strong> preceding<br />
text lends itself to provide for <strong>the</strong> omitted relative clause.<br />
Things are obviously different with <strong>the</strong> following example <strong>from</strong> Aphra Behn’s<br />
The Lucky Chance where ano<strong>the</strong>r worried character makes remarks aside:<br />
(21) Sir Feeb: Hum, who’s here? My Gentlewoman – she’s monstrous kind of <strong>the</strong><br />
sudden. But whom is’t meant to? [Aside.<br />
Let: Give me your hand, my Love, my Life, my All – Alas! where are you?<br />
Sir Feeb: Hum – no, no, this is not to me – I am jilted, cozen’d, cuckolded, and<br />
so forth. – [Groping, she takes hold of Sir Feeb.<br />
Let: Oh, are you here? indeed you frighted me with your Silence – here,<br />
take <strong>the</strong>se Jewels, and let us haste away.<br />
Sir Feeb: Hum – are you <strong>the</strong>reabouts, Mistress? was I sent away with a Sham-<br />
Plot for this! – She cannot mean it to me. [Aside.<br />
Let: Will you not speak? – will you not answer me? – do you repent already?<br />
– before Enjoyment are you cold and false?<br />
Sir Feeb: Hum, before Enjoyment – that must be me. Before Injoyment – Ay, ay,<br />
’tis I – I see a little Prolonging a Woman’s Joy, sets an Edge upon her<br />
Appetite. [Merrily.<br />
Let: What means my Dear? shall we not haste away?<br />
Sir Feeb: Haste away! <strong>the</strong>re ’tis again – No – ’tis not me she means: what, at your<br />
Tricks and Intrigues already? – Yes, yes, I am destin’d a Cuckold –<br />
Let: Say, am I not your Wife? can you deny me?<br />
Sir Feeb: Wife! adod, ’tis I she means – ’tis I she means – [Merrily<br />
(Aphra Behn, The Lucky Chance (1687); ChHEDD)<br />
Sir Feeble’s “that must be me” parallels Sir Andrew Aguecheek’s “that’s mee” as that is<br />
referential. Yet, when Sir Feeble turns to “’tis not me she means” and “’tis I she means”<br />
we have a clear object-ClC in <strong>the</strong> first instance and in <strong>the</strong> second instance one that<br />
looks like an object ClC but has <strong>the</strong> pronoun in <strong>the</strong> matrix clause in subject case. 8<br />
8. Object ClCs with mean in <strong>the</strong> relative clause (and me in <strong>the</strong> matrix clause) are very frequent<br />
in our corpus.
216 Claudia Lange & Ursula Schaefer<br />
Although we are still a far cry <strong>from</strong> really being able to generalize, our last examples<br />
point towards what might, on fur<strong>the</strong>r scrutiny, turn out as a complementary<br />
pattern: both characters use me as predicate when <strong>the</strong> subject is referential, i.e.,<br />
not empty, but <strong>the</strong> subject form in that position when <strong>the</strong> subject is it, that is, in a<br />
‘proper’ IdCC. That or this in <strong>the</strong> examples <strong>from</strong> Shakespeare and Aphra Behn are<br />
semantically filled by explicit recourse to an immediately preceding noun phrase<br />
(a foolish knight (Shakespeare), my Love, my Life (Behn)) that is coreferential with<br />
<strong>the</strong> person who is musing aside. In <strong>the</strong> wake of Huddleston and Pullum we might<br />
speculate here about an underlying thought of <strong>the</strong> sort ‘when he refers to a foolish<br />
knight he might mean me’ or ‘when she refers to my love, my life she must mean<br />
me’. The example <strong>from</strong> Aphra Behn in a way supports this speculation as Sir Feeble<br />
soon afterwards states in resignation: “’tis not me she means”. Unfortunately he<br />
seemingly breaks <strong>the</strong> pattern as he readily falls into “’tis I she means”. – Or does he?<br />
Let us reconsider <strong>the</strong> passage <strong>from</strong> Behn. At <strong>the</strong> beginning of <strong>the</strong> scene Sir<br />
Feeble wonders: “whom is’t meant to?”. The it here refers to Leticia’s friendly behaviour,<br />
hence mean here may be paraphrased as “to intend (a remark, allusion, etc.) to<br />
have a particular reference”. 9 Soon he is convinced that “She cannot mean it to me”<br />
and few lines later reinforces this with “this is not to me”. Next comes “that must<br />
be me”, which we have already discussed, immediately followed by “ ’tis I”. When<br />
<strong>the</strong> verb mean is taken up again it comes in <strong>the</strong> ‘regular’ object-ClC “ ’tis not me she<br />
means”. The repeated “’tis I she means – ’tis I she means” which, as <strong>the</strong> stage direction<br />
says, is supposed to be uttered “merrily”, is <strong>the</strong> culmination point of this scene. Here<br />
<strong>the</strong> subject case pronoun obviously serves emphatically to express Sir Feeble’s insight<br />
that Leticia is directing her actions and words really to no o<strong>the</strong>r man but to him.<br />
This last finding seems to run counter to <strong>the</strong> usual classification of <strong>the</strong> subject<br />
case pronoun as ‘unstressed’ and <strong>the</strong> object case pronoun as ‘stressed’ (e.g., Visser<br />
1963/73: 244). Wales (1996: 19), however, has shown that <strong>the</strong> pronoun paradigm<br />
generally displays “ ‘instability’ of <strong>the</strong> subjective/objective case system”, such that<br />
all subject and object forms may occur “reversed in function” in “some dialect of<br />
English around <strong>the</strong> world.” (ibid.) Moreover <strong>the</strong> use of I is grammatically unusual<br />
here as it is <strong>the</strong> predicate in <strong>the</strong> matrix clause of an object ClC – if that is <strong>the</strong> structure<br />
here to begin with. Here <strong>the</strong> immediate situational and linguistic context may<br />
help to assess this unusual contruction. First of all: <strong>the</strong> ‘running gag’ in this scene<br />
is Sir Feeble’s doubt as to how he should pragmatically interpret Leticia’s words and<br />
deeds. Are <strong>the</strong>y directed toward him? Is <strong>the</strong>re coreferentiality between “my Love,<br />
my Life, my All”, for whom she calls, and himself? Does us in her urging “let us<br />
haste away” include him or somebody else? Only when Leticia refers to herself as<br />
9. OED s.v. vb. mean 1 (e.).
Cleft and identificational constructions 217<br />
“your [i.e., Sir Feeble’s] wife” is he convinced that he has been meant throughout.<br />
Hence <strong>the</strong> culmination in “ ’tis I she means – ’tis I she means”. We <strong>the</strong>refore suggest<br />
interpreting ’tis I in <strong>the</strong>se two instances as IdCCs, though superficially it takes part<br />
in an object ClC which would demand <strong>the</strong> object pronoun in predicate position. 10<br />
It might be objected that while before we tried to make up ‘omitted’ relative<br />
clauses in order to interpret IdCCs as “truncated it-clefts”, here we are doing <strong>the</strong> reverse,<br />
by denying that <strong>the</strong> verb in <strong>the</strong> overt relative clause assigns case to <strong>the</strong> predicate<br />
pronoun. Yet, before we try to substantiate our analysis we should come back to <strong>the</strong><br />
example <strong>from</strong> Twelfth Night (ex. 20). Remember that when Sir Andrew Aguecheek<br />
first expresses <strong>the</strong> suspicion that Malvolio might be speaking about him, he does so<br />
by saying “That’s me, I warrant you”. Immediately after that Malvolio specifies his<br />
reference to “a foolish knight” by “One sir Andrew”. Again: <strong>the</strong> character gains certainty<br />
that <strong>the</strong> person referred to previously is actually identical with him.<br />
Hatcher’s very illuminating article (dating back almost 60 years (1948)) in<br />
which she treats <strong>the</strong> development <strong>from</strong> ce suis je to c’est moi might help to explain<br />
<strong>the</strong> switches to <strong>the</strong> identificational ’tis I in <strong>the</strong> two scenes we have just looked into.<br />
In view of <strong>the</strong> development in French, Hatcher observes that ce est il (‘this is he’)<br />
has a “truly climactic effect” when it is used to express this insight that “ ‘<strong>the</strong> person<br />
present and <strong>the</strong> person just named are one and <strong>the</strong> same’ ” (1948: 1081). Unfortunately<br />
Hatcher does not discuss <strong>the</strong> same ‘climactic effect’ for <strong>the</strong> first person. Yet<br />
this is exactly what <strong>the</strong> two scenes <strong>from</strong> Shakespeare and Aphra Behn are all about.<br />
For Sir Andrew Aguecheek this “fusion of two potentially independent identities”<br />
(1948: 1081) is facilitated as his name is explicitly mentioned. Sir Feeble, in his<br />
turn, has to take a more complicated way of bringing about this fusion thanks to<br />
his wife’s semi-rhetorical question: “am I not your Wife?”.<br />
Now, does all this get us any closer to answering <strong>the</strong> question as to how IdCCs<br />
and it-ClC are correlated? And, what is more, if we find an answer beyond <strong>the</strong><br />
sheer surface observation that <strong>the</strong> two are made up of <strong>the</strong> same building blocks,<br />
would this help us better to understand <strong>the</strong> rise of object case pronouns in predicate<br />
position? Let us see where we have got so far.<br />
From <strong>the</strong> examples we have discussed in this chapter it should have become obvious<br />
that <strong>the</strong> suggestion to interpret some (if not all) independent copular clauses as<br />
‘truncated it-clefts’ (Huddleston and Pullum 2002) is only moderately helpful. Though<br />
<strong>the</strong> retrieval of <strong>the</strong> ‘omitted’ relative clause was relatively unproblematic in our exs.<br />
(16) to (19), <strong>the</strong> putatively ‘omitted’ relative clause for ex. (19) was reconstructed in a<br />
10. The difference between this example and ex. 14 (“No, no, Sir, I am <strong>the</strong> Thorn that galls<br />
him; ’tis me, ’tis me he hates”) is that in Behn <strong>the</strong> ’tis I in <strong>the</strong> repeated “ ’tis I she means” expresses<br />
a sudden insight on <strong>the</strong> speaker’s side, while in ex. (14) <strong>the</strong> repeated ’tis me corrects a<br />
mistake on <strong>the</strong> addressee’s side.
218 Claudia Lange & Ursula Schaefer<br />
way that also could provide for <strong>the</strong> somewhat ‘unnatural’ situation of <strong>the</strong> beginning<br />
of a telephone call. Finally, in ex. (20) any ‘omitted’ relative clause that we might make<br />
up to complement <strong>the</strong> IdCC would be sheer speculation as <strong>the</strong>re is no lexical – not to<br />
speak of syntactical – support whatsoever in <strong>the</strong> linguistic context. Ex. (21), in turn,<br />
has, for one thing, both an isolated IdCC and what looks like two object ClCs, one<br />
with <strong>the</strong> object pronoun predicate (as we would expect), and one with <strong>the</strong> subject<br />
pronoun predicate. As has just been indicated: Sir Feeble and Sir Andrew cognitively<br />
move, as it were, <strong>from</strong> being <strong>the</strong> ‘object’ of reference (albeit in focus) of <strong>the</strong> person<br />
overheard to <strong>the</strong> ‘subject(-complement)’ position where <strong>the</strong> identification prevails.<br />
We have, of course, grouped our examples in <strong>the</strong> present section in such a way<br />
that <strong>the</strong> ‘omitted’ relative clause becomes increasingly harder to retrieve. At <strong>the</strong> one<br />
end of <strong>the</strong> scale we have this ‘omitted’ relative clause spelled out in <strong>the</strong> utterance immediately<br />
preceding <strong>the</strong> IdCC (ex. 16 and 17), at <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r end we have a completely<br />
‘isolated’ it is I. The latter “identifies out of nothingness”, as Hatcher has it (1948:<br />
1084). In view of this it seems increasingly hard to abide by <strong>the</strong> claim of Huddleston<br />
and Pullum (2002: 1417) that IdCCs are in fact ‘truncated it-clefts’. We would ra<strong>the</strong>r<br />
suggest that in specific situations with specific (linguistic) contexts IdCCs may be extended<br />
into it-ClCs, while in o<strong>the</strong>rs this is impossible. In historical terms this could<br />
translate into postulating that <strong>the</strong> IdCC was anterior to and <strong>the</strong>n coexistent with<br />
<strong>the</strong> it-ClC. If <strong>the</strong>re is – <strong>from</strong> some point which still needs to be specified – indeed<br />
a ‘routinized‘ form of self-identification with <strong>the</strong> formula ’tis I which <strong>the</strong>n may be<br />
extended into an it-ClC, we see ‘Emergent Grammar’ at work, in which<br />
[. . .] forms of language are [. . .] embedded in formulaic constructions that are<br />
basically prefabricated but repeated with local variations in a way that Bolinger<br />
called “syntactic diffusion,” one variation splitting off and founding a new familiy<br />
of constructions. (Hopper 1998: 195; our emphasis)<br />
With <strong>the</strong> rise of pronouns in predicate position it is/’tis I seems to have become<br />
‘formulaic’, and hence by way of a ‘splitting off ’ was able to found a ‘new family of<br />
constructions’ – <strong>the</strong> it-ClC.<br />
A side-product of <strong>the</strong> analysis of our examples in this part of our chapter<br />
might be that – o<strong>the</strong>r than in an object ClC – me in predicate position might be <strong>the</strong><br />
rule in copular constructions where <strong>the</strong> subject of <strong>the</strong> matrix clause is not empty.<br />
The two examples we have presented here are, of course, not sufficient evidence<br />
to claim this to be a rule. As we have been primarily searching our corpora for it<br />
is/it was x constructions and <strong>the</strong>ir contracted (and negated) variants, a number<br />
of copular constructions with referential this/that as subject and a pronoun in<br />
predicate position may have escaped us. We do, however, strongly surmise that<br />
referentiality/emptiness of <strong>the</strong> matrix subject may have an influence on <strong>the</strong> shape<br />
of <strong>the</strong> predicate pronoun in this early stage.
Cleft and identificational constructions 219<br />
In any event, <strong>the</strong> discussion of findings <strong>from</strong> 17th and 18th-century plays<br />
which we have presented in this section of our paper should have illustrated<br />
that – for one thing – <strong>the</strong> correlation between IdCCs and ClCs might indeed<br />
be translated into an historical sequence. Moreover, we believe we have found<br />
a means of attempting to explain <strong>the</strong> rise of object pronouns in predicate position<br />
by indicating that <strong>the</strong>se are tied to referential conditions.<br />
4. Conclusions<br />
Let us begin our brief concluding section with yet ano<strong>the</strong>r quote <strong>from</strong> an 18thcentury<br />
grammarian, this time <strong>from</strong> John Burn who was Priestley’s contemporary.<br />
In his Practical Grammar he states:<br />
The substantive verb am or be admits a nominative before it and after it, False<br />
syntax: ‘It is me’, ‘It was <strong>the</strong>m that bought <strong>the</strong> goods, and it was me that bought for<br />
<strong>the</strong>m’. (Burn 1786: 85)<br />
If this reflects real usage of <strong>the</strong> predicative first person pronoun, <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong>se constructions<br />
too were affected by a tendency that we have witnessed in <strong>the</strong> plays:<br />
<strong>the</strong>re we do indeed find alternating use of subject and object pronoun in <strong>the</strong> identificational<br />
use, sometimes even with <strong>the</strong> same character and within a few lines.<br />
However, we have not found a single felicitous instance with me in a subject ClC.<br />
This does not, of course, mean that speakers did not produce such constructions.<br />
But here we enter uncertain territory. In terms of frequency we may, however,<br />
infer that self-identification – as well as pronominal identification of ano<strong>the</strong>r<br />
person – was pragmatically a frequent matter. Then what of focussing by clefting?<br />
To begin with: was this a strategy in oral communication? Our data at least<br />
suggest this, although it would take a much more thorough quantitative analysis to<br />
get closer to an adequate answer.<br />
What is basically at stake is <strong>the</strong> question as to how ‘oral’ it-ClCs really were.<br />
All we know for sure is that <strong>the</strong>y were established to some extent in LME and that<br />
today <strong>the</strong>y are largely restricted to expository written prose (Biber et al. 1999: 961).<br />
What happened in <strong>the</strong> meantime is still open for fur<strong>the</strong>r research. Until <strong>the</strong> results<br />
of this research we probably have to stick with Figaro in Holcroft’s wording: ’Tis<br />
he, ’tis she, ’tis me ’tis – I don’t know who . . . 11<br />
11. We thank Derek Britton very much for checking our English. Moreover we thank <strong>the</strong><br />
referees and editors of this volume for <strong>the</strong>ir valuable comments during <strong>the</strong> revision process<br />
of this paper.
220 Claudia Lange & Ursula Schaefer<br />
References<br />
Ball, Ca<strong>the</strong>rine N. 1991. The historical development of <strong>the</strong> it-cleft. University of Pennsylvania<br />
Dissertation in Linguistics, Ann Arbor.<br />
Ball, Ca<strong>the</strong>rine N. 1994. Relative pronouns in it-clefts: The last seven centuries. Language<br />
Variation and Change 6: 179–200.<br />
Beal, Joan C. 2004. English in Modern Times 1700–1945. London: Arnold.<br />
Biber, Douglas & Edward Finegan. 1992. The linguistic evolution of five written and speechbased<br />
English genres <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 17th to <strong>the</strong> 20th centuries. Rissanen et al. 1992: 688–704.<br />
Biber, Douglas et al. 1999. Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English. London: Longman.<br />
Bosch, Peter & Rob van der Sandt, eds. 1999. Focus: Linguistic, Cognitive, and Computational<br />
Perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br />
Burn, John. 4 1786. A practical grammar of <strong>the</strong> English language: in which <strong>the</strong> several parts of speech<br />
are clearly and methodically explained, toge<strong>the</strong>r with rules of composition. Glasgow. Eighteenth<br />
Century Collections Online. Gale Group. http://galenet.galegroup.com/servlet/ECCO<br />
Chadwyck-Healey English Drama Database: http://collections.chadwyck.co.uk/index.jsp<br />
Gundel, Jeanette K. 1977. Where do cleft sentences come <strong>from</strong>? Language 53, 3: 543–559.<br />
Hatcher, Anne Granville. 1948. From ce suis je to c’est moi (<strong>the</strong> ego as subject and as predicative<br />
in Old French). PMLA 63/4: 1053–1100.<br />
Herrmann, Tanja. 2005. Relative clauses in English dialects of <strong>the</strong> British Isles. A Comparative<br />
Grammar of British English Dialects. Agreement, Gender, Relative Clauses ed. by Bernd<br />
Kortmann et al. 21–123. Berlin, New York: Mouton de Gruyter,<br />
Hopper, Paul. 1998. Emergent Grammar. The New Psychology of Language: Cognitive and<br />
Functional Approaches to Language Structure ed. by Michael Tomasello, 155–175. Mahwah,<br />
NJ: Erlbaum.<br />
Huddleston, Rodney D. & Geoffrey K. Pullum, eds. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of <strong>the</strong><br />
English Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br />
Kiss, Katalin É. 1999. The English Cleft-Construction as a focus phrase. Boundaries of Morphology<br />
and Syntax ed. by Lunella Mereu, 195–229. Amsterdam: Benjamins.<br />
König, Ekkehard. 1991. The Meaning of Focus Particles: A Comparative Perspective. London:<br />
Routledge.<br />
Lambrecht, Knud. 1994. Information structure and sentence form. Topic, focus, and <strong>the</strong> mental<br />
representation of discourse referents. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br />
Lambrecht, Knud. 2001. A framework for <strong>the</strong> analysis of cleft constructions. Linguistics 39/3:<br />
463–516.<br />
Lange, Claudia. 2007. Reflexivity and Intensification in English: A Study of Texts and Contexts.<br />
Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.<br />
Leonard, Sterling Andrus. 1929. The doctrine of correctness in English usage 1700–1800. Madison:<br />
University of Wisconsin.<br />
Nevalainen, Terttu & Helena Raumolin-Brunberg. 1993. Early Modern British English. Early<br />
English in <strong>the</strong> Computer Age. Explorations through <strong>the</strong> Helsinki Corpus ed. by Matti Rissanen,<br />
Merja Kytö & Minna Palander-Collin, 53–73. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.<br />
Oxford Text Archive [= OTA]: http://www.ota.ahds.ac.uk<br />
Peitsara, Kirsti. 1997. The development of reflexive strategies in English. Grammaticalization at<br />
Work. Studies of Long-term Developments in English ed. by Matti Rissanen, Merja Kytö &<br />
Kirsti Heikkonen, 277–370. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Cleft and identificational constructions 221<br />
Peitsara, Kirsti. 2004. Variants of contraction: The case of it’s and ‘tis. ICAME-Journal 28: 77–94.<br />
Priestley, Joseph. 1762 [1970]. Course of Lectures on <strong>the</strong> Theory of Language and Universal<br />
Grammar. Menston: Scolar Press.<br />
Priestley, Joseph. 1786. The rudiments of English grammar, adapted to <strong>the</strong> use of schools; with<br />
notes and observations, for <strong>the</strong> use of those who have made some proficiency in <strong>the</strong> language.<br />
London. Eighteenth Century Collections Online. Gale Group. http://galenet.galegroup.com/<br />
servlet/ECCO<br />
Quirk, Randolph et al. 1985. A Comprehensive Grammar of <strong>the</strong> English Language. London:<br />
Longman.<br />
Rebuschi, Georges & Laurice Tuller, eds. 1999. The grammar of focus. Amsterdam: Benjamins.<br />
Rissanen, Matti. 1999. Syntax. The Cambridge History of <strong>the</strong> English Language Vol. III: 1476–1776<br />
ed. by Roger Lass, 187–331. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br />
Rissanen, Matti, Ossi Ihalainen, Terttu Nevalainen & Irma Taavitsainen, eds. 1992. History<br />
of Englishes. New Methods and Interpretations in Historical Linguistics. Berlin/New York:<br />
de Gruyter.<br />
Smits, R. J. C. 1989. Eurogrammar. The relative and cleft constructions of <strong>the</strong> Germanic and<br />
Romance Languages. Dordrecht: Foris.<br />
Tagliamonte, Sali, Jennifer, Smith & Helen, Lawrence. 2005. No taming <strong>the</strong> vernacular! Insights<br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> relatives in nor<strong>the</strong>rn Britain. Language Variation and Change 17: 75–112.<br />
Visser, F. T. 1963/73. An Historical Syntax of <strong>the</strong> English Language. Leiden.<br />
Wales, Katie. 1996. Personal pronouns in present-day English. Cambridge: Cambridge University<br />
Press.<br />
Wolf, Göran. 2005. Grammarians assess <strong>the</strong> English language. Theory and Practice in English<br />
Studies 3: Proceedings <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Eighth Conference of English, American and Canadian Studies.<br />
ed. by Jan Chovanec, 173–179. Brno: Masaryk University.
Emotion verbs with to-infinitive<br />
complements<br />
From specific to general predication<br />
Thomas Egan<br />
Hedmark University College<br />
This paper traces <strong>the</strong> evolution of to-infinitive complement constructions with <strong>the</strong><br />
emotion matrix verbs like, love, hate and prefer over <strong>the</strong> past two hundred years.<br />
It proposes that when <strong>the</strong> matrix verb is not preceded by a modal auxiliary <strong>the</strong>se<br />
constructions should be analysed in Present-day English as encoding general<br />
ra<strong>the</strong>r than specific predications. In Late Modern English, on <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand,<br />
<strong>the</strong>se same constructions were widely used to encode specific predications. Using<br />
data <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> BNC and <strong>the</strong> Corpus of Late Modern English Texts, <strong>the</strong> chapter<br />
demonstrates how <strong>the</strong>se constructions have become increasingly restricted to<br />
encoding general predications over <strong>the</strong> past two hundred years. This development<br />
is related to <strong>the</strong> parallel expansion of -ing complement constructions and of toinfinitive<br />
complement constructions with modalised matrix verbs.<br />
1. Introduction<br />
This study traces <strong>the</strong> evolution of non-finite verbal complement constructions<br />
with <strong>the</strong> emotion matrix verbs like, love, hate and prefer, over <strong>the</strong> past two hundred<br />
years. In particular, it shows that <strong>the</strong> construction type with a non-modalised<br />
matrix verb and a to-infinitive complement (as in ‘I like to swim’) is becoming<br />
more specialised in <strong>the</strong> sense that it is being increasingly restricted to encoding<br />
general ra<strong>the</strong>r than specific predications. Two of <strong>the</strong> matrix verbs investigated,<br />
like and love, encode a positive attitude on <strong>the</strong> part of <strong>the</strong> matrix verb subject; one,<br />
hate, a negative attitude; and <strong>the</strong> fourth, prefer, a comparative attitude. The reason<br />
for restricting <strong>the</strong> discussion to just four verbs is <strong>the</strong> relative paucity of examples<br />
of constructions containing o<strong>the</strong>r comparable emotion matrix verbs in historical<br />
corpora. In Section 2, I introduce <strong>the</strong> constructions under investigation and<br />
contrast to-infinitive complement constructions with non-modalised matrix verbs<br />
1. By ‘comparable emotion verbs’ I mean verbs that encode same-time predications by means<br />
of gerund complement clauses. Excluded are thus forward-looking verbs like want, wish, fear<br />
and dread, <strong>the</strong> complements of which are always located in <strong>the</strong> projected future, irrespective of<br />
complement form.
224 Thomas Egan<br />
with to-infinitive constructions with modalised matrix verbs and constructions<br />
with gerunds. 2 Section 3 contains an overview of <strong>the</strong> distribution of all three constructions<br />
over <strong>the</strong> last three hundred years and Section 4 details of <strong>the</strong> use of <strong>the</strong><br />
construction with a non-modalised matrix verb and a to-infinitive complement<br />
to encode specific and general predications in <strong>the</strong> last two hundred years. Finally,<br />
Section 5 contains a summary and conclusion.<br />
2. The non-finite complements of emotion verbs in Present-day English<br />
All four verbs discussed in this paper occur in three non-finite construction types,<br />
each of which typically (or prototypically) locates <strong>the</strong> complement predication in<br />
a different ontological domain. 3 In <strong>the</strong> first place, <strong>the</strong>y all occur with a modalised<br />
matrix verb and a to-infinitive complement. In this construction <strong>the</strong> complement<br />
is normally situated in <strong>the</strong> projected future, i.e., posterior to <strong>the</strong> time of <strong>the</strong> matrix<br />
verb. ( )–(4), all taken <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> BNC, illustrate this construction type with <strong>the</strong><br />
four matrix verbs.<br />
( ) Ultimately, she would like to work in film, behind <strong>the</strong> camera.<br />
(BNC CGB 786)<br />
(2) Paula says that she would love to have children but hasn’t yet found <strong>the</strong> right<br />
man to have children with. (BNC K3P 69)<br />
(3) I wouldn’t mind losing my stuff but I’d hate to lose my films.<br />
(4) ‘I’d prefer to fly <strong>the</strong>re, and rent a villa,’ she said.<br />
(BNC APC 748)<br />
(BNC CKB 429)<br />
In ( ) <strong>the</strong> realisation of <strong>the</strong> wishes of <strong>the</strong> subject would lead to her working in <strong>the</strong><br />
film industry. If this occurs, and, of course, nothing is certain where <strong>the</strong> future<br />
is concerned, it will be after <strong>the</strong> time of <strong>the</strong> utterance. As <strong>the</strong> Cambridge Grammar<br />
puts it, <strong>the</strong> ‘would like to-infinitive’ construction “projects into <strong>the</strong> future<br />
and resembles a verb of wanting” (Huddleston & Pullum 2002: 242). Similarly<br />
<strong>the</strong> ‘would love to-infinitive’ construction also projects into <strong>the</strong> future and also it,<br />
too, resembles a verb of wanting. In this case <strong>the</strong> degree of <strong>the</strong> wanting is merely<br />
2. The vast majority of <strong>the</strong> modals in question in Late Modern and Present-day English are<br />
would, should or ’d. Note that in this paper I use an expression like ‘would like to’ as shorthand<br />
for ‘modal verb + like to’.<br />
. They also occur in a non-finite construction with an object predicative in <strong>the</strong> form of a past<br />
participle, as in ‘I like my humour served up intelligently and well presented’ (BNC BNS 458).<br />
This construction is not considered in this paper.
Emotion verbs with to-infinitive complements 225<br />
stronger. The opposite is <strong>the</strong> case with <strong>the</strong> ‘would hate to-infinitive’ construction.<br />
This resembles a verb of not-wanting. 4 Thus <strong>the</strong> last thing <strong>the</strong> subject in (3)<br />
would like to experience is <strong>the</strong> loss of his or her films. The construction in (4) also<br />
encodes wanting: to be specific it encodes wanting <strong>the</strong> situation encoded in <strong>the</strong><br />
complement clause more than some explicit or implicit alternative(s).<br />
When, on <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, <strong>the</strong>se four verbs occur with gerunds, <strong>the</strong>y locate <strong>the</strong><br />
complement predication, which may be ei<strong>the</strong>r serial (recurrent) or one-off, in <strong>the</strong><br />
extended present. (5)–(8) illustrate <strong>the</strong>se same-time predications.<br />
(5) A letter <strong>from</strong> your Aunt Emily told us how much<br />
she likes having you and how accomplished you are becoming.<br />
(BNC H8X 203)<br />
(6) She loves gossiping with friends over lunch, he would ra<strong>the</strong>r<br />
be alone with his thoughts. (BNC CBC 044 )<br />
(7) ‘In my experience’, she mimicked, ‘men hate hanging around<br />
while women shop.’ (BNC HHA 2446)<br />
(8) ‘Some women prefer seeing make [sic] gynaecologists because<br />
<strong>the</strong>y find <strong>the</strong>m more authoritative.’ (BNC G2V 972)<br />
As was pointed out by Kiparsky and Kiparsky ( 97 ), matrix verbs like <strong>the</strong>se<br />
are factive when <strong>the</strong>y occur with gerund complements. In each case <strong>the</strong> subject<br />
engages in <strong>the</strong> activity encoded in <strong>the</strong> complement predication on one or more<br />
occasions, and this participation evokes simultaneous pleasure or displeasure as<br />
<strong>the</strong> case may be. Thus in (6) <strong>the</strong> subject in question does gossip, and when she does<br />
so this activity affords her a great deal of pleasure. Similarly, in (7) <strong>the</strong> subjects do<br />
hang around but in this case <strong>the</strong> activity affords <strong>the</strong>m displeasure.<br />
The third type of construction containing <strong>the</strong>se matrix verbs consists of<br />
to-infinitive complements following non-modalised matrix verbs. These are<br />
illustrated by (9)–( 2).<br />
(9) He always liked to tell me things about my lover that my lover<br />
kept <strong>from</strong> me. (BNC FAT 2835)<br />
( 0) Is <strong>the</strong>re a certain time when you always love to sit down with a<br />
relaxing drink and something to eat? (BNC AD0 563)<br />
4. In addition to being situated in <strong>the</strong> projected future <strong>the</strong> complement situation in <strong>the</strong> ‘would<br />
hate to’ construction may also be located in irrealis proper. It may even be counter-factual, as in<br />
“I would hate to be in <strong>the</strong> royal family” (BNC KSS 459). Both ‘would prefer to’ and ‘would love<br />
to’ may occasionally be employed to encode propositions like <strong>the</strong>se.
226 Thomas Egan<br />
( ) However, no money was to be spent on florists’ bouquets or<br />
wreaths, and in any case we’d both always hated to see flowers<br />
wired and thrust into stiff, unnatural arrangements. (BNC CES 5 3)<br />
( 2) I always prefer to pay all my bills by cheque or by hand. (BNC BNL 53)<br />
There is no consensus in <strong>the</strong> literature about how to specify <strong>the</strong> meaning of utterances<br />
like (9)–( 2). Duffley ( 992, 2006), for instance, ascribes to <strong>the</strong>m a ‘future’<br />
sense. Huddleston and Pullum (2002) maintain that <strong>the</strong>y evoke <strong>the</strong> idea of (repeated)<br />
change. De Smet and Cuyckens (2005), writing about <strong>the</strong> matrix verbs like<br />
and love, argue that <strong>the</strong>se encode a network of meanings including habituality and<br />
enjoyment. Carter and McCarthy (2006) write:<br />
Hate, like, love and prefer can be followed by ei<strong>the</strong>r -ing or a to-infinitive.<br />
The difference in meaning is often not great, but -ing emphasises <strong>the</strong> action or<br />
event in itself, while <strong>the</strong> infinitive places <strong>the</strong> emphasis more on <strong>the</strong> results of <strong>the</strong><br />
action or event. (Carter and McCarthy 2006: 5 5)<br />
I propose that constructions like <strong>the</strong>se with non-modalised matrix verbs and<br />
to-infinitive complements should be analysed as encoding what Langacker ( 999)<br />
calls general validity predications. He characterises <strong>the</strong>se as follows:<br />
The situation <strong>the</strong>y describe may hold for ei<strong>the</strong>r a bounded or an unbounded span<br />
of time, i.e., <strong>the</strong>ir validity has a temporal scope. An indefinite, potentially openended<br />
set of instances of <strong>the</strong> basic event type can occur within that scope. General<br />
validity predications do not however profile <strong>the</strong>se instances, but ra<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> higher-order<br />
relationship (of genericity/habituality) that <strong>the</strong>y constitute or manifest.<br />
(Langacker 999: 249–250)<br />
This characterisation seems to encapsulate neatly <strong>the</strong> sense of such tokens as<br />
(9)–( 2). General validity predications are higher order predications. As such<br />
<strong>the</strong>y do not encode <strong>the</strong> actual realisation of <strong>the</strong> complement situation. However,<br />
<strong>the</strong>y are often accompanied by an adverbial indicating <strong>the</strong> likely occasion of its<br />
realisation. For instance, all four tokens (9)–( 2) contain <strong>the</strong> adverb always. This<br />
indicates that <strong>the</strong> complement situations are likely to be realised on all suitable occasions.<br />
In (9), for instance, <strong>the</strong> exchange of information may be presumed to take<br />
place during intimate conversations between <strong>the</strong> two parties concerned. And in<br />
( 0) <strong>the</strong> speaker questions <strong>the</strong> addressee about <strong>the</strong> possible existence of this sort<br />
of occasion. A variety of adverbials may be used to encode <strong>the</strong> likely occasions<br />
of realisation of general validity predications. ( 3)–( 6), for instance, contain<br />
(underlined) ‘time-when’ adverbials.<br />
( 3) And when <strong>the</strong> flat’s not in use for entertaining clients I like to<br />
make it available to all my employees. (BNC H8S 333)
Emotion verbs with to-infinitive complements 227<br />
( 4) When we are hungry we love to eat bread. (BNC HS7 263)<br />
( 5) Jannie instinctively hid her cigarette behind her back when <strong>the</strong><br />
kitchen door opened; John hated to see her smoking while she<br />
cooked. (BNC G 2 2)<br />
( 6) I like to wake up to a cup of Assam, a very robust tea, or a<br />
strong blend of African and Indian teas of <strong>the</strong> type that makes a<br />
good English breakfast blend; in <strong>the</strong> evening I prefer to drink<br />
Keemun or Lapsang Souchong. (BNC ABB 727)<br />
In examples ( 3)–( 6) <strong>the</strong> likely occasions of realisation are all encoded explicitly.<br />
There are also many cases in which <strong>the</strong> times when <strong>the</strong> actions encoded by <strong>the</strong><br />
to-infinitives are likely to be realised are implicit. In such cases our rule of thumb<br />
as language users, our working hypo<strong>the</strong>sis, is that <strong>the</strong>y are likely to be realised, or<br />
in <strong>the</strong> case of hate not realised, on appropriate occasions. We must make use of <strong>the</strong><br />
context or of our world knowledge to identify <strong>the</strong> sort of occasion that is meant in<br />
any particular instance. ( 7)–(20) are cases in point.<br />
( 7) Relatives hated to see a sheet over <strong>the</strong> faces of <strong>the</strong>ir loved<br />
ones. (BNC JYB 472)<br />
( 8) There is very little connection now between our people and<br />
you Europeans. We prefer to take our husbands <strong>from</strong> among<br />
each o<strong>the</strong>r. (BNC CJD 94)<br />
( 9) Harry loves to talk about his gardening exploits. (BNC ACY 85 )<br />
(20) And nowadays coaches had lavatories and armchairs and dear<br />
little hostesses whom Laura liked to induce to tell her <strong>the</strong>ir life<br />
stories. (BNC CMJ 00 )<br />
Our interpretation of what constitutes suitable occasions is naturally informed by<br />
our encyclopaedic knowledge of <strong>the</strong> event types in question. Even without access<br />
to <strong>the</strong> context, we know that <strong>the</strong> situation in ( 7) is likely to take place in a mortuary,<br />
<strong>the</strong> situation in ( 8) on <strong>the</strong> occasion of choosing a marriage partner, and <strong>the</strong><br />
situations in ( 9)–(20) whenever <strong>the</strong> subjects in question can find a willing ear.<br />
The point is that, unlike <strong>the</strong> construction with gerund complements exemplified<br />
in (5)–(8), none of <strong>the</strong>se tokens encode <strong>the</strong> actual realisation of <strong>the</strong> complement<br />
situations. Ra<strong>the</strong>r, <strong>the</strong>y all encode a higher order predication of <strong>the</strong> likelihood of<br />
<strong>the</strong>ir being realised in <strong>the</strong> appropriate circumstances.<br />
There is no doubt that non-modalised emotion matrix verbs with to-infinitive<br />
complements in Present-day English typically encode general predications (see<br />
Figure and Duffley 2006: 77). However, <strong>the</strong>y do not invariably do so, or at least<br />
three of <strong>the</strong>m, <strong>the</strong> exception being love, do not always do so. (2 )–(23) exemplify<br />
some exceptions.
228 Thomas Egan<br />
100<br />
80<br />
60<br />
40<br />
20<br />
0<br />
hate like love prefer<br />
specic<br />
general<br />
Figure 1. Non-modalised to-infinitive constructions with matrix verbs hate, like, love and<br />
prefer: Ratio of general to specific predications (data: BNC W ).<br />
(2 ) I don’t like to say this but <strong>the</strong>re’s a society in Glasgow buying<br />
tickets for The children for pantomime. (BNC J8B 523)<br />
(22) I hate to say this guys but lets compare <strong>the</strong> Irish with <strong>the</strong><br />
English squads for tomorrow. (BNC J G 509)<br />
(23) They didn’t tell Martinho what <strong>the</strong> situation was for a while,<br />
and <strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong>y preferred to get me to break it to him. (BNC H9N 2079)<br />
In all three of <strong>the</strong>se examples <strong>the</strong> complement situation encodes a specific situation<br />
that is located in <strong>the</strong> projected future. To be more exact, it is situated in<br />
<strong>the</strong> near projected future. Note that this construction does not overlap in sense<br />
with <strong>the</strong> gerund construction which always locates <strong>the</strong> complement situation as a<br />
one-off or recurrent event in <strong>the</strong> extended present.<br />
We have already noted that <strong>the</strong> ‘love to-infinitive’ construction does not appear<br />
to be used with this sort of forward-looking meaning. What of <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r<br />
three constructions: how often are <strong>the</strong>y so used? Figure contains percentages<br />
for all four non-modalised to-infinitive constructions, based on samples of ,000<br />
tokens of each of <strong>the</strong> four matrix verbs downloaded at random <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> written<br />
imaginative sub-corpus of <strong>the</strong> BNC. The tokens containing non-finite complements<br />
were extracted <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong>se samples. The written imaginative sub-corpus was<br />
chosen in order to facilitate comparison with <strong>the</strong> Corpus of Late Modern English<br />
Texts, which contains a preponderance of literary texts. The percentages in Figure<br />
are based on 70 tokens of non-modalised ‘hate to-infinitive’, 06 tokens of nonmodalised<br />
‘like to-infinitive’, 33 tokens of non-modalised ‘love to-infinitive’ and<br />
286 tokens of non-modalised ‘prefer to-infinitive’.<br />
As can be seen in Figure , ‘hate to’ is <strong>the</strong> construction that occurs most frequently<br />
with a specific as opposed to a general sense. 5 Almost half of <strong>the</strong> specific<br />
5. In terms of actual tokens <strong>the</strong>re is little difference between total numbers for ‘like to’ and ‘hate<br />
to’ with specific complements, as may be seen by comparing Figure with Figures 2 and 4.
Emotion verbs with to-infinitive complements 229<br />
complement predicates in <strong>the</strong> ‘hate to’ construction encode acts of communication<br />
as in (22). One typically hates to say, admit or mention something, and <strong>the</strong>n<br />
proceeds to do just that! The same types of complement predicate are even more<br />
frequent with negated ‘like to’, as in (2 ). The only o<strong>the</strong>r context in which ‘like to’<br />
occurs in Present-day English with a specific complement is in if-suggestions, as<br />
in (24). Negatives and suggestions also account for a third of <strong>the</strong> tokens of specific<br />
‘prefer to’, but in its case we also find affirmative matrix verbs in <strong>the</strong> simple past as<br />
in (23), in <strong>the</strong> present as in (25) and as a participle as in (26).<br />
(24) And if you like to check yours now just okay. (BNC KLW 3 6)<br />
(25) If I have any fur<strong>the</strong>r requests, I prefer to make <strong>the</strong>m to him personally.<br />
(BNC GW2 68)<br />
(26) He refused <strong>the</strong> offer of any sword, preferring to use <strong>the</strong> blade<br />
he had forged with his own hands. (BNC CM 2238)<br />
Note that all <strong>the</strong>se tokens ((2 )–(26)) encode forward-looking predications. In<br />
Section 4 we will see that <strong>the</strong>se constructions were not restricted to specific predication<br />
in <strong>the</strong> projected future in Late Modern English. But before we do so, we<br />
will look at <strong>the</strong> overall incidence of <strong>the</strong> non-modalised to-infinitive constructions<br />
compared to <strong>the</strong>ir modalised and -ing counterparts over <strong>the</strong> last 300 years.<br />
. The historical development of all three construction types<br />
Although <strong>the</strong> topic proper of this paper is <strong>the</strong> use of to-infinitive complement<br />
constructions after non-modalised emotion verbs to encode general and specific<br />
predications, <strong>the</strong> increased tendency to use <strong>the</strong>se constructions to encode <strong>the</strong> former<br />
type of predication must be seen in <strong>the</strong> context of <strong>the</strong> distribution of <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r<br />
two constructions introduced in Section 2. Both of <strong>the</strong>se prototypically encode<br />
specific predications in Present-day English: <strong>the</strong> modalised to-infinitive construction<br />
encodes a specific predication in <strong>the</strong> projected future (‘I’d like to go now’), <strong>the</strong><br />
-ing construction encodes a specific predication in <strong>the</strong> extended present (‘I like<br />
walking around town’). We begin with like. Figure 2 contains data for <strong>the</strong> three like<br />
constructions per 00,000 words in two sub-corpora of <strong>the</strong> Corpus of Late Modern<br />
English Texts ( 7 0–80, 780– 850, see De Smet and Cuyckens 2005), <strong>the</strong><br />
Corpus of Early Twentieth Century Texts (containing some three million words<br />
<strong>from</strong> texts published between 9 and 922, written by authors born in <strong>the</strong> 880s<br />
and compiled especially for this study) and <strong>the</strong> Written Imaginative sub-corpus<br />
of <strong>the</strong> BNC. The reason for compiling <strong>the</strong> CETCT ra<strong>the</strong>r than using CLMET<br />
850– 920 as a source of data for <strong>the</strong> period between 850 and <strong>the</strong> time of <strong>the</strong><br />
BNC was <strong>the</strong> hypo<strong>the</strong>sis, later confirmed, that changes were taking place in <strong>the</strong>
2 0 Thomas Egan<br />
16,00<br />
14,00<br />
12,00<br />
10,00<br />
8,00<br />
6,00<br />
4,00<br />
2,00<br />
0,00<br />
1710–1780 1780–1850 1911–1922 BNC WI<br />
like to<br />
d like to<br />
like-ing<br />
Figure 2. Tokens per 00,000 words of three constructions containing <strong>the</strong> matrix verb like in<br />
four corpora.<br />
distribution of ‘like to’ around <strong>the</strong> turn of <strong>the</strong> century that do not show up clearly<br />
in <strong>the</strong> data in CLMET.<br />
As can be seen in Figure 2, all three like constructions were infrequent before<br />
<strong>the</strong> end of <strong>the</strong> eighteenth century. Although <strong>the</strong> non-modalised ‘like to’ construction,<br />
at least, was current in <strong>the</strong> ME period (<strong>the</strong>re is an example in <strong>the</strong> OED <strong>from</strong><br />
350), it was comparatively infrequent in Early Modern English. This rarity is presumably<br />
related to <strong>the</strong> widespread use of <strong>the</strong> ‘were like to’ and ‘had like to’ constructions<br />
during this period. At any rate <strong>the</strong>se two constructions went into rapid<br />
decline in <strong>the</strong> nineteenth century, <strong>the</strong> same period which witnessed <strong>the</strong> expansion<br />
of both ‘like to’ complement constructions. Note that while <strong>the</strong> non-modalised<br />
construction has remained fairly stable in incidence over <strong>the</strong> last two hundred<br />
years, <strong>the</strong>re is an increase in <strong>the</strong> modalised construction of over 40% between <strong>the</strong><br />
second and third periods. For <strong>the</strong> sake of convenience I will refer to this period,<br />
not strictly accurately, as <strong>the</strong> latter half of <strong>the</strong> nineteenth century. The -ing construction<br />
increases steadily over <strong>the</strong> whole period studied. 6<br />
Figure 3 contains data on <strong>the</strong> development of <strong>the</strong> three love constructions.<br />
There are two points in which <strong>the</strong> development of love, shown in Figure 3, resembles<br />
that of like and which are relevant to <strong>the</strong> discussion to come in Section 4. One is<br />
<strong>the</strong> expansion of <strong>the</strong> modalised construction in <strong>the</strong> latter half of <strong>the</strong> nineteenth<br />
6. One should note that <strong>the</strong>re is a general increase in <strong>the</strong> use of <strong>the</strong> lexeme would of approx.<br />
0% <strong>from</strong> CLMET 780– 850 to CETCT. This increase in itself cannot account for <strong>the</strong> much<br />
larger increase in <strong>the</strong> incidence of modalised forms of <strong>the</strong> matrix verb in <strong>the</strong> case of <strong>the</strong> four<br />
verbs that are <strong>the</strong> subject of this paper.
2,50<br />
2,00<br />
1,50<br />
1,00<br />
0,50<br />
0,00<br />
1710–1780 1780–1850 1911–1922 BNC WI<br />
Emotion verbs with to-infinitive complements 2 1<br />
love to<br />
d love to<br />
love-ing<br />
Figure 3. Tokens per 00,000 words of three constructions containing <strong>the</strong> matrix verb love in<br />
four corpora.<br />
century, <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> slight expansion of <strong>the</strong> -ing construction in <strong>the</strong> twentieth.<br />
While <strong>the</strong> non-modalised to-infinitive construction with like remains fairly stable<br />
in incidence throughout <strong>the</strong> twentieth century, in <strong>the</strong> case of love it suffers a sharp<br />
decline.<br />
Corresponding data for <strong>the</strong> three hate constructions are contained in Figure 4.<br />
The development of hate is parallel to that of both like and love in <strong>the</strong> two areas<br />
most pertinent to <strong>the</strong> argument in this chapter: <strong>the</strong> ‘would hate to’ construction<br />
increases in <strong>the</strong> latter half of <strong>the</strong> nineteenth century as does <strong>the</strong> -ing construction<br />
which continues to increase in <strong>the</strong> twentieth. There is a decrease in <strong>the</strong> incidence<br />
of <strong>the</strong> modalised construction in <strong>the</strong> twentieth century.<br />
Data for <strong>the</strong> prefer constructions are given in Figure 5. The data for prefer<br />
differ <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r three constructions in respect of one of <strong>the</strong> two factors of<br />
most relevance to <strong>the</strong> topic of this chapter. While <strong>the</strong>re is a growth in <strong>the</strong> incidence<br />
of <strong>the</strong> modalised construction in <strong>the</strong> latter half of <strong>the</strong> nineteenth century,<br />
<strong>the</strong>re is actually a slight decrease in <strong>the</strong> incidence of <strong>the</strong> -ing construction over<br />
<strong>the</strong> last 00 years. This development, however, must be seen against <strong>the</strong> background<br />
of <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong> -ing form was <strong>the</strong> first non-finite complementiser to<br />
be used with this matrix verb. It was only in <strong>the</strong> second half of <strong>the</strong> nineteenth<br />
century that <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r two constructions became more commonplace.<br />
Let us summarise <strong>the</strong> contents of Figures 2–5. In <strong>the</strong> case of all four matrix<br />
verbs, <strong>the</strong> construction that prototypically encodes specific events in <strong>the</strong> projected<br />
future in Present-day English, <strong>the</strong> modalised matrix verb + to-infinitive construction<br />
became more widespread in <strong>the</strong> second half of <strong>the</strong> nineteenth century. In<br />
<strong>the</strong> case of three of <strong>the</strong>m <strong>the</strong> construction that prototypically encodes same-time<br />
specific events, <strong>the</strong> -ing construction, became more widespread in <strong>the</strong> twentieth<br />
century. In <strong>the</strong> next section we will see that <strong>the</strong>re was a statistically significant
2 2 Thomas Egan<br />
1,20<br />
1,00<br />
0,80<br />
0,60<br />
0,40<br />
0,20<br />
0,00<br />
1710–1780 1780–1850 1911–1922 BNC WI<br />
hate to<br />
d hate to<br />
hate-ing<br />
Figure 4. Tokens per 00,000 words of three constructions containing <strong>the</strong> matrix verb hate in<br />
four corpora.<br />
1,80<br />
1,60<br />
1,40<br />
1,20<br />
1,00<br />
0,80<br />
0,60<br />
0,40<br />
0,20<br />
0,00<br />
1710–1780 1780–1850 1911–1922 BNC WI<br />
prefer to<br />
d prefer to<br />
prefer-ing<br />
Figure 5. Tokens per 00,000 words of three constructions containing <strong>the</strong> matrix verb prefer<br />
in four corpora.<br />
decrease in <strong>the</strong> tendency of two of <strong>the</strong> four non-modalised to-infinitive constructions<br />
to encode specific predications in <strong>the</strong> same periods.<br />
4. General and specific predication with a non-modalised matrix verb<br />
Figure 6 contains details (<strong>from</strong> 780 to <strong>the</strong> present) of <strong>the</strong> percentages of nonmodalised<br />
to-infinitive constructions containing <strong>the</strong> four matrix verbs and<br />
constructions which (as we have seen in Section 2) typically encode general predications.<br />
The period <strong>from</strong> 7 0– 780 is omitted <strong>from</strong> consideration in this section<br />
as <strong>the</strong>re is so little data for two of <strong>the</strong> verbs, like and prefer, <strong>from</strong> this period. In <strong>the</strong>
100<br />
90<br />
80<br />
70<br />
60<br />
50<br />
40<br />
30<br />
20<br />
10<br />
0<br />
prefer like hate love<br />
Emotion verbs with to-infinitive complements 2<br />
Figure 6. Percentage of general predications with four non-modalised matrix verbs <strong>from</strong> Late<br />
Modern to Present-day English<br />
case of love <strong>the</strong> change in numbers is barely perceptible in <strong>the</strong> figure. As for hate,<br />
<strong>the</strong>re is hardly any change between <strong>the</strong> first two periods and <strong>the</strong> change <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
second to <strong>the</strong> third period is not significant at <strong>the</strong> level of p = 0.05. In <strong>the</strong> case of<br />
prefer <strong>the</strong> increase in <strong>the</strong> use of <strong>the</strong> construction <strong>from</strong> CETCT to BNC WI to encode<br />
general predications is significant at <strong>the</strong> level of p = 0.005. In <strong>the</strong> case of like,<br />
both stages in <strong>the</strong> increase are significant at this level.<br />
The discussion below will be limited to like and prefer constructions displaying<br />
statistically significant change in <strong>the</strong> periods in question. To begin with like,<br />
<strong>the</strong>re are two uses of non-modalised ‘like to’ in CLMET that are not represented<br />
in <strong>the</strong> BNC, or indeed in o<strong>the</strong>r corpora of Present-day English, such as FLOB and<br />
FROWN. 7 The first of <strong>the</strong>se is <strong>the</strong> use of ‘like to’ to encode same-time predications.<br />
(27)–(30) are cases in point.<br />
(27) ‘‘Oh no,’’ wept <strong>the</strong> young lady; ‘‘you wished me away<br />
because you knew I liked to be <strong>the</strong>re!’’ (Brontë, Wu<strong>the</strong>ring Heights)<br />
(28) Thereupon I could have kissed her as a sort of tribute, liking to<br />
be appreciated. (Blackmore, Lorna Doone)<br />
(29) I wonder his bro<strong>the</strong>r likes to sit <strong>the</strong>re, so late at night—on this<br />
night too. (Dickens, Barnaby Rudge)<br />
1780-1850<br />
1911-1922<br />
BNC WI<br />
7. Although <strong>the</strong> construction illustrated in (27)–(29) is no longer current in English, one can<br />
still encounter it in <strong>the</strong> literature. Hamawand’s (2002: 9) example “She likes to join <strong>the</strong> club” is<br />
a case in point.
2 4 Thomas Egan<br />
Deprived of <strong>the</strong>ir co-texts, it might appear that (27)–(29) could in fact encode<br />
general validity predications but a closer investigation shows this not to be <strong>the</strong><br />
case. (30) is an extended version of (27).<br />
(30) ‘‘How can you say I am harsh, you naughty fondling?’’ cried<br />
<strong>the</strong> mistress, amazed at <strong>the</strong> unreasonable assertion. ‘‘You are<br />
surely losing your reason. When have I been harsh, tell me?’’<br />
‘‘Yesterday,’’ sobbed Isabella, ‘‘and now!’’<br />
‘‘Yesterday!’’ said her sister-in-law. ‘‘On what occasion?’’<br />
‘‘In our walk along <strong>the</strong> moor. You told me to ramble where I pleased,<br />
while you sauntered on with Mr. Heathcliff!’’<br />
‘‘And that’s your notion of harshness?’’ said Ca<strong>the</strong>rine,<br />
laughing. ‘‘It was no hint that your company was superfluous.<br />
We didn’t care whe<strong>the</strong>r you kept with us or not. I merely<br />
thought Heathcliff ’s talk would have nothing entertaining for<br />
your ears.’’<br />
‘‘Oh no,’’ wept <strong>the</strong> young lady; ‘‘you wished me away<br />
because you knew I liked to be <strong>the</strong>re!’’ (Brontë, Wu<strong>the</strong>ring Heights)<br />
There can be no doubt that when Isabella in (30) says I liked to be <strong>the</strong>re she is referring<br />
to <strong>the</strong> specific occasion of <strong>the</strong> walk on <strong>the</strong> moors <strong>the</strong> previous day. Similarly in<br />
(28) <strong>the</strong> subject expresses his gratification at having been praised on <strong>the</strong> particular<br />
occasion in question. In (29) <strong>the</strong> adverbial on this night too allows us to infer <strong>the</strong><br />
specificity of <strong>the</strong> predication.<br />
The predication in (30) could be felicitously encoded in Present-day English<br />
by ‘like -ing’. This would be less likely in (28) because of <strong>the</strong> so-called ‘double-ing<br />
constraint’ (see Ross 972). As for (29), ano<strong>the</strong>r possible interpretation is that it<br />
is a forward-looking predication, with like meaning ‘choose’. This use of like to<br />
encode an act of choosing is also instantiated in (3 )–(34), all of which clearly<br />
encode forward-looking predications.<br />
(3 ) Anne said she would not meddle with <strong>the</strong>m, and that she would<br />
wait till her bro<strong>the</strong>r liked to count <strong>the</strong>m. (Edgeworth, The Parent’s Assistant)<br />
(32) The usher walked slowly round <strong>the</strong> down with such boys as<br />
liked to accompany him. (Hughes, Tom Brown’s Schooldays.)<br />
(33) “Any day you like to come and dine with me, I’ll give you as<br />
good a bottle of wine as you’ll get in London.”<br />
(Galsworthy, The Man of Property)<br />
(34) I want you to give me a few minutes of your attention in private, at<br />
any time and place you like to appoint. (Bronte, The Tenant of Wildfell Hall)<br />
While all four examples (3 )–(34) could be paraphrased using choose, <strong>the</strong><br />
predications in (33) and (34), though not (3 ) and (32), may be expressed in
Emotion verbs with to-infinitive complements 2 5<br />
Present-day English by means of ‘would like to’. As mentioned in Section 2, <strong>the</strong><br />
only contexts in which such forward-looking predications with non-modalised<br />
like as those in (3 )–(34) survive in Present-day English are in if-suggestions and<br />
negatives. In <strong>the</strong> case of <strong>the</strong> former, <strong>the</strong> modalised construction is in <strong>the</strong> process<br />
of superseding <strong>the</strong> non-modalised one. Figure 7 gives details of <strong>the</strong> development<br />
over two hundred years of all if-clauses containing modalised ‘like to’ and<br />
non-modalised ‘like to’.<br />
Figure 7 shows <strong>the</strong> steady retreat of ‘if x like to’ in <strong>the</strong> face of <strong>the</strong> spread of ‘if x<br />
would like to’. Today we only find specific if-clauses with non-modalised like used<br />
to encode suggestions, and even when so used, <strong>the</strong>y are in direct competition with<br />
<strong>the</strong> modalised variety, as may be seen in (35)–(40).<br />
(35) So if you like to write that one down. (BNC FMH 679)<br />
(36) Right so if you’d like to label that triangle. (BNC FMJ 85)<br />
(37) If you like to look back at <strong>the</strong> ca<strong>the</strong>dral office in an hour, I’ll<br />
see it’s ready for you. (BNC HA2 2 8 )<br />
(38) If you’d like to come back to my office we can discuss it <strong>the</strong>re,’<br />
he said, looking at Fairham. (BNC G0 966)<br />
(39) If you like to get on I’ll fetch my horse. (BNC A0R 2245)<br />
(40) If you’d like to go into <strong>the</strong> next room, please. (BNC F77 523)<br />
It is difficult to discern any substantive semantic or pragmatic differences between<br />
<strong>the</strong> pairs of tokens with modalised and non-modalised matrix verbs<br />
in (35)–(40). The development of <strong>the</strong>se two forms over <strong>the</strong> last two hundred<br />
years appears to be an example of drift in <strong>the</strong> classic sense of Sapir ( 92 ), with<br />
100<br />
90<br />
80<br />
70<br />
60<br />
50<br />
40<br />
30<br />
20<br />
10<br />
0<br />
1780–1850 1911–1922 BNC<br />
if – modal like<br />
if + modal like<br />
Figure 7. The percentage of ‘if x like to’ versus ‘if x would like to’ in three corpora.
2 6 Thomas Egan<br />
<strong>the</strong> ‘would like to’ form gradually, but inexorably, replacing its non-modalised<br />
‘like to’ counterpart.<br />
The o<strong>the</strong>r context in which <strong>the</strong> non-modalised ‘like to’ construction is found<br />
with specific complements in Present-day English is when <strong>the</strong> matrix verb is negated.<br />
Although <strong>the</strong>re has been an increase in <strong>the</strong> occurrence of general validity<br />
predications in this context in <strong>the</strong> last two centuries, this increase is not statistically<br />
significant. The fact that <strong>the</strong> non-modalised ‘hate to’ construction is still employed<br />
with a similar meaning may be a factor influencing <strong>the</strong> resilience of ‘don’t<br />
like to’ used in this sense in Present-day English.<br />
The second matrix verb to exhibit a statistically significant increase in <strong>the</strong><br />
use of <strong>the</strong> non-modalised construction to encode general validity predications is<br />
prefer. Recall that prefer differs <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r three verbs in that it occurred with<br />
an -ing complement before it began to be used with a to-infinitive complement.<br />
In <strong>the</strong> nineteenth century it was <strong>the</strong> only emotion verb to regularly encode general<br />
validity predications by means of -ing ra<strong>the</strong>r than to-infinitive complements.<br />
(4 )–(43) are cases where one would expect to find to-infinitive complements in<br />
Present-day English.<br />
(4 ) Mr and Mrs Murray generally thought it sufficient to show<br />
<strong>the</strong>mselves at church once in <strong>the</strong> course of <strong>the</strong> day; but<br />
frequently <strong>the</strong> children preferred going a second time to<br />
wandering about <strong>the</strong> grounds all <strong>the</strong> day with nothing to do.<br />
(Brontë, Agnes Gray)<br />
(42) They departed early in <strong>the</strong> morning before any one else was<br />
down, except myself, and just as I was leaving my room, Lord<br />
Lowborough was descending to take his place in <strong>the</strong> carriage<br />
where his lady was already ensconced; and Arthur (or Mr.<br />
Huntingdon as I prefer calling him, for <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r is my child’s<br />
name) had <strong>the</strong> gratuitous insolence to come out in his dressinggown<br />
to bid his ‘friend’ good bye. (Brontë, The Tenant of Wildfell Hall )<br />
(43) They generally prefer running against <strong>the</strong> wind; yet at <strong>the</strong> first<br />
start <strong>the</strong>y expand <strong>the</strong>ir wings, and like a vessel make all sail.<br />
(Darwin, The Voyage of <strong>the</strong> Beagle)<br />
A third of <strong>the</strong> -ing complements of prefer in <strong>the</strong> CLMET 780– 850 are of this<br />
type. There are some general validity predications encoded by ‘prefer -ing’ complements<br />
in <strong>the</strong> BNC, as evidenced by (44) and (45). However, a search of <strong>the</strong> BNC<br />
as a whole for prefer preceded by generally, normally or usually yielded 23 tokens<br />
containing non-finite complements, of which <strong>the</strong> only two -ing complements
Emotion verbs with to-infinitive complements 2 7<br />
were (44) and (45). 8 The o<strong>the</strong>r 2 contained to-infinitive complements, as in<br />
(46) and (47). 9<br />
(44) Corral generally prefers buying <strong>from</strong> commercial galleries ra<strong>the</strong>r than auction<br />
houses and she often consults <strong>the</strong> artists about <strong>the</strong> works <strong>the</strong> Museum intends<br />
to buy. (BNC EBS 707)<br />
(45) Macho man usually prefers talking to his own sex because it’s<br />
safer, and he’s more interested in proving he’s as ‘male’ as his<br />
peer group than in entering a relationship which requires an<br />
ability to give, to love, to be tender. (BNC H83 939)<br />
(46) They had noticed that females of both types generally prefer to<br />
mate with a quadrimaculata male, if given a choice. (BNC GU8 76)<br />
(47) The children could take early dinner, but <strong>the</strong>y usually<br />
preferred to eat with us in one of <strong>the</strong> dining rooms. (BNC AMW 457)<br />
Thus prefer has come to resemble <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r three verbs with respect to <strong>the</strong> encoding<br />
of general validity predications by means of <strong>the</strong> to-infinitive form. This form<br />
may also be employed on occasion to encode specific predications in <strong>the</strong> projected<br />
future. When so used, it often seems difficult to find any tangible difference in<br />
meaning between utterances with a modalised and non-modalised matrix verb.<br />
(48)–(53) may serve to illustrate this point.<br />
(48) ‘I shall be at Trebyan for a while.’ ‘I’ll drop you off <strong>the</strong>re, sir.’<br />
‘No, I prefer to walk.’ (BNC GWB 2955)<br />
(49) ‘Do you want to go and sit down some place?’ Maggie asked.<br />
‘No, I’d prefer to keep walking.’ (BNC AN7 2262)<br />
(50) ‘But I prefer to see you safely to your flat. (BNC JXS 3848)<br />
(5 ) ‘Yes, but I’d prefer to come with you. (BNC GUS 309)<br />
(52) ‘So, are you going to climb on board or do you prefer to stay<br />
here in <strong>the</strong> water? (BNC JXT 643)<br />
(53) ‘We’re fully booked for this evening, sir. Oh, just a moment . . .<br />
I do have one seat left in <strong>the</strong> stalls. Or would you prefer to try<br />
your luck up in <strong>the</strong> Gallery?’ (BNC KAT 3)<br />
8. It may be of interest to note in this connection that <strong>the</strong>re are no instances of <strong>the</strong>se three adverbs<br />
directly preceding ‘enjoy -ing’ or ‘dislike -ing’ in <strong>the</strong> BNC, which is in line with what one would expect<br />
if <strong>the</strong>se constructions prototypically encode ei<strong>the</strong>r one-off or recurrent actuated situations.<br />
9. However, one should enter <strong>the</strong> proviso here that ‘prefer to’ is almost ten times more common<br />
than ‘prefer -ing’.
2 8 Thomas Egan<br />
One may perhaps still discern a greater degree of hesitation on <strong>the</strong> part of <strong>the</strong><br />
speaker in <strong>the</strong> first person expressions in (49) and (5 ) than in (48) and (50). The<br />
modalised variant may perhaps be interpreted as exerting less pressure on <strong>the</strong> addressee<br />
to respect <strong>the</strong> wishes of <strong>the</strong> speaker. On <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, what was originally<br />
<strong>the</strong> more diffident form may be in <strong>the</strong> process of becoming <strong>the</strong> unmarked<br />
or default mode of expression, as is <strong>the</strong> case with ‘if you’d like to’ discussed above,<br />
in which case <strong>the</strong> connotation of diffidence is likely to be reduced in time. The<br />
example with <strong>the</strong> second person subject in (52) seems ra<strong>the</strong>r more stilted, at least<br />
to my ears, than <strong>the</strong> one with <strong>the</strong> modal in (53). (52) is <strong>the</strong> only one of eleven<br />
tokens of ‘do you prefer to’ in <strong>the</strong> BNC to encode a forward-looking ra<strong>the</strong>r than<br />
a general validity predication (<strong>the</strong>re are fifteen tokens of forward-looking ‘would<br />
you prefer to’). To sum up, prefer seems to be moving in <strong>the</strong> same direction as like<br />
and love with same-time situations being typically encoded by -ing complements,<br />
situations in <strong>the</strong> projected future being typically encoded by modalised matrix<br />
verbs followed by to-infinitive complements, and situations of general validity<br />
being encoded by non-modalised matrix verbs and to-infinitive complements.<br />
5. Conclusion<br />
In this paper we have seen that <strong>the</strong> four verbs like, love, hate and prefer typically<br />
encode general validity predications when <strong>the</strong> matrix verb is not modalised and<br />
is followed by a to-infinitive clause. The same verbs are typically used to encode<br />
situations in <strong>the</strong> projected future when <strong>the</strong> matrix verb is modalised, and sametime<br />
(ei<strong>the</strong>r one-off or recurrent) situations when <strong>the</strong> matrix verb is followed by<br />
an -ing clause. As recently as Late Modern English, however, <strong>the</strong> constructions<br />
with <strong>the</strong> non-modalised matrix verb and <strong>the</strong> to-infinitive were used to encode<br />
specific predications, both same-time and forward-looking. The former of <strong>the</strong>se<br />
two usages appears to have been lost. Instead, this sort of predication may now be<br />
encoded in -ing clauses, which, as was shown in Section 3, have been expanding<br />
steadily with <strong>the</strong>se verbs, with <strong>the</strong> exception of prefer, over <strong>the</strong> last two hundred<br />
years. The function of encoding forward-looking predications has been increasingly<br />
assumed by <strong>the</strong> construction with a modalised matrix verb and to-infinitive<br />
clause, a construction that experienced a steady expansion in <strong>the</strong> latter half of <strong>the</strong><br />
nineteenth century. Three of <strong>the</strong> verbs, like, hate and prefer, may still, never<strong>the</strong>less,<br />
encode specific forward-looking predications when non-modalised and followed<br />
by a to-infinitive. In <strong>the</strong> case of like this form of predication is limited to negatives<br />
and if-suggestions.<br />
The data investigated in this chapter indicate that <strong>the</strong>re has been a drift towards<br />
a greater degree of form-function isomorphism in this area of non-finite<br />
complementation in English than was <strong>the</strong> case as recently as 50 years ago. In fact,
Emotion verbs with to-infinitive complements 2 9<br />
looking at data for all matrix verbs followed by a to-infinitive, it is clear that in Late<br />
Modern English to-infinitive complement constructions could be used to encode<br />
situations located prior to <strong>the</strong> time of <strong>the</strong> matrix verb and situations occurring at<br />
<strong>the</strong> same time as <strong>the</strong> matrix verb. Nei<strong>the</strong>r of <strong>the</strong>se functions is carried out by <strong>the</strong><br />
to-infinitive construction in Present-day English. Fanego ( 996) points out that<br />
<strong>the</strong> backward-looking construction containing verbs such as remember followed<br />
by a perfect infinitive is “no longer acceptable today, but was in use in Modern<br />
English [. . .] and can even be found in texts dating back to <strong>the</strong> middle of <strong>the</strong> twentieth<br />
century” (Fanego 996: 75). The evidence of <strong>the</strong> present paper points to a<br />
similar direction of change in <strong>the</strong> case of same-time predications with <strong>the</strong> four<br />
verbs under study. In both <strong>the</strong>se cases <strong>the</strong> function formerly served by to-infinitive<br />
complements has been assumed by -ing complement constructions. In Present-day<br />
English <strong>the</strong> to-infinitive in complement constructions serves just three functions. It<br />
is now restricted to <strong>the</strong> encoding of predications in <strong>the</strong> projected-future, judgements<br />
(opinions) on <strong>the</strong> part of <strong>the</strong> subject, and general validity predications.<br />
References<br />
Primary<br />
BNC: British National Corpus (200 ). Oxford: Oxford University Computing Services.<br />
CLMET: see De Smet, Hendrik and Hubert Cuyckens (2005).<br />
CETCT: The works contained in CETCT were all downloaded <strong>from</strong> Project Gutenberg. They are<br />
listed here with <strong>the</strong> dates of birth of <strong>the</strong> authors and dates of publication.<br />
Christie, Agatha (b. 890). The Mysterious Affair at Styles ( 920).<br />
Colum, Padraic (b. 88 ). The King of Ireland’s Son (1916), The Adventures of Odysseus and <strong>the</strong><br />
Tales of Troy (1918), The Golden Fleece and <strong>the</strong> Heroes who lived before Achilles ( 92 ).<br />
Dalton, Hugh (b. 887). With British Guns in Italy ( 9 9).<br />
Dell, E<strong>the</strong>l M. (b. 887). The Way of an Eagle ( 9 ), The Knave of Diamonds ( 9 2), The Bars<br />
of Iron ( 9 6).<br />
Ervine, St. John (b. 883). The Foolish Lovers ( 920).<br />
Joyce, James (b. 882). Dubliners ( 9 4), A Portrait of <strong>the</strong> Artist as a Young Man ( 9 6).<br />
Keynes, J.M. (b. 883). The Economic Consequences of <strong>the</strong> Peace ( 920).<br />
Lawrence, D.H. (b. 885). Sons and Lovers ( 9 3), Women in Love ( 920).<br />
Lofting, Hugh (b. 886). Doctor Doolittle ( 920), Voyages of Doctor Doolittle ( 922).<br />
MacKenzie, Compton (b. 883). The Altar Steps ( 922).<br />
O’Kelly, Seumas (b. 88 ). Waysiders ( 9 8).<br />
Peet, T. Eric (b. 882). Rough Stone Monuments and Their Builders ( 9 2).<br />
Ransome, Arthur (b. 884). Old Peter’s Russian Tales ( 9 6), Six weeks in Russia in 1919 ( 9 9),<br />
The Crisis in Russia ( 920).<br />
Rawlinson, A.E.J. (b. 884). Religious Reality ( 9 8).<br />
Redgrove, H. Stanley (b. 887). Bygone Beliefs ( 9 9).<br />
Rohmer, Sax (b. 883). The Insidious Dr. Fu Manchu ( 9 3), The Return of Dr. Fu-Manchu<br />
( 9 6), The Quest of <strong>the</strong> Sacred Slipper ( 9 9).
240 Thomas Egan<br />
Stephens, James (b. 882). The Crock of Gold ( 9 2), The Insurrection in Dublin ( 9 6), Irish<br />
Fairy Tales ( 920).<br />
Swinnerton, Frank (b. 884). Nocturnes ( 9 7).<br />
Toynbee, Arnold J. (b. 889). Turkey, A Past and a Future ( 9 7).<br />
Walpole, Hugh (b. 884). Jeremy ( 9 9), The Secret City ( 9 9).<br />
Williams, Valentine (b. 883). The Man with <strong>the</strong> Clubfoot ( 9 8), Okewood of <strong>the</strong> Secret Service<br />
( 9 9), The Yellow Streak ( 922).<br />
Wodehouse, P.G. (b. 88 ). My Man Jeeves ( 9 9), Three Men and a Maid ( 92 ), Right Ho,<br />
Jeeves ( 922).<br />
Woolf, Virginia (b. 884). The Voyage Out ( 9 5), Night and Day ( 9 9), Jacob’s Room ( 922).<br />
Wren, Percival, Ch. (b. 885). Snake and Sword ( 9 4), Driftwood Spars ( 9 6).<br />
Yates, Dornford (b. 885). The Bro<strong>the</strong>r of Daphne ( 9 4), Berry and Co. ( 920).<br />
Secondary<br />
Carter, Ronald & Michael McCarthy. 2006. Cambridge grammar of English: a comprehensive<br />
guide: spoken and written English grammar and use. Cambridge: Cambridge University<br />
Press.<br />
De Smet, Hendrik & Hubert Cuyckens. 2005. Pragmatic Streng<strong>the</strong>ning and <strong>the</strong> Meaning of<br />
Complement Constructions. Journal of English Linguistics 33: : 3–34.<br />
Duffley, Patrick J. 992. The English Infinitive. London: Longman.<br />
Duffley, Patrick J. 2006. The English gerund-participle: a comparison with <strong>the</strong> infinitive.<br />
New York: Peter Lang.<br />
Fanego, Teresa. 996. On <strong>the</strong> historical development of English retrospective verbs. Neuphilologische<br />
Mitteilungen 97: 7 –79.<br />
Hamawand, Z. 2002. Atemporal complement clauses in English: a cognitive grammar analysis.<br />
München: LINCOM Europa.<br />
Huddleston, Rodney & Geoffrey K. Pullum. 2002. The Cambridge Grammar of <strong>the</strong> English<br />
Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br />
Kiparsky, Paul & Carol Kiparsky. 97 . Fact. Semantics: an interdisciplinary reader in philosophy,<br />
linguistics and psychology ed. by Danny Steinberg & L.A. Jakobovits, 345–369. Cambridge:<br />
Cambridge University Press.<br />
Langacker, Ronald. 999. Grammar and conceptualisation. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.<br />
Ross, John R. 972. Double-ing. Linguistic Inquiry 3( ): 6 –86.<br />
Sapir, Edward. 92 . Language: an introduction to <strong>the</strong> study of speech. New York: Harcourt, Brace<br />
and Company.
Subjective progressives in seventeenth<br />
and eighteenth century English<br />
Secondary grammaticalization as a process<br />
of objectification<br />
Svenja Kranich<br />
Freie Universität Berlin<br />
The aim of <strong>the</strong> study is to analyse <strong>the</strong> subjective uses of <strong>the</strong> progressive in 7th<br />
and 8th century English, i.e., uses of <strong>the</strong> progressives as expressions of speaker<br />
attitude. After an overview of <strong>the</strong> Old and Middle English meanings of <strong>the</strong><br />
progressive, I discuss <strong>the</strong> three different types of subjective progressives found<br />
in <strong>the</strong> 7th and 8th century data <strong>from</strong> ARCHER-2 (A Representative Corpus<br />
of Historical English Registers 2). In this context, I discuss some methodological<br />
issues, as formal criteria have proved insufficiently reliable for <strong>the</strong> distinction of<br />
subjective uses (cf. Killie 2004). I <strong>the</strong>n look at <strong>the</strong> relation between subjective and<br />
o<strong>the</strong>r meanings of <strong>the</strong> progressive. In <strong>the</strong> 7th and 8th centuries, <strong>the</strong> aspectual<br />
function of <strong>the</strong> progressive grammaticalizes, which leads to changing relative<br />
frequencies between subjective and objective uses. The paper ends with some<br />
suggestions about general tendencies in <strong>the</strong> relation between grammaticalization<br />
and subjectification and objectification.<br />
1. Introduction<br />
The use of progressives in o<strong>the</strong>r than purely aspectual functions has often been<br />
noted, both in studies on present-day use and in diachronic surveys. Although<br />
a recognition of <strong>the</strong> capacity of <strong>the</strong> progressive to convey emotional involvement<br />
is by no means new, 2 in recent years <strong>the</strong>re has been noticeable particular<br />
interest in <strong>the</strong> evolution and characteristics of such uses (cf. e.g., Wright 994;<br />
1. I would like to thank <strong>the</strong> anonymous referees of <strong>the</strong> proceedings as well as <strong>the</strong> participants<br />
of <strong>the</strong> 4 ICEHL in Bergamo, in particular Elke Gehweiler, Stefan Thim and Ilse Wischer, for<br />
<strong>the</strong>ir valuable suggestions. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, I would like to thank <strong>the</strong> Nafög commitee for <strong>the</strong> grant<br />
received for a research project on <strong>the</strong> development of <strong>the</strong> English progressive.<br />
. For an overview of early references to subjective uses of <strong>the</strong> English progressive, see Storms<br />
( 964), who provides a summary of various accounts <strong>from</strong> Onions ( 904) to his days.
4 Svenja Kranich<br />
Fitzmaurice 2004a, 2004b & Killie 2004; Smitterberg 2004, 2005). This can be seen<br />
as related to <strong>the</strong> general interest in processes of subjectification and <strong>the</strong>ir relation<br />
to grammaticalization processes (cf. e.g., Traugott 995 & Traugott/Dasher 2002), a<br />
relation which is not as straightforward as it has sometimes been understood to be.<br />
In this paper, I will pursue a twofold aim: on <strong>the</strong> one hand, I wish to study <strong>the</strong><br />
particular subjective functions of <strong>the</strong> English progressive, considering such questions<br />
as how <strong>the</strong>se subjective functions can be distinguished <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> aspectual<br />
functions, which different types of subjective progressives we find, and how and<br />
with which frequency <strong>the</strong>y are used in seventeenth and eighteenth century English.<br />
On <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, I wish to add to <strong>the</strong> general discussion of how grammaticalization<br />
and subjectification are typically related.<br />
Before going into any detail, it seems desirable to provide some definitions,<br />
since <strong>the</strong>re is no perfect agreement as to <strong>the</strong> use of <strong>the</strong> terminology. I shall use <strong>the</strong><br />
term ‘grammaticalization’ in a general sense to refer “to <strong>the</strong> steps whereby particular<br />
items become more grammatical through time” (Hopper/Traugott 2003: 2). Especially<br />
in <strong>the</strong> context of <strong>the</strong> relation to subjectification processes, it is important to<br />
fur<strong>the</strong>r distinguish between primary and secondary grammaticalization, following<br />
Traugott’s (forthc.) latest account: primary grammaticalization refers to <strong>the</strong> process<br />
by which a lexical item or items first become(s) grammaticalized, while secondary<br />
grammaticalization refers to developments by which already grammaticalized<br />
items or constructions become more grammatical. Subjectification – <strong>the</strong> process<br />
by which “[m]eanings […] become increasingly based in <strong>the</strong> speaker’s subjective<br />
belief state/attitude toward <strong>the</strong> situation” (Traugott 990: 500) – typically accompanies<br />
only <strong>the</strong> former process, or even precedes it (Traugott forthc.). Subjectification<br />
in this sense is to be understood as a type of semantic change and not, as <strong>the</strong> term<br />
sometimes seems to be understood, as a type of grammaticalization.<br />
The focus of this paper is on a period where one can witness <strong>the</strong> secondary<br />
grammaticalization of <strong>the</strong> progressive, i.e., <strong>the</strong> gradual fixation of its aspectual<br />
function. In this paper I would like to take fur<strong>the</strong>r Traugott’s view that secondary<br />
grammaticalization is not typically accompanied by subjectification. I will argue<br />
that secondary grammaticalization generally ra<strong>the</strong>r leads to more objective meanings.<br />
This will be referred to by <strong>the</strong> term ‘objectification’, which accordingly can be<br />
defined as a process by which items/constructions become less available for <strong>the</strong><br />
expression of <strong>the</strong> speaker’s belief state/attitudes toward a proposition.<br />
I will now examine how this general hypo<strong>the</strong>sis is borne out by <strong>the</strong> development<br />
of <strong>the</strong> English progressive. To get a better idea of <strong>the</strong> general direction of<br />
<strong>the</strong> development, I will first present a very brief summary of <strong>the</strong> development of<br />
<strong>the</strong> meaning of <strong>the</strong> progressive <strong>from</strong> Old English (OE) to Early Modern English<br />
(EModE). Following that, I shall present a categorization of types of subjective<br />
progressives and discuss some problems connected to distinguishing <strong>the</strong>m <strong>from</strong>
Subjective progressives in 7th and 8th century English 43<br />
objective (i.e., aspectual) uses of <strong>the</strong> progressive. The evidence <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> relevant<br />
section of ARCHER-2 (A Representative Corpus of Historical English Registers 2)<br />
will <strong>the</strong>n be analysed. For <strong>the</strong> present purpose, I have analysed <strong>the</strong> seventeenth<br />
and eighteenth century data of <strong>the</strong> corpus, i.e., a subsection of 57 ,887 words. 3<br />
The evidence <strong>from</strong> this corpus study will provide a clear picture of <strong>the</strong> general<br />
development of subjectification and/or objectification of <strong>the</strong> progressive in its<br />
development in <strong>the</strong> seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.<br />
. Subjective and objective meanings of <strong>the</strong> progressive<br />
<strong>from</strong> Old English to Modern English<br />
Progressives generally seem to be used for two reasons in OE: <strong>the</strong>y ei<strong>the</strong>r highlight<br />
<strong>the</strong> imperfective character of a situation or “function [...] as an index of <strong>the</strong> speaker’s<br />
emotional attitude toward <strong>the</strong> propositional content expressed” (Hübler 998: 63).<br />
Hübler offers a number of examples of OE progressives where <strong>the</strong> progressive may<br />
be understood to underline <strong>the</strong> ‘remarkableness’ of an event (Hübler 998: 70),<br />
such as in Wæs he Mellitus mid lichoman untrymnesse mid fotadle swiðe gehefigad<br />
... he glaedlice all eorðlic þing wæs oferhleapende ... “Mellitus suffered severely<br />
<strong>from</strong> bodily infirmity ... , but still, ..., he surmounted with alacrity all earthly<br />
obstacles ...” (Bede’s Ecclesiastical History, 6, 30: example and translation <strong>from</strong><br />
Hübler 998: 69). Although <strong>the</strong>re can be little doubt that <strong>the</strong> progressive had subjective<br />
meanings in OE, it is problematic to consider <strong>the</strong> subjective function as its<br />
core function. Hübler’s ( 998: 86–89) argumentation in favour of this view is not<br />
convincing. He recognizes <strong>the</strong> fact that OE progressives were also used to express<br />
time-frame but claims that <strong>the</strong>se uses are distributionally different <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> progressives<br />
expressing speaker attachment, which he understands as <strong>the</strong> main function<br />
of <strong>the</strong> progressive in OE. But a brief look at OE instances, e.g., those adduced<br />
in Nickel ( 966), shows that aspectual and attitudinal meanings actually coincide<br />
in a number of examples. Nickel expresses <strong>the</strong> contrary position to Hübler: he<br />
believes that a subjective element may be observed in individual examples, but<br />
that this is by no means a systematic function (Nickel 966: 237). According to<br />
him, <strong>the</strong>re is ra<strong>the</strong>r a strong indication that imperfectivity was <strong>the</strong> distinguishing<br />
3. ARCHER-2 altoge<strong>the</strong>r includes nearly 2.5 million words of British and American English,<br />
covering different text types <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> timespan 600– 999. The corpus was accessed in June<br />
2005 at <strong>the</strong> University of Heidelberg. At <strong>the</strong> time, <strong>the</strong> American English part of <strong>the</strong> corpus<br />
only covered later periods, so that <strong>the</strong> data used for <strong>the</strong> present study only consists of British<br />
English.
44 Svenja Kranich<br />
feature of <strong>the</strong> majority of <strong>the</strong> situations expressed by predicates containing <strong>the</strong><br />
progressive in OE (cf. Nickel 966: 238–259). One may opt for an intermediate<br />
position and consider <strong>the</strong> progressive to have a ‘double core meaning’ (i.e., aspectual<br />
and attitudinal meaning), as Rydén ( 997) does. 4<br />
The combination of <strong>the</strong> progressive with always-type adverbials (henceforth<br />
ALWAYS) 5 occurs frequently, both in subjective and objective meanings. In regard<br />
to <strong>the</strong> former meaning, ALWAYS refers to a time-span perceived to be of remarkable<br />
or even excessive length by <strong>the</strong> speaker; in regard to <strong>the</strong> latter, <strong>the</strong> adverb<br />
refers to a situation that objectively holds at all times.<br />
In Middle English (ME), apart <strong>from</strong> a drop in frequency, <strong>the</strong> progressive is<br />
used more or less as in OE: it often refers to imperfective events and is commonly<br />
used “to describe in a vivid and emphatic way” (Mustanoja 960: 594). It also still<br />
regularly co-occurs with ALWAYS (cf. Scheffer 975 2 8–220 for evidence of this<br />
and o<strong>the</strong>r similarities between <strong>the</strong> use of <strong>the</strong> progressive in OE and ME). In EModE<br />
<strong>the</strong> progressive continues to be available for both aspectual and attitudinal functions,<br />
but a change becomes noticeable in regard to its aspectual use: while in OE<br />
and ME <strong>the</strong> progressive is used for imperfective situations in general, in EModE<br />
<strong>the</strong> trend becomes clear that it is more and more restricted to progressive situations,<br />
i.e., situations which are both imperfective and dynamic and hence most<br />
often of limited duration (since dynamic events require an input of energy, which<br />
is normally not endlessly supplied). This has <strong>the</strong> consequence that now ALWAYS,<br />
when combined with <strong>the</strong> progressive, rarely has <strong>the</strong> objective meaning ‘at all times<br />
possible’, as we shall see clearly in <strong>the</strong> following discussion of this type.<br />
3. The three types of subjective progressives in Early<br />
and Late Modern English<br />
Apart <strong>from</strong> this type of subjective progressive, <strong>the</strong> combination of progressive +<br />
ALWAYS (type ), we can distinguish two more types of subjective progressives,<br />
namely subjective progressives without ALWAYS (type 2) and <strong>the</strong> interpretative<br />
progressive (type 3), i.e., <strong>the</strong> use of <strong>the</strong> progressive to signal that a more basic<br />
4. One should underline, however, that it is impossible to find a ‘panchronic core meaning’ for<br />
<strong>the</strong> progressive <strong>from</strong> OE to PDE, double or o<strong>the</strong>rwise, as Rydén ( 997) endeavoured to, since<br />
<strong>the</strong> construction underwent decisive changes in regard to its functions <strong>from</strong> OE to ModE.<br />
. This means adverbials referring to <strong>the</strong> concept expressed by always, perpetually, forever<br />
and similar adverbs and adverbial phrases such as day and night, all <strong>the</strong> time. In OE among<br />
<strong>the</strong> adverbs most commonly occurring with <strong>the</strong> progressive are for instance simle, æfre, aa<br />
(cf. Nickel 966: passim).
Subjective progressives in 7th and 8th century English 4<br />
observed behaviour is commented upon or interpreted by <strong>the</strong> speaker (cf. Ljung<br />
980: 70f.). Examples of all of <strong>the</strong>se can be found in <strong>the</strong> period under consideration<br />
here. 6 Examples <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> seventeenth and eighteenth century data in ARCHER-2<br />
include:<br />
( ) Ay, ay, you are always suspecting me, when Heaven knows I am<br />
such a poor constant Fool, I never so much as dream of any man<br />
but my own dear Fubby (archerii\ 650–99.bre\ 697pix.d )<br />
Type : Subjective progressives with ALWAYS<br />
(2) If you have a good estate, every covetous rogue is longing<br />
for it. (archerii\ 650–99.bre\ 680otwa.d )<br />
Type 2: Subjective progressives without ALWAYS<br />
(3) HARRY. Why, it is possible you may yet receive a valentine.<br />
SOPHIA. Nay, now, but don’t you go to think that I am asking for one;<br />
(archer\ 750–99.bre\ 792holc.d3)<br />
Type 3: Interpretative progressives<br />
The first two types are evidently old and can already be found in OE. 7 Type 3<br />
seems to be younger: it is sparse in <strong>the</strong> seventeenth and eighteenth century data <strong>from</strong><br />
ARCHER-2, but becomes more common in <strong>the</strong> nineteenth century, as Smitterberg’s<br />
analysis of data <strong>from</strong> CONCE shows (cf. Smitterberg 2005: 227–24 ).<br />
. Smitterberg (2005) makes a similar distinction in his treatment of what he terms ‘not-solely<br />
aspectual’ progressives. His criteria for distinguishing <strong>the</strong>se subjective progressives <strong>from</strong> objective,<br />
aspectual progressives are, however, different <strong>from</strong> mine as will become apparent in <strong>the</strong><br />
following section, particularly in my discussion of type 2. My choice to call <strong>the</strong>se progressives<br />
‘subjective’, ra<strong>the</strong>r than ‘not-solely aspectual’ is based on <strong>the</strong> fact that in a number of cases <strong>the</strong>se<br />
progressives do not carry <strong>the</strong> aspectual meaning normally associated with <strong>the</strong> progressive at<br />
all. Particularly in regard to interpretative progressives, type 3, <strong>the</strong> situation expressed in <strong>the</strong><br />
predicate containing <strong>the</strong> progressive is often perfective, cf. e.g., <strong>the</strong> present-day example I am<br />
not speaking to you, where <strong>the</strong> situation cannot possibly be viewed as in progress because <strong>the</strong>n<br />
this sentence could never be truthfully uttered (cf. Ljung 980: 76).<br />
. An example of an OE subjective progressive without ALWAYS was already presented in <strong>the</strong><br />
preceding section; a subjective progressive with ALWAYS <strong>from</strong> OE can be found in <strong>the</strong> following<br />
instance adduced by Goedsche ( 932: 474): þa gehældan hiene þa apostole Petrus & Johannes,<br />
cwiþ seo boc, þæt he up astode & ongunne hliapettan, mied þæm apostolum in þæt temple eode aa<br />
wæs gongende hleapende & Dryghten herigende, “<strong>the</strong>n <strong>the</strong> apostles Peter and John healed him,<br />
and <strong>the</strong> book says that he stood up and began to leap, went with <strong>the</strong> apostles into <strong>the</strong> temple,<br />
and was forever going leaping & praising <strong>the</strong> lord”, where <strong>the</strong> event of <strong>the</strong> ‘going leaping’ is very<br />
remarkable, since <strong>the</strong> person performing it is a leper. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, <strong>the</strong> adverb aa must be interpreted<br />
as a hyperbole, not as objectively refering to ‘all <strong>the</strong> time, at all moments possible’.
4 Svenja Kranich<br />
It is not easy to distinguish between aspectual and subjective progressives.<br />
The first, general criterion I have applied to identify <strong>the</strong> latter is that <strong>the</strong> progressive<br />
must serve as an expression of <strong>the</strong> speaker’s subjective belief state/attitude<br />
toward <strong>the</strong> proposition, and that this should be reasonably understood as <strong>the</strong> main<br />
motivation for <strong>the</strong> use of <strong>the</strong> progressive, unlike in <strong>the</strong> following example:<br />
(4) for <strong>the</strong> troops are all mouldering in <strong>the</strong>ir winter quarters.<br />
(archerii\ 650–99.bre\ 667temp.x 37)<br />
Here, <strong>the</strong> speaker clearly has a certain attitude toward <strong>the</strong> proposition, but<br />
this is expressed by lexical choice (mouldering), while <strong>the</strong> use of <strong>the</strong> progressive is<br />
ra<strong>the</strong>r motivated by <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong> event is viewed as in progress. Thus, if one can<br />
assume that a progressive would have been used regardless of a possible speaker<br />
involvement, <strong>the</strong> use will not be counted as subjective.<br />
3.1 Type : Subjective progressive with ALWAYS<br />
Type is characterized by this general criterion as well as by <strong>the</strong> use of an alwaystype<br />
adverbial. Since EModE times, <strong>the</strong> use of ALWAYS increasingly “signposts<br />
<strong>the</strong> construction as operating modally” (Wright 994: 478). As limited duration is<br />
strongly implied by <strong>the</strong> progressive since EModE, <strong>the</strong>re is a clash when it is combined<br />
with ALWAYS: temporally limited events are not always ongoing – at least<br />
not in <strong>the</strong> objective sense of ‘at all times possible’. This is not to say that a combination<br />
of progressive + ALWAYS in ModE 8 can never refer to an objectively always<br />
ongoing, dynamic event. We can see that this is possible in <strong>the</strong> PDE example The<br />
universe is forever expanding. This example is taken <strong>from</strong> Ljung ( 980: 28) who<br />
explains that<br />
it is part of our knowledge of <strong>the</strong> world that events progress [...] [and that]<br />
this progression <strong>from</strong> beginning to end does not take very long. Because of this,<br />
it is natural to associate all dynamic constructions with temporariness. However,<br />
it is also part of our knowledge that <strong>the</strong> progression <strong>from</strong> beginning to end may<br />
sometimes take very long, and it is not inconceivable that <strong>the</strong>re are events which<br />
go on for ever. (Ljung 980: 28)<br />
Thus, limited duration is not part of <strong>the</strong> meaning of <strong>the</strong> progressive, but it is likely<br />
to be associated with it. The presence of an adverbial of <strong>the</strong> always-type in ModE is,<br />
<strong>the</strong>n, a good indication that we are looking at a subjective progressive (<strong>the</strong> adverb<br />
. The term ModE is used here to refer to <strong>the</strong> English language <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> EModE period<br />
onwards, including present-day use.
Subjective progressives in 7th and 8th century English 4<br />
being used hyperbolically in <strong>the</strong>se cases), but we must still always check that <strong>the</strong><br />
adverb does not refer to something objectively ongoing at all moments in time. 9<br />
3. Type 2: Subjective progressive without ALWAYS<br />
Type 2 proves much more difficult, since no such easily recognizable criterion can<br />
be found. Formal criteria have been proposed for this type in Wright ( 994), 0<br />
which Smitterberg (2005), although more critical, used with some modification<br />
in his analysis. Killie (2004) has already drawn attention to <strong>the</strong> problem of using<br />
such formal criteria. In her study of subjective uses of <strong>the</strong> progressive in EModE,<br />
she chose to concentrate on combinations with always, as <strong>the</strong>se are less prone to<br />
ambiguity. However, in order to get a complete picture, it is necessary to include<br />
also subjective progressives without ALWAYS, because it is intuitively clear that in<br />
such examples as (2) <strong>the</strong> use of <strong>the</strong> progressive is motivated by a desire to express<br />
a subjective attitude. But we clearly need an appropriate method of distinguishing<br />
<strong>the</strong>se uses <strong>from</strong> aspectual progressives.<br />
The formal criteria used by Smitterberg in his study of <strong>the</strong> nineteenth century<br />
uses of <strong>the</strong> progressive are <strong>the</strong> following:<br />
. Tense: The progressive occurs in <strong>the</strong> present, no perfect or modal<br />
auxiliaries.<br />
2. Clause: The progressive occurs in a main ra<strong>the</strong>r than subordinate<br />
clause.<br />
3. Person: It is used with a first- or second-person subject.<br />
4. Situation type: The progressive is part of a stative situation.<br />
(cf. Smitterberg 2005: 22 )<br />
Smitterberg (2005: 220) counted all progressives which fulfil at least three of <strong>the</strong>se<br />
four criteria as subjective. We would like to find whe<strong>the</strong>r this promises good results.<br />
The first problem one may note is that one could think of aspectual ra<strong>the</strong>r than<br />
subjective uses of <strong>the</strong> progressive where all of <strong>the</strong>se formal criteria are still satisfied,<br />
as e.g., in (4) (if one allows <strong>the</strong> interpretation of [moulder in <strong>the</strong>ir winter quarters]<br />
. The semantics of progressive + ALWAYS combinations has been discussed in greater detail<br />
elsewhere (Kranich 2007b).<br />
10. Wright ( 994: 472) based her choice of formal criteria on Biber’s ( 988) and Biber and<br />
Finegan’s ( 989) findings about features that generally tend to occur often in involved speechproduction.<br />
(‘Involved’ refers here to <strong>the</strong> personal involvement of <strong>the</strong> speaker/writer in <strong>the</strong> subject<br />
matter of <strong>the</strong> text, as opposed to ‘detached’.) One should, however, note that <strong>the</strong>se features<br />
were meant to characterize whole text types, and not as indication of <strong>the</strong> subjective or objective<br />
meaning of a specific form.
4 Svenja Kranich<br />
as stative). A much greater risk, however, lies in <strong>the</strong> fact that one seems to miss out<br />
on a great number of progressives which intuitively seem to require a subjective<br />
interpretation and which do not allow an aspectual, progressive reading, e.g.:<br />
(5) if you will needs be tutoring, go teach your Daughter how to behave herself<br />
(archerii\ 650–99.bre\ 67 cary.d 54)<br />
An analysis was made on a subsection of <strong>the</strong> corpus, namely <strong>the</strong> subperiod<br />
650– 699, where I have checked all <strong>the</strong> progressives I had analysed as subjective<br />
with regard to <strong>the</strong> presence of <strong>the</strong> supposed formal markers. 2 The following<br />
results were obtained:<br />
. Tense: 0 out of 9 progressives are in <strong>the</strong> present tense.<br />
2. Clause: 0 out of 9 progressives occur in a main clause. 3<br />
3. Person: 4 out of 9 progressives occur with a first- or second-<br />
person subject.<br />
4. Situation type: 2 out of 9 progressives occur in a stative situation type.<br />
None of <strong>the</strong> progressives in this subperiod of <strong>the</strong> corpus actually fulfils all of<br />
<strong>the</strong> formal criteria. Never<strong>the</strong>less, <strong>the</strong>y are best interpreted as giving expression to<br />
speaker attitude. Fur<strong>the</strong>r examples of type 2 <strong>from</strong> this subperiod include:<br />
(6) if you have a handsome wife, every smooth-faced coxcomb will be combing and<br />
cocking at her (archerii\ 650–99.bre\ 680otwa.d 27)<br />
(7) I’m glad she’s to be lock’d up, – for had any Gentlemen come to see me, she’s<br />
so pert, her Tongue would have been running.<br />
(archerii\ 650–99.bre\ 697pix.d 44)<br />
(8) <strong>the</strong>se Letters <strong>from</strong> my Wife, must serve to draw <strong>the</strong> Woodcocks Bonavent and<br />
Squeezewit in, and since <strong>the</strong>y must be leaping, <strong>the</strong>y shall find it is unsafe to venture<br />
in my Pasture. (archerii\ 650–99.bre\ 693powe.d 67)<br />
In regard to (5)–(8) one can note that a combination of modal + progressive<br />
frequently produces a subjective reading, quite contrary to criterion ). However,<br />
one can clearly not go as far as using <strong>the</strong> combination with a modal as a criterion,<br />
11. The subjective progressives found in this subperiod can be seen as representative for <strong>the</strong><br />
entire period under consideration.<br />
1 . One non-finite example was excluded, since not all of <strong>the</strong> formal criteria could be applied.<br />
O<strong>the</strong>rwise, all subjective progressives of <strong>the</strong> subperiod were taken into account, not just those<br />
classified as belonging to type 2, because <strong>the</strong> formal criteria proposed by Wright ( 994) were<br />
meant to characterise subjective progressives in general.<br />
13. Note that <strong>the</strong>se 0 progressives are not <strong>the</strong> same ones as those fulfilling criterion (Tense).
Subjective progressives in 7th and 8th century English 4<br />
since we also find type 2 progressives without modals, as in (2). The cooccurrence<br />
of subjective progressive with modals should ra<strong>the</strong>r be viewed in <strong>the</strong> light of a<br />
more general criterion, namely that subjective elements tend to cluster: speakers<br />
who wish to express a certain attitude toward a proposition generally seem to do<br />
so by using more than one linguistic marker. This is <strong>the</strong> criterion I applied in my<br />
classification of this type of subjective progressive, so that my analysis is based<br />
on evidence <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> cotext, i.e., on <strong>the</strong> presence of o<strong>the</strong>r devices available for<br />
expressing emotions in close vicinity to <strong>the</strong> progressive. 4 Apart <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> use of<br />
modals, which clearly also express speaker-attitude based meanings, such devices<br />
include subjective markers such as interjections, lexical metaphorizations 5 and<br />
connotation-loaded lexemes (cf. also Hübler 998: 3). 6<br />
3.3 Type 3: Interpretative progressives<br />
The interpretative function of <strong>the</strong> progressive has not been recognized until ra<strong>the</strong>r<br />
recently, which has led to <strong>the</strong> assumption that <strong>the</strong> function as such is also of very<br />
recent date. 7 In my data, interpretative progressives occur <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> earliest subperiod<br />
onwards, i.e., since <strong>the</strong> early seventeenth century, although <strong>the</strong>y are not<br />
nearly as common as in later centuries. The interpretative progressive is characterized<br />
by <strong>the</strong> fact that “all <strong>the</strong> sentences consist of two parts, A and B[…]. The<br />
A part expresses [or consists of] <strong>the</strong> observed behaviour, <strong>the</strong> B part sums up or<br />
interprets this behaviour“ (Ljung 980: 70f.). One can notice that “it is <strong>the</strong> clause<br />
with <strong>the</strong> simple form […] which gives <strong>the</strong> more fundamental description, i.e., <strong>the</strong><br />
14. In his analysis of this type of subjective progressive, Smitterberg (2005: 225f.) also checked<br />
<strong>the</strong> near context of <strong>the</strong> progressive for expressions of emotion. However, he applied this criterion<br />
only to <strong>the</strong> limited set of progressives which fulfilled three out of <strong>the</strong> four formal criteria – a<br />
procedure which will clearly yield a more limited number of instances and, in my view, miss out<br />
on a number of progressives best analysed as subjective.<br />
1 . The importance of metaphorical uses of <strong>the</strong> lexical verb has also been noted in this context<br />
by Fitzmaurice (2004a: 34).<br />
1 . Hübler ( 998) provides a helpful list of linguistic devices available for <strong>the</strong> expression of<br />
speaker-attitude, but he ends up going somewhat too far in his analysis of different grammatical<br />
constructions which he claims to have subjective functions, giving excessive importance to<br />
<strong>the</strong> subjective element in grammar, as e.g., in his claim that <strong>the</strong> subjective meaning is <strong>the</strong> core<br />
function of <strong>the</strong> OE progressive.<br />
1 . Buyssens ( 968: 36– 56) seems to be <strong>the</strong> first to have treated this function systematically.<br />
His claim, though, that no scholar before him had noticed this function is not tenable, since<br />
Charleston ( 955: 276) already recognized that a common use in PDE is that of “equating one<br />
action in <strong>the</strong> unexpanded form with ano<strong>the</strong>r in <strong>the</strong> expanded form, <strong>the</strong> expanded form being in<br />
some way an interpretation of <strong>the</strong> action expressed in <strong>the</strong> unexpanded form”.
0 Svenja Kranich<br />
description which is nearer to <strong>the</strong> merely physical and is less dependent on wider<br />
circumstances” (König 980: 280), as is evident <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> following examples:<br />
(9) A <strong>the</strong>y dooe moste nimbly bestur <strong>the</strong>mselvs<br />
B as if <strong>the</strong>y were dancing <strong>the</strong> Hey. (=interpretation of A)<br />
(archerii\ 600–49.bre\ 634butl.p0b 43)<br />
( 0) A <strong>the</strong>y wished him success, and prayed for him<br />
B as if he had been going to execution.<br />
(archer\ 750–99.bre\ 778reev.f3)<br />
Obviously, it would not be impossible to use a simple form in <strong>the</strong>se contexts.<br />
However, it seems clear that in PDE <strong>the</strong> progressive is <strong>the</strong> preferred form in such<br />
uses (cf. König 980), and this seems to be a trend which is slowly starting in <strong>the</strong><br />
period under consideration here.<br />
It is not necessary for two sentences to be present. If <strong>the</strong>re are, <strong>the</strong> conjunction<br />
as if, as in <strong>the</strong> two examples above, often supports <strong>the</strong> interpretative meaning<br />
of <strong>the</strong> progressive, introducing a comparison which serves to elucidate <strong>the</strong><br />
more basic description. But <strong>the</strong> role of <strong>the</strong> more basic A-part may also be some<br />
activity in <strong>the</strong> communicative situation that all participants are immediately aware<br />
of – often, this will be a speech act, as in (3) Nay, now, but don’t you go to think that<br />
I am asking for one, where <strong>the</strong> speaker rejects an interpretation that she assumes<br />
her interlocutor may have. 8 Such uses generally are not possible with a mere simple<br />
form of <strong>the</strong> verb. Ra<strong>the</strong>r, if a progressive is not chosen, one needs to express<br />
<strong>the</strong> interpretative function differently, e.g., by lexical choice or by a modal element<br />
(e.g., I wouldn’t ever ask for one).<br />
4. Objective progressives<br />
In order to evaluate <strong>the</strong> changing distribution of <strong>the</strong> subjective and objective<br />
meanings of <strong>the</strong> progressive in <strong>the</strong> data, it is necessary to relate very briefly which<br />
objective functions were distinguished. The function of <strong>the</strong> progressive is clearly<br />
a highly controversial topic. The idea that <strong>the</strong> progressive is a marker of aspect<br />
is, however, widely accepted, although whe<strong>the</strong>r it marks <strong>the</strong> general imperfective<br />
or only <strong>the</strong> progressive viewpoint is debated (cf. e.g., Hirtle 967; Goosens 994;<br />
Smith 997: 7 – 74). I have found both uses in <strong>the</strong> data and shall thus differentiate<br />
between <strong>the</strong> general imperfective (abbreviated ‘Imp.’ in <strong>the</strong> table) and <strong>the</strong><br />
progressive function (abbreviated ‘Progr.’) of <strong>the</strong> progressive form. The former is<br />
1 . It has thus been noted by Girard (2002) that it is often verbs of saying that occur in this<br />
function in present-day English.
Subjective progressives in 7th and 8th century English 1<br />
understood to be an aspectual marker which views <strong>the</strong> situation expressed by <strong>the</strong><br />
predicate as having begun and not yet finished at topic time. 9 Progressive aspect<br />
is understood as a specific subtype of this general imperfective category which<br />
fur<strong>the</strong>r qualifies <strong>the</strong> situation as being viewed dynamically, i.e., as in progress<br />
(cf. Bybee, Perkins & Pagliuca 994: 26f.). Ano<strong>the</strong>r controversial aspect of this<br />
topic which, as it is not <strong>the</strong> focus of <strong>the</strong> present paper, I will only briefly touch<br />
upon in this context are <strong>the</strong> particular progressive + perfect effects (such as<br />
absence of result, focus on concomitant effects, cf. König 995: 62f.). 20 These<br />
meanings should be understood as being pragmatically ra<strong>the</strong>r than semantically<br />
determined, that is, as being induceable <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> combination of <strong>the</strong> meanings of<br />
progressive and perfect where, however, <strong>the</strong> context only can offer clues about <strong>the</strong><br />
actuation of one of <strong>the</strong> possible meanings. For <strong>the</strong> present purpose, I have grouped<br />
all of <strong>the</strong>se pragmatic effects toge<strong>the</strong>r. The important criterion for this chapter is<br />
only whe<strong>the</strong>r <strong>the</strong> progressive carries its aspectual meaning (which it clearly does<br />
when <strong>the</strong> product of <strong>the</strong> combination with <strong>the</strong> perfect are such effects as absence<br />
of result, cf. König 995: 63) or whe<strong>the</strong>r its function is ra<strong>the</strong>r subjective, as it is in<br />
<strong>the</strong> following example of an interpretative progressive in <strong>the</strong> perfect:<br />
( ) <strong>the</strong> Insect stood upon <strong>the</strong> inwards bulbous Part, and beat upon <strong>the</strong> outward Coat,<br />
as if it had been working it off as it went (archer\ 700–49.bre\ 724fair.s2 5 )<br />
Quite similar to ( 0), this sentence in <strong>the</strong> past perfect progressive offers a more<br />
speaker-based view of <strong>the</strong> event described neutrally in <strong>the</strong> preceding sentence, using<br />
a comparison, while none of <strong>the</strong> typical effects of <strong>the</strong> combination of perfect<br />
and progressive in aspectual use – such as focus on duration, focus on recency, concomitant<br />
effects and absence of result – can be observed. In contrast, <strong>the</strong> following<br />
example can be classified as an objective/aspectual use of a perfect progressive:<br />
( 2) I was call’d out to see it [an odd apparition in <strong>the</strong> sky], by <strong>the</strong> Servants, who had<br />
been looking at it about half a quarter of an Hour<br />
(archer\ 700–49.bre\ 720perc.s2)<br />
Here, we have <strong>the</strong> typical focus on duration, made explicit by <strong>the</strong> adverbial (about<br />
half a quarter of an hour), and fur<strong>the</strong>rmore <strong>the</strong> situation described by <strong>the</strong> predicate<br />
is ei<strong>the</strong>r still in progress at topic time or only recently stopped.<br />
1 . The term topic time goes back to Klein ( 994: 3) and refers to <strong>the</strong> time for which a claim is<br />
made about <strong>the</strong> situation expressed by <strong>the</strong> predicate.<br />
0. Understanding <strong>the</strong>se meanings as pragmatically determined is preferred here, since<br />
attempts to analyse <strong>the</strong> perfect progressive in a strict formal semantic framework do not seem to<br />
be able to account for all characteristics of actual use (cf. Klein 994 and <strong>the</strong> criticism provided<br />
by Lucko 994).
Svenja Kranich<br />
. Subjective and objective progressives in <strong>the</strong> seventeenth<br />
and eighteenth century data of ARCHER-2<br />
The data <strong>from</strong> ARCHER-2 <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> seventeenth and eighteenth centuries 2 clearly<br />
show a changing distribution of subjective and objective progressives, as shown in<br />
Table :<br />
Table 1. Objective and subjective uses of <strong>the</strong> progressive in <strong>the</strong> 7th and 8th century<br />
data <strong>from</strong> ARCHER-2<br />
Total<br />
Objective Subjective (per<br />
Progr. Obj. Subj. 100,000<br />
Time Imp. Progr. + perf. total Type Type 2 Type 3 total words)<br />
600– 649 6 – 7 2 3 2 7 24<br />
70.8% 29.2% (37.0)<br />
650– 699 3 75 4 82 6 2 2 20 02<br />
80.4% 9.6% (62.7)<br />
700– 749 – 2 0 22 5 2 2 9 4<br />
86.5% 3.5% (82.5)<br />
750– 799 5 5 67 4 3 8 75<br />
95.4% 4.6% ( 0 .0)<br />
It is evident <strong>from</strong> table that <strong>the</strong> objective functions are on a steady increase in<br />
<strong>the</strong> time-span under consideration, while <strong>the</strong> subjective uses decrease in relative<br />
frequency (even as <strong>the</strong> total frequency of all progressives is increasing). This can<br />
clearly be linked to <strong>the</strong> grammaticalization process <strong>the</strong> progressive is undergoing<br />
at that time.<br />
1. The subperiod 600– 649 was still under construction when I had <strong>the</strong> opportunity to<br />
access <strong>the</strong> corpus at <strong>the</strong> University of Heidelberg in June 2005. It includes only texts <strong>from</strong> two<br />
different text types, namely drama and fiction, while <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r half-centuries taken into account<br />
here include eight different text types (apart <strong>from</strong> drama and fiction, <strong>the</strong>se are news, journals,<br />
medical texts, science, religious texts and private letters), and it also includes a smaller number<br />
of words (64,92 words, while <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r half centuries all have round about 70,000). Therefore,<br />
<strong>the</strong> results concerning <strong>the</strong> first half century will have to be taken with a grain of salt. Never<strong>the</strong>less,<br />
I have included this time-span, since <strong>the</strong> numbers are still suggestive. Whe<strong>the</strong>r this halfcentury<br />
is included or not does not change anything about <strong>the</strong> general trend that appears clearly<br />
with or without its inclusion.
Subjective progressives in 7th and 8th century English 3<br />
. The relation between subjectification/objectification<br />
and grammaticalization<br />
The reason why we find that objectification ra<strong>the</strong>r than subjectification accompanies<br />
<strong>the</strong> grammaticalization of <strong>the</strong> progressive in seventeenth- and eighteenthcentury<br />
English can be found in <strong>the</strong> fact that <strong>the</strong> progressive is undergoing a<br />
secondary grammaticalization process – a process through which a construction<br />
becomes more clearly grammatical, e.g., as its functions become a more fixed part<br />
of grammar. If we look at <strong>the</strong> preceding development of <strong>the</strong> form, we find that most<br />
scholars agree that <strong>the</strong> progressive had a peripheral status in grammar <strong>from</strong> OE<br />
up to EModE – it could be used for <strong>the</strong> expression of aspectual meaning, but was not<br />
obligatory in any context, and <strong>the</strong> choice was ra<strong>the</strong>r determined by idiosyncratic<br />
taste and questions of style. Now, in <strong>the</strong> seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, it<br />
gradually becomes a part of <strong>the</strong> English tense-aspect system. In <strong>the</strong> nineteenth<br />
century this development will proceed fur<strong>the</strong>r, as visible in a fur<strong>the</strong>r considerable<br />
rise in frequency (cf. Arnaud 983, 998) and in such new developments as<br />
a formally marked passive (cf. Pratt & Denison 2000; Hundt 2004). But already in<br />
<strong>the</strong> eighteenth century <strong>the</strong> trend is very clear: in Table , we can see a steady rise<br />
in frequency and a clear change in <strong>the</strong> distributions of <strong>the</strong> objective and subjective<br />
functions. Over ninety percent of progressives in <strong>the</strong> second half of <strong>the</strong> eighteenth<br />
century are used to express aspectual meaning: in o<strong>the</strong>r words, <strong>the</strong> aspectual function<br />
clearly becomes <strong>the</strong> main one.<br />
The increase in <strong>the</strong> use of <strong>the</strong> form for aspectual functions, associated with<br />
<strong>the</strong> greater fixation of <strong>the</strong> grammatical meaning, necessarily lead to a decrease in<br />
<strong>the</strong> subjective functions of <strong>the</strong> construction, because, as <strong>the</strong> aspectual meaning<br />
becomes more fixed, <strong>the</strong> construction ceases to be available for <strong>the</strong> expression of<br />
speaker attitude in certain contexts. 22 This is obvious in PDE: if I must say I am<br />
working right now, because *I work right now would be ungrammatical, <strong>the</strong>n I can<br />
obviously no longer invest <strong>the</strong> progressive in such contexts with any subjective<br />
shades of meaning. For an element to be available for <strong>the</strong> expression of speaker<br />
attitude, <strong>the</strong> speaker has to be free to choose whe<strong>the</strong>r or not to use it (cf. Hübler<br />
998: 5), so as soon as an element or construction has become an obligatory element<br />
of grammar, its meaning cannot become enriched any more by inferences<br />
that can produce subjective meaning. The present study of one particular secondary<br />
grammaticalization process may look like a slender empirical basis to support<br />
<strong>the</strong> general claim that secondary grammaticalization typically is accompanied by<br />
. The decline is both relative (<strong>from</strong> 29% to 5% of all progressives) and absolute (<strong>from</strong><br />
instances per 00,000 words to 5).
4 Svenja Kranich<br />
a decrease or loss of subjective meanings, by objectification – but <strong>the</strong> one seems a<br />
logical consequence of <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r. Fur<strong>the</strong>rmore, studies of o<strong>the</strong>r secondary grammaticalization<br />
processes show similar tendencies (Kranich 2007a). In Kranich<br />
(2007a), <strong>the</strong> grammaticalization of progressive constructions in <strong>the</strong> Romance<br />
languages was studied, and a similar tendency could be observed: subjective meanings<br />
are evidenced early on (when <strong>the</strong> constructions just emerge), but when <strong>the</strong><br />
constructions acquire more clearly grammatical functions in secondary grammaticalization,<br />
such meanings get lost or become uncommon. 23 The reason behind<br />
such a general tendency is quite clear: in <strong>the</strong> course of secondary grammaticalization<br />
processes, elements or constructions acquire more fixed, more grammatical<br />
meanings, eventually often acquiring obligatory status. In <strong>the</strong>se obligatory uses,<br />
<strong>the</strong>y can be expected to lose <strong>the</strong> ability of expressing speaker attitude, thus overall<br />
tending toward <strong>the</strong> more objective as <strong>the</strong>y become more grammatical.<br />
Source of data<br />
ARCHER-2, A Representative Corpus of Historical English Registers 2. 990– 993/2002. Compiled<br />
under <strong>the</strong> supervision of Douglas Biber and Edward Finegan at Nor<strong>the</strong>rn Arizona University,<br />
University of Sou<strong>the</strong>rn California, University of Freiburg, University of Helsinki,<br />
Uppsala University and University of Heidelberg.<br />
References<br />
Arnaud, René. 983. On <strong>the</strong> progress of <strong>the</strong> progressive in <strong>the</strong> private correspondence of famous<br />
British People ( 800– 880). <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Second Scandinavian Symposium on Syntactic<br />
Variation ed. by Sven Jacobson, 83–94. Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell.<br />
Arnaud, René. 998. The development of <strong>the</strong> progressive in 9th century English: A quantitative<br />
survey. Language Variation and Change 0: 23– 52.<br />
Biber, Douglas. 988. Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br />
Biber, Douglas Edward Finegan. 989. Drift and <strong>the</strong> Evolution of English Style: A History of<br />
three genres. Language 65: 487–5 7.<br />
Buyssens, Eric. 968. Les deux aspectifs de la conjugaison anglaise au XXe siècle. Étude de<br />
l’expression de l’aspect. Bruxelles: Presses Universitaires de Bruxelles.<br />
Bybee, Joan, Revere Perkins and William Pagliuca. 994. The Evolution of Grammar. Tense, Aspect<br />
and Modality in <strong>the</strong> Languages of <strong>the</strong> World. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.<br />
3. The focus of Kranich (2007a) was on <strong>the</strong> Romance progressives, but future expressions and<br />
perfects were also briefly touched upon. Cross-linguistic comparison of more and less grammaticalized<br />
expressions of such grams indicated a similar direction of change. These will be<br />
promising candidates for fur<strong>the</strong>r investigation.
Subjective progressives in 7th and 8th century English<br />
Charleston, Britta M. 955. A reconsideration of <strong>the</strong> problem of time, tense, and aspect in<br />
Modern English. English Studies 36: 263–278.<br />
Curzan, Anne and Kimberly Emmons, eds. 2004. Studies in <strong>the</strong> History of <strong>the</strong> English Language<br />
II: Unfolding Conversations. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.<br />
Fitzmaurice, Susan M. 2004a. The Meanings and Uses of <strong>the</strong> Progressive Construction in an<br />
Early Eighteenth-Century English Network. Curzan & Emmons 2004: 3 – 73.<br />
Fitzmaurice, Susan M. 2004b. A Brief Response. Curzan & Emmons 2004. 83– 87.<br />
Girard, Géneviève. 2002. Aspect, choix sémiques, valeur de vérité. Temps et aspect: de la grammaire<br />
au lexique, ed. by Véronique Lagae, Anne Carlier & Céline Benninger, 79–96.<br />
Amsterdam: Rodopi.<br />
Goedsche, C.R. 932. The Terminate Aspect of <strong>the</strong> Expanded Form: Its Development and Its<br />
Relation to <strong>the</strong> Gerund. The Journal of English and Germanic Philology 3 : 469–47 .<br />
Goosens, Louis. 994. The English progressive tenses and <strong>the</strong> layered representation of Functional<br />
Grammar. Tense and Aspect in Discourse, ed. by Co Vet and Carl Vetters, 6 – 77.<br />
Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.<br />
Hirtle, Walter H. 967. The simple and progressive forms. An analytical approach. Québec:<br />
Les presses de l’université Laval.<br />
Hopper, Paul and Elizabeth Closs Traugott. 2003. Grammaticalization. 2nd edition. Cambridge:<br />
Cambridge University Press.<br />
Hübler, Axel. 998. The Expressivity of Grammar. Grammatical Devices Expressing Emotion<br />
across Time. Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.<br />
Hundt, Marianne. 2004. The Passival and <strong>the</strong> Progressive Passive: A Case Study of Layering in<br />
<strong>the</strong> English Aspect and voice Systems. Corpus Approaches to Grammaticalization in English<br />
ed. by Hans Lindquist & Christian Mair, 79– 20. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.<br />
Killie, Kristin. 2004. Subjectivity and <strong>the</strong> English Progressive. English Language and Linguistics<br />
8: 25–46.<br />
Klein, Wolfgang. 994. Time in Language. London: Routledge.<br />
König, Ekkehard. 980. On <strong>the</strong> Context-Dependence of <strong>the</strong> Progressive in English. Time, Tense,<br />
and Quantifiers: Proceedings of <strong>the</strong> Stuttgart Conference on <strong>the</strong> logic of tense and quantification<br />
ed. by Christian Rohrer, 269–29 . Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.<br />
König, Ekkehard. 995. On analyzing <strong>the</strong> tense-aspect system of English: a state of-<strong>the</strong>-art report.<br />
Proceedings Anglistentag 1994, Graz ed. by Wolfgang Riehle, 53– 69. Tübingen: Niemeyer.<br />
Kranich, Svenja. 2007a. Grammaticalization, subjectification and ‘objectifications’. Paper presented<br />
at <strong>the</strong> workshop What’s new about grammaticalization?, Freie Universität Berlin, May 2007.<br />
Kranich, Svenja. 2007b. Subjectification and <strong>the</strong> English Progressive. The History of ALWAYS +<br />
Progressive Constructions. York <strong>Papers</strong> in Linguistics (Series 2) 8: 20– 37.<br />
Ljung, Magnus. 980. Reflections on <strong>the</strong> English Progressive. Go<strong>the</strong>nburg: Acta Universitatis<br />
Gothoburgensis.<br />
Lucko, Peter. 995. Between Aspect, Actionality and Modality: The Functions of <strong>the</strong> Expanded Form.<br />
Proceedings Anglistentag 1994, Graz ed. by Wolfgang Riehle, 53– 69. Tübingen: Niemeyer.<br />
Mustanoja, Tauno. 960. A Middle English syntax, Vol. I: Parts of speech. Helsinki: Société<br />
Néophilologique.<br />
Nickel, Gerhard. 966. Die Expanded Form im Altenglischen. Neumünster: Karl Wachholtz Verlag.<br />
Onions, Charles Talbut. 904. An Advanced English Syntax. London: Sonnenschein.<br />
Pratt, Lynda and David, Denison. 2000. The Language of <strong>the</strong> Sou<strong>the</strong>y-Coleridge Circle. Language<br />
Sciences 22: 40 –22.
Svenja Kranich<br />
Rydén, Mats. 997. On <strong>the</strong> Panchronic Core Meaning of <strong>the</strong> English Progressive. To explain <strong>the</strong><br />
present. Studies in <strong>the</strong> changing English language in Honour of Matti Rissanen ed. by Terttu<br />
Nevalainen & Leena Kahlas-Tarkka, 4 9–429. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.<br />
Scheffer, Johannes. 975. The Progressive in English. Amsterdam: North Holland.<br />
Smith, Carlota S. 997. The parameter of Aspect. 2nd edition. Dordrecht, Boston and London:<br />
Kluwer Academic Publishers.<br />
Smitterberg, Erik. 2004. Investigating <strong>the</strong> Expressive Progressive: On Susan M. Fitzmaurice’s<br />
‘The Meanings and Uses of <strong>the</strong> Progressive Construction in an Early Eighteenth-Century<br />
English Network. Curzan & Emmons 2004: 75– 82.<br />
Smitterberg, Erik. 2005. The progressive in 19th-century English. A process of integration. Amsterdam,<br />
New York: Rodopi.<br />
Storms, G. 964. The Subjective and <strong>the</strong> Objective Form in Mdn English. English Studies.<br />
Supplement presented to R.W. Zandvoort on <strong>the</strong> occasion of his seventieh birthday. 57–63.<br />
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 990. From less to more situated in language: <strong>the</strong> unidirectionality<br />
of semantic change. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Fifth <strong>International</strong> Conference on English Historical<br />
Linguistics ed. by Sylvia Adamson, Vivien Law, Nigel Vincent & Susan Wright, 497–5 7.<br />
Amsterdam: John Benjamins.<br />
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs. 995. Subjectification in grammaticalisation. Subjectivity and subjectivisation:<br />
linguistic perspectives ed. by Dieter Stein & Susan Wright, 3 –54. Cambridge:<br />
Cambridge University Press.<br />
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs and Richard B. Dasher. 2002. Regularity in Semantic Change.<br />
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.<br />
Traugott, Elizabeth Closs (forthcoming). From ideational to interpersonal. A reassesment. Subjectification,<br />
intersubjectification and grammaticalization ed. by Hubert Cuyckens, Kristin<br />
Davidse & Lieven Vandelanotte. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.<br />
Wright, Susan. 994. The mystery of <strong>the</strong> modal progressive. Studies in Early Modern English<br />
ed. by Dieter Kastovsky, 467–485. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Index of subjects, terms & languages<br />
Note: This index does not claim to be exhaustive. For instance, too familiar subjects<br />
with no special relevance to <strong>the</strong> discussion have been omitted.<br />
A<br />
adjunction 109, 118, 120, 123<br />
adposition 160, 168<br />
adverbs 3, 4, 6, 8–10, 12, 13,<br />
15, 119<br />
adverbs, derived 3, 8, 29, 38,<br />
70, 89, 98, 106, 109, 118,<br />
119, 123, 163, 183, 184, 186,<br />
190, 191, 193, 203<br />
affixation 184, 192, 193<br />
affixation, suspended 184, 198<br />
agreement phrase 161, 173<br />
Alfredian model of ‘good’<br />
Anglo-Saxon 39<br />
analogical extension 25, 39,<br />
41, 46<br />
anaphoric reference 3, 4, 11,<br />
60, 95<br />
Anglian dialect 26–9<br />
aspectual distinctions 32, 33<br />
asymmetry 133, 134, 198<br />
auxiliary of <strong>the</strong> passive 25<br />
B<br />
Becuman 23, 25–7, 29, 35–46<br />
brachylogy, morphological<br />
194–199<br />
C<br />
clause types 49, 53, 55, 56, 65<br />
cleft constructions 203, 204,<br />
209, 210<br />
collocation 23, 41, 42, 45, 163,<br />
192<br />
complement constructions 223,<br />
229, 230, 239<br />
complex predicates 157–179<br />
Construction Grammar 23,<br />
29, 30<br />
conversion 166, 167, 170, 185–7,<br />
193, 94, 196, 199<br />
complement constructions 223,<br />
229, 230, 239<br />
complex predicates 157, 159,<br />
160–5, 169, 175–7<br />
conditions on adjunction 118<br />
coordinate clauses 49,–65<br />
coordination 56, 60, 64, 183,<br />
184, 187, 191–99<br />
copula 52, 54, 55, 61, 63, 85, 127,<br />
128, 209, 212<br />
copula-constructions 23–26,<br />
29, 30, 33–9, 42, 44, 46<br />
D<br />
deadjectival verb 174, 176<br />
denominal verbs 157, 166, 167,<br />
173, 176, 177<br />
derivational paradigm 193<br />
dialect 26–30, 105, 106, 129,<br />
138, 205, 211, 216<br />
dialectal variation 141–156<br />
discourse 3, 4, 7, 8, 10–20, 56,<br />
128, 211<br />
discourse partitioners 3, 8<br />
discourse strategies 3, 4<br />
E<br />
eall 109–18, 121–23<br />
Early Middle English (eME) 6,<br />
23, 27, 50, 55, 135, 143, 149,<br />
150, 151, 153–55<br />
Early Modern English<br />
(EModE) 75, 76, 78, 79,<br />
84, 86, 125, 126, 128, 133,<br />
138, 142, 183, 185, 190, 191,<br />
195, 196, 205, 230, 242<br />
ellipsis 183, 184, 194, 196, 198<br />
ellipsis, morphological 183,<br />
184, 194, 196, 198<br />
eighteenth-century English 253<br />
Emergent Grammar 218<br />
emotion matrix verbs 223, 227<br />
English 1, 3, 4, 6–8, 10–12, 15,<br />
19, 20, 49–52, 54, 55, 57,<br />
60–2, 65–7, 69–2, 74–9,<br />
81–7, 109, 111, 125–8, 131–8,<br />
141–55, 203–6, 209, 211–3,<br />
216, 219<br />
emancipation 42, 46<br />
existential verbs 49, 52, 53,<br />
55–8, 61<br />
extraposed relative clauses 152<br />
extraposition 133, 141, 142, 151,<br />
154, 155<br />
F<br />
floating quantifier 110, 111, 115,<br />
116, 120, 122<br />
focalized progressive 69, 70,<br />
72, 75, 86<br />
focus 8–10, 12, 13, 15, 50, 62, 63,<br />
72, 75, 203–05, 207, 209,<br />
210, 212, 213, 218<br />
focus marker 210–12, 214<br />
frame construction 72, 76, 78,<br />
79, 86<br />
French 69, 127, 132, 133, 203,<br />
208, 209, 217<br />
functional perspective 49, 50, 65<br />
G<br />
gap relativization strategy 147<br />
generalized linear mixed effect<br />
model 18<br />
general validity predications 226,<br />
234, 236–39
258 Index of subjects, terms & languages<br />
grammaticalization 73, 79,<br />
84, 86<br />
Gregory’s Dialogue 28<br />
ground 207<br />
H<br />
head-adjunction 120, 123<br />
high-level construction 29, 32<br />
high-level schemas 32<br />
historical dialectology 141,<br />
142, 145<br />
I<br />
identificational copular<br />
clauses 203, 204<br />
imperfectivity 73, 74<br />
information content 49, 63, 65<br />
-ing construction 229–31<br />
interpretative progressive 244,<br />
249, 251<br />
intransitive predication constructions<br />
45<br />
intraposed relative clause 152<br />
intraposition 154, 155<br />
invariable relativization strategy<br />
147<br />
it-cleft 207, 211, 213, 214, 215,<br />
217, 218<br />
L<br />
Late Middle English (LME)<br />
207<br />
Late Modern English (LModE)<br />
181–7, 190, 199, 223, 224,<br />
228, 229, 233, 239, 244<br />
Late Old English (LOE) 54, 103,<br />
104, 143, 148–50, 153, 154<br />
left-dislocated relative<br />
clauses 152<br />
left-dislocation 59, 151, 154, 155<br />
lexeme-independent constructional<br />
copula network 33<br />
Lexical Conceptual Structure<br />
166<br />
locative hypo<strong>the</strong>sis 70, 84<br />
locative progressive 74<br />
low-level constructions 29<br />
M<br />
manner of motion verbs 174,<br />
176<br />
marker of <strong>the</strong> future 35<br />
Middle English (ME) 1, 6, 23,<br />
26, 27, 38, 42, 49, 50, 52,<br />
55, 65–7, 69, 71, 72, 75, 76,<br />
78, 79, 81–4, 86, 87, 103,<br />
104, 125, 127, 132, 135, 136,<br />
138, 141–6, 148–51, 153–55,<br />
170, 172, 191, 205, 207, 239,<br />
241, 244<br />
Midlands dialect 143, 144, 146,<br />
149, 150, 154, 155<br />
modalised construction 230,<br />
231, 235, 236<br />
morphological 13, 89, 92–4,<br />
100, 133, 134, 137, 138, 183,<br />
184, 193–9<br />
N<br />
network of constructions 25, 30<br />
non-agentivity 32<br />
non-volitionality 32<br />
non-coordinate clauses 49, 51,<br />
53–64<br />
North-South divide 142, 144,<br />
146, 154, 155<br />
Nor<strong>the</strong>rn (English) 126, 133,<br />
141–5<br />
O<br />
object pronoun 12, 207, 209,<br />
210, 217, 218, 219<br />
object transfer 169<br />
objectification 241–3, 253, 254<br />
Old English (OE) 110, 205<br />
Old English poetry 27, 39<br />
Ormulum 28<br />
P<br />
paradigm 16, 19, 142, 145, 147,<br />
154, 216<br />
paradigm, derivational 193<br />
paradigmatic selection 183,<br />
184, 193, 195–7, 199<br />
parataxis-to-hypotaxis<br />
hypo<strong>the</strong>sis 143, 151<br />
participle 69<br />
particle 8, 11, 15, 19<br />
passive construction 42–4,<br />
46, 138<br />
passive participle 24, 32, 35<br />
passive participle construction<br />
24<br />
paths 73<br />
perfect participle<br />
construction 24<br />
personal pronouns 4, 5, 7,<br />
94, 203<br />
phrasal verbs 157, 163–5, 173, 175<br />
prefixes 159, 166, 173<br />
preposition 69, 71, 147<br />
prepositional passive 43<br />
prescriptive grammarians 203,<br />
212<br />
present-day English 109, 134<br />
presupposition 10, 14, 72<br />
PROG imperfective drift 69,<br />
70, 73, 75, 78, 85, 86<br />
progressive 69–86<br />
pronominal relativization<br />
strategy 147<br />
Q<br />
quantifier phrase 117, 120<br />
quantitative analysis 3, 4, 16, 219<br />
R<br />
relative clause 11, 117, 141–3,<br />
146, 147, 151–55, 207, 210,<br />
211, 213–5, 217, 218<br />
relative marking 211<br />
relativization 141–3, 145–8,<br />
151, 211<br />
relativizer 146, 148–50, 154,<br />
207, 210, 211<br />
resultatives 165, 167<br />
rhythm 203<br />
Romance 71, 74, 75<br />
S<br />
satellite-framed languages 176<br />
schematic construction 165,<br />
167<br />
se, seo, þæt 10, 11, 13, 93–5,<br />
101, 146<br />
semantic bleaching 166<br />
seventeenth-century<br />
English 241, 242, 253<br />
Sou<strong>the</strong>rn dialect 27, 141, 142, 150<br />
specific predication 229, 232<br />
speech-based registers 207<br />
standardization 205<br />
stative progressive 75, 80–86<br />
structural reanalysis 42<br />
subjective progressive 246, 247<br />
subject pronoun 12, 203, 208, 218<br />
subjectification 241–243
SVX pattern 55, 62, 63<br />
symmetry 183, 188, 189, 194,<br />
195, 199<br />
syntactic cliticization 5<br />
T<br />
telicity 159, 164<br />
<strong>the</strong>matic role 161<br />
time stability 44–46<br />
time-stable predicate 42, 46<br />
time-unstable predicate 42,<br />
44–5<br />
to-infinitive 223–9, 231, 232,<br />
236–39<br />
topic function 43<br />
topicalization 211<br />
topicalizing strategy 43<br />
transitive construction 35, 45<br />
truncated it-clefts 214, 217, 218<br />
U<br />
unaccusative 121, 122, 126, 135<br />
unergative verbs 171–3<br />
‘unselected’ objects 157, 161,<br />
163, 164, 171, 173, 174,<br />
176, 77<br />
V<br />
verb-framed languages 176<br />
verb-medial 49, 51, 58, 62, 65<br />
verb-second 49, 51, 58, 62,<br />
126, 145<br />
verb distribution 49, 62, 65<br />
verbs with complement 49, 52,<br />
55, 57–9, 60–2<br />
verbs without complement 49,<br />
52, 53<br />
verb types 49, 51, 53, 54, 58, 60,<br />
64, 65, 81<br />
W<br />
weak demonstratives 10<br />
word order 3–5, 8, 12, 49–51,<br />
53, 54, 57–9, 60–3, 65, 114,<br />
121, 205<br />
West-Germanic 8, 176<br />
Index of subjects, terms & languages 259<br />
West Saxon 26, 80, 142, 144,<br />
145, 148, 150<br />
wh-relativizer 146<br />
word order 3, 5, 8, 12, 43, 49,<br />
50–55, 57–63, 65, 102, 114,<br />
117, 121, 145, 157, 171, 205<br />
X<br />
XVS (pattern) 49, 55, 56, 58,<br />
61, 65<br />
XSV (pattern) 49, 50, 55, 61, 62<br />
Y<br />
YCOE: The York-Toronto-<br />
Helsinki Parsed Corpus of<br />
Old English Prose 6, 16,<br />
18, 27, 111<br />
Z<br />
zero morphology 183, 185<br />
zero relative clauses 147–9,<br />
210, 211
CURRENT ISSUES IN LINGUISTIC THEORY<br />
E. F. K. Koerner, Editor<br />
Zentrum für Allgemeine Sprachwissenschaft, Typologie<br />
und Universalienforschung, Berlin<br />
efk.koerner@rz.hu-berlin.de<br />
Current Issues in Linguistic Theory (CILT) is a <strong>the</strong>ory-oriented series which welcomes contributions <strong>from</strong><br />
scholars who have significant proposals to make towards <strong>the</strong> advancement of our understanding of language,<br />
its structure, functioning and development. CILT has been established in order to provide a forum<br />
for <strong>the</strong> presentation and discussion of linguistic opinions of scholars who do not necessarily accept <strong>the</strong><br />
prevailing mode of thought in linguistic science. It offers an outlet for meaningful contributions to <strong>the</strong><br />
current linguistic debate, and furnishes <strong>the</strong> diversity of opinion which a healthy discipline must have.<br />
A complete list of titles in this series can be found on <strong>the</strong> publishers’ website, www.benjamins.com<br />
299 González-Díaz, Victorina: English Adjective Comparison. A historical perspective.<br />
xvii, 247 pp. + index. Expected August 2008<br />
298 Bowern, Claire, Bethwyn eVans and luisa MiCeli (eds.): Morphology and Language History. In<br />
honour of Harold Koch. 2008. x, 364 pp.<br />
297 Dossena, Marina, richard Dury and Maurizio Gotti (eds.): English Historical Linguistics 2006.<br />
Volume III: Geo-Historical Variation in English. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> fourteenth <strong>International</strong><br />
Conference on English Historical Linguistics (ICEHL 14), Bergamo, 21–25 August 2006. 2008. xiii, 197 pp.<br />
296 Dury, richard, Maurizio Gotti and Marina Dossena (eds.): English Historical Linguistics 2006.<br />
Volume II: Lexical and Semantic Change. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> fourteenth <strong>International</strong> Conference on<br />
English Historical Linguistics (ICEHL 14), Bergamo, 21–25 August 2006. 2008. xiii, 264 pp.<br />
295 Gotti, Maurizio, Marina Dossena and richard Dury (eds.): English Historical Linguistics 2006.<br />
Volume I: Syntax and Morphology. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> fourteenth <strong>International</strong> Conference on<br />
English Historical Linguistics (ICEHL 14), Bergamo, 21–25 August 2006. 2008. xiv, 259 pp.<br />
294 FrellesViG, Bjarke and John whitMan (eds.): Proto-Japanese. Issues and Prospects. 2008. vii, 229 pp.<br />
293 DetGes, ulrich and richard waltereit (eds.): The Paradox of Grammatical Change. Perspectives<br />
<strong>from</strong> Romance. 2008. vi, 252 pp.<br />
292 niColoV, nicolas, Kalina BontCheVa, Galia anGeloVa and ruslan MitKoV (eds.): Recent<br />
Advances in Natural Language Processing IV. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> RANLP 2005. 2007. xii, 307 pp.<br />
291 Baauw, sergio, Frank DriJKoninGen and Manuela Pinto (eds.): Romance Languages and<br />
Linguistic Theory 2005. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> ‘Going Romance’, Utrecht, 8–10 December 2005. 2007.<br />
viii, 338 pp.<br />
290 MuGhazy, Mustafa a. (ed.): Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics XX. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> twentieth annual<br />
symposium on Arabic linguistics, Kalamazoo, Michigan, March 2006. 2007. xii, 247 pp.<br />
289 BenMaMoun, elabbas (ed.): Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics XIX. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> nineteenth annual<br />
symposium on Arabic Linguistics, Urbana, Illinois, April 2005. 2007. xiv, 304 pp.<br />
288 toiVonen, ida and Diane nelson (eds.): Saami Linguistics. 2007. viii, 321 pp.<br />
287 CaMaCho, José, nydia Flores-Ferrán, liliana sánChez, Viviane DéPrez and María José<br />
CaBrera (eds.): Romance Linguistics 2006. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 36th Linguistic Symposium on<br />
Romance Languages (LSRL), New Brunswick, March-April 2006. 2007. viii, 340 pp.<br />
286 weiJer, Jeroen van de and erik Jan van der torre (eds.): Voicing in Dutch. (De)voicing – phonology,<br />
phonetics, and psycholinguistics. 2007. x, 186 pp.<br />
285 saCKMann, robin (ed.): Explorations in Integrational Linguistics. Four essays on German, French, and<br />
Guaraní. 2008. ix, 239 pp.<br />
284 salMons, Joseph C. and shannon DuBenion-sMith (eds.): Historical Linguistics 2005. <strong>Selected</strong><br />
papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 17th <strong>International</strong> Conference on Historical Linguistics, Madison, Wisconsin, 31 July - 5<br />
August 2005. 2007. viii, 413 pp.<br />
283 lenKer, ursula and anneli MeurMan-solin (eds.): Connectives in <strong>the</strong> History of English. 2007.<br />
viii, 318 pp.<br />
282 Prieto, Pilar, Joan MasCaró and Maria-Josep solé (eds.): Segmental and prosodic issues in<br />
Romance phonology. 2007. xvi, 262 pp.<br />
281 VerMeerBerGen, Myriam, lorraine leeson and onno CrasBorn (eds.): Simultaneity in Signed<br />
Languages. Form and function. 2007. viii, 360 pp. (incl. CD-Rom).<br />
280 hewson, John and Vit BuBeniK: From Case to Adposition. The development of configurational syntax<br />
in Indo-European languages. 2006. xxx, 420 pp.
279 neDerGaarD thoMsen, ole (ed.): Competing Models of Linguistic Change. Evolution and beyond.<br />
2006. vi, 344 pp.<br />
278 DoetJes, Jenny and Paz González (eds.): Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2004. <strong>Selected</strong><br />
papers <strong>from</strong> ‘Going Romance’, Leiden, 9–11 December 2004. 2006. viii, 320 pp.<br />
277 helasVuo, Marja-liisa and lyle CaMPBell (eds.): Grammar <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Human Perspective. Case,<br />
space and person in Finnish. 2006. x, 280 pp.<br />
276 Montreuil, Jean-Pierre y. (ed.): New Perspectives on Romance Linguistics. Vol. II: Phonetics,<br />
Phonology and Dialectology. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 35th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages<br />
(LSRL), Austin, Texas, February 2005. 2006. x, 213 pp.<br />
275 nishiDa, Chiyo and Jean-Pierre y. Montreuil (eds.): New Perspectives on Romance Linguistics. Vol.<br />
I: Morphology, Syntax, Semantics, and Pragmatics. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 35th Linguistic Symposium on<br />
Romance Languages (LSRL), Austin, Texas, February 2005. 2006. xiv, 288 pp.<br />
274 Gess, randall s. and Deborah arteaGa (eds.): Historical Romance Linguistics. Retrospective and<br />
perspectives. 2006. viii, 393 pp.<br />
273 FilPPula, Markku, Juhani KleMola, Marjatta PalanDer and esa Penttilä (eds.): Dialects<br />
Across Borders. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 11th <strong>International</strong> Conference on Methods in Dialectology<br />
(Methods XI), Joensuu, August 2002. 2005. xii, 291 pp.<br />
272 Gess, randall s. and edward J. ruBin (eds.): Theoretical and Experimental Approaches to Romance<br />
Linguistics. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 34th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Salt Lake<br />
City, March 2004. 2005. viii, 367 pp.<br />
271 Branner, David Prager (ed.): The Chinese Rime Tables. Linguistic philosophy and historicalcomparative<br />
phonology. 2006. viii, 358 pp.<br />
270 Geerts, twan, ivo van GinneKen and haike JaCoBs (eds.): Romance Languages and Linguistic<br />
Theory 2003. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> ‘Going Romance’ 2003, Nijmegen, 20–22 November. 2005. viii, 369 pp.<br />
269 harGus, sharon and Keren riCe (eds.): Athabaskan Prosody. 2005. xii, 432 pp.<br />
268 CraVens, Thomas D. (ed.): Variation and Reconstruction. 2006. viii, 223 pp.<br />
267 alhawary, Mohammad t. and elabbas BenMaMoun (eds.): Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics<br />
XVII–XVIII. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> seventeenth and eighteenth annual symposia on Arabic linguistics. Volume<br />
XVII–XVIII: Alexandria, 2003 and Norman, Oklahoma 2004. 2005. xvi, 315 pp.<br />
266 BouDelaa, sami (ed.): Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics XVI. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> sixteenth annual<br />
symposium on Arabic linguistics, Cambridge, March 2002. 2006. xii, 181 pp.<br />
265 CorniPs, leonie and Karen P. CorriGan (eds.): Syntax and Variation. Reconciling <strong>the</strong> Biological and<br />
<strong>the</strong> Social. 2005. vi, 312 pp.<br />
264 Dressler, wolfgang u., Dieter KastoVsKy, oskar e. PFeiFFer and Franz rainer (eds.):<br />
Morphology and its demarcations. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 11th Morphology meeting, Vienna, February<br />
2004. With <strong>the</strong> assistance of Francesco Gardani and Markus A. Pöchtrager. 2005. xiv, 320 pp.<br />
263 BranCo, antónio, tony Mcenery and ruslan MitKoV (eds.): Anaphora Processing. Linguistic,<br />
cognitive and computational modelling. 2005. x, 449 pp.<br />
262 VaJDa, edward J. (ed.): Languages and Prehistory of Central Siberia. 2004. x, 275 pp.<br />
261 Kay, Christian J. and Jeremy J. sMith (eds.): Categorization in <strong>the</strong> History of English. 2004. viii, 268 pp.<br />
260 niColoV, nicolas, Kalina BontCheVa, Galia anGeloVa and ruslan MitKoV (eds.): Recent<br />
Advances in Natural Language Processing III. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> RANLP 2003. 2004. xii, 402 pp.<br />
259 Carr, Philip, Jacques DuranD and Colin J. ewen (eds.): Headhood, Elements, Specification and<br />
Contrastivity. Phonological papers in honour of John Anderson. 2005. xxviii, 405 pp.<br />
258 auGer, Julie, J. Clancy CleMents and Barbara VanCe (eds.): Contemporary Approaches to<br />
Romance Linguistics. <strong>Selected</strong> <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 33rd Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL),<br />
Bloomington, Indiana, April 2003. With <strong>the</strong> assistance of Rachel T. Anderson. 2004. viii, 404 pp.<br />
257 FortesCue, Michael, eva skafte Jensen, Jens erik MoGensen and lene sChøsler (eds.):<br />
Historical Linguistics 2003. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 16th <strong>International</strong> Conference on Historical<br />
Linguistics, Copenhagen, 11–15 August 2003. 2005. x, 312 pp.<br />
256 BoK-BenneMa, reineke, Bart holleBranDse, Brigitte KaMPers-Manhe and Petra<br />
sleeMan (eds.): Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2002. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> ‘Going Romance’,<br />
Groningen, 28–30 November 2002. 2004. viii, 273 pp.<br />
255 Meulen, alice ter and werner aBrahaM (eds.): The Composition of Meaning. From lexeme to<br />
discourse. 2004. vi, 232 pp.<br />
254 BalDi, Philip and Pietro u. Dini (eds.): Studies in Baltic and Indo-European Linguistics. In honor of<br />
William R. Schmalstieg. 2004. xlvi, 302 pp.<br />
253 CaFFarel, alice, J.r. Martin and Christian M.i.M. Matthiessen (eds.): Language Typology. A<br />
functional perspective. 2004. xiv, 702 pp.
252 Kay, Christian J., Carole houGh and irené wo<strong>the</strong>rsPoon (eds.): New Perspectives on English<br />
Historical Linguistics. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> 12 ICEHL, Glasgow, 21–26 August 2002. Volume II: Lexis and<br />
Transmission. 2004. xii, 273 pp.<br />
251 Kay, Christian J., simon horoBin and Jeremy J. sMith (eds.): New Perspectives on English<br />
Historical Linguistics. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> 12 ICEHL, Glasgow, 21–26 August 2002. Volume I: Syntax and<br />
Morphology. 2004. x, 264 pp.<br />
250 Jensen, John t.: Principles of Generative Phonology. An introduction. 2004. xii, 324 pp.<br />
249 Bowern, Claire and harold KoCh (eds.): Australian Languages. Classification and <strong>the</strong> comparative<br />
method. 2004. xii, 377 pp. (incl. CD-Rom).<br />
248 weiGanD, edda (ed.): Emotion in Dialogic Interaction. Advances in <strong>the</strong> complex. 2004. xii, 284 pp.<br />
247 ParKinson, Dilworth B. and samira Farwaneh (eds.): Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics XV. <strong>Papers</strong><br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Fifteenth Annual Symposium on Arabic Linguistics, Salt Lake City 2001. 2003. x, 214 pp.<br />
246 holisKy, Dee ann and Kevin tuite (eds.): Current Trends in Caucasian, East European and Inner<br />
Asian Linguistics. <strong>Papers</strong> in honor of Howard I. Aronson. 2003. xxviii, 426 pp.<br />
245 Quer, Josep, Jan sChroten, Mauro sCorretti, Petra sleeMan and els VerheuGD (eds.):<br />
Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2001. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> 'Going Romance', Amsterdam, 6–8<br />
December 2001. 2003. viii, 355 pp.<br />
244 Pérez-leroux, ana teresa and yves roBerGe (eds.): Romance Linguistics. Theory and Acquisition.<br />
<strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 32nd Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Toronto, April 2002.<br />
2003. viii, 388 pp.<br />
243 CuyCKens, hubert, Thomas BerG, rené DirVen and Klaus-uwe Pan<strong>the</strong>r (eds.): Motivation in<br />
Language. Studies in honor of Günter Radden. 2003. xxvi, 403 pp.<br />
242 seuren, Pieter a.M. and Gerard KeMPen (eds.): Verb Constructions in German and Dutch. 2003.<br />
vi, 316 pp.<br />
241 leCarMe, Jacqueline (ed.): Research in Afroasiatic Grammar II. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Fifth<br />
Conference on Afroasiatic Languages, Paris, 2000. 2003. viii, 550 pp.<br />
240 Janse, Mark and sijmen tol (eds.): Language Death and Language Maintenance. Theoretical, practical<br />
and descriptive approaches. With <strong>the</strong> assistance of Vincent Hendriks. 2003. xviii, 244 pp.<br />
239 anDersen, henning (ed.): Language Contacts in Prehistory. Studies in Stratigraphy. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
Workshop on Linguistic Stratigraphy and Prehistory at <strong>the</strong> Fifteenth <strong>International</strong> Conference on Historical<br />
Linguistics, Melbourne, 17 August 2001. 2003. viii, 292 pp.<br />
238 núñez-CeDeño, rafael, luis lóPez and richard CaMeron (eds.): A Romance Perspective on<br />
Language Knowledge and Use. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 31st Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages<br />
(LSRL), Chicago, 19–22 April 2001. 2003. xvi, 386 pp.<br />
237 BlaKe, Barry J. and Kate BurriDGe (eds.): Historical Linguistics 2001. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 15th<br />
<strong>International</strong> Conference on Historical Linguistics, Melbourne, 13–17 August 2001. Editorial assistance Jo<br />
Taylor. 2003. x, 444 pp.<br />
236 siMon-VanDenBerGen, anne-Marie, Miriam taVerniers and louise J. raVelli (eds.):<br />
Grammatical Metaphor. Views <strong>from</strong> systemic functional linguistics. 2003. vi, 453 pp.<br />
235 linn, andrew r. and nicola MclellanD (eds.): Standardization. Studies <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Germanic languages.<br />
2002. xii, 258 pp.<br />
234 weiJer, Jeroen van de, Vincent J. van heuVen and harry van der hulst (eds.): The Phonological<br />
Spectrum. Volume II: Suprasegmental structure. 2003. x, 264 pp.<br />
233 weiJer, Jeroen van de, Vincent J. van heuVen and harry van der hulst (eds.): The Phonological<br />
Spectrum. Volume I: Segmental structure. 2003. x, 308 pp.<br />
232 BeyssaDe, Claire, reineke BoK-BenneMa, Frank DriJKoninGen and Paola MonaChesi<br />
(eds.): Romance Languages and Linguistic Theory 2000. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> ‘Going Romance’ 2000,<br />
Utrecht, 30 November–2 December. 2002. viii, 354 pp.<br />
231 CraVens, Thomas D.: Comparative Historical Dialectology. Italo-Romance clues to Ibero-Romance<br />
sound change. 2002. xii, 163 pp.<br />
230 ParKinson, Dilworth B. and elabbas BenMaMoun (eds.): Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics.<br />
<strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Annual Symposium on Arabic Linguistics. Volume XIII-XIV: Stanford, 1999 and Berkeley,<br />
California 2000. 2002. xiv, 250 pp.<br />
229 neVin, Bruce e. and stephen B. Johnson (eds.): The Legacy of Zellig Harris. Language and<br />
information into <strong>the</strong> 21st century. Volume 2: Ma<strong>the</strong>matics and computability of language. 2002. xx, 312 pp.<br />
228 neVin, Bruce e. (ed.): The Legacy of Zellig Harris. Language and information into <strong>the</strong> 21st century.<br />
Volume 1: Philosophy of science, syntax and semantics. 2002. xxxvi, 323 pp.<br />
227 FaVa, elisabetta (ed.): Clinical Linguistics. Theory and applications in speech pathology and <strong>the</strong>rapy. 2002.<br />
xxiv, 353 pp.
226 leVin, saul: Semitic and Indo-European. Volume II: Comparative morphology, syntax and phonetics.<br />
2002. xviii, 592 pp.<br />
225 shahin, Kimary n.: Postvelar Harmony. 2003. viii, 344 pp.<br />
224 FaneGo, teresa, Belén MénDez-naya and elena seoane (eds.): Sounds, Words, Texts and Change.<br />
<strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> 11 ICEHL, Santiago de Compostela, 7–11 September 2000. Volume 2. 2002. x, 310 pp.<br />
223 FaneGo, teresa, Javier Pérez-Guerra and María José lóPez-Couso (eds.): English Historical<br />
Syntax and Morphology. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> 11 ICEHL, Santiago de Compostela, 7–11 September 2000.<br />
Volume 1. 2002. x, 306 pp.<br />
222 hersChensohn, Julia, enrique Mallén and Karen zaGona (eds.): Features and Interfaces in<br />
Romance. Essays in honor of Heles Contreras. 2001. xiv, 302 pp.<br />
221 D’hulst, yves, Johan rooryCK and Jan sChroten (eds.): Romance Languages and Linguistic<br />
Theory 1999. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> ‘Going Romance’ 1999, Leiden, 9–11 December 1999. 2001. viii, 406 pp.<br />
220 satterFielD, teresa, Christina tortora and Diana Cresti (eds.): Current Issues in Romance<br />
Languages. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 29th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL), Ann<br />
Arbor, 8–11 April 1999. 2002. viii, 412 pp.<br />
219 anDersen, henning (ed.): Actualization. Linguistic Change in Progress. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> a workshop held<br />
at <strong>the</strong> 14th <strong>International</strong> Conference on Historical Linguistics, Vancouver, B.C., 14 August 1999. 2001.<br />
vii, 250 pp.<br />
218 BenDJaBallah, sabrina, wolfgang u. Dressler, oskar e. PFeiFFer and Maria D. VoeiKoVa<br />
(eds.): Morphology 2000. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 9th Morphology Meeting, Vienna, 24–28 February 2000.<br />
2002. viii, 317 pp.<br />
217 wiltshire, Caroline r. and Joaquim CaMPs (eds.): Romance Phonology and Variation. <strong>Selected</strong><br />
papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 30th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages, Gainesville, Florida, February 2000.<br />
2002. xii, 238 pp.<br />
216 CaMPs, Joaquim and Caroline r. wiltshire (eds.): Romance Syntax, Semantics and L2 Acquisition.<br />
<strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 30th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages, Gainesville, Florida, February<br />
2000. 2001. xii, 246 pp.<br />
215 Brinton, laurel J. (ed.): Historical Linguistics 1999. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 14th <strong>International</strong><br />
Conference on Historical Linguistics, Vancouver, 9–13 August 1999. 2001. xii, 398 pp.<br />
214 weiGanD, edda and Marcelo DasCal (eds.): Negotiation and Power in Dialogic Interaction. 2001.<br />
viii, 303 pp.<br />
213 sorniCola, rosanna, erich PoPPe and ariel shisha-haleVy (eds.): Stability, Variation and<br />
Change of Word-Order Patterns over Time. With <strong>the</strong> assistance of Paola Como. 2000. xxxii, 323 pp.<br />
212 rePetti, lori (ed.): Phonological Theory and <strong>the</strong> Dialects of Italy. 2000. x, 301 pp.<br />
211 elšíK, Viktor and yaron Matras (eds.): Grammatical Relations in Romani. The Noun Phrase. with a<br />
Foreword by Frans Plank (Universität Konstanz). 2000. x, 244 pp.<br />
210 DworKin, steven n. and Dieter wanner (eds.): New Approaches to Old Problems. Issues in Romance<br />
historical linguistics. 2000. xiv, 235 pp.<br />
209 KinG, ruth: The Lexical Basis of Grammatical Borrowing. A Prince Edward Island French case study.<br />
2000. xvi, 241 pp.<br />
208 roBinson, orrin w.: Whose German? The ach/ich alternation and related phenomena in ‘standard’ and<br />
‘colloquial’. 2001. xii, 178 pp.<br />
207 sanz, Montserrat: Events and Predication. A new approach to syntactic processing in English and<br />
Spanish. 2000. xiv, 219 pp.<br />
206 FawCett, robin P.: A Theory of Syntax for Systemic Functional Linguistics. 2000. xxiv, 360 pp.<br />
205 DirVen, rené, roslyn M. FranK and Cornelia ilie (eds.): Language and Ideology. Volume 2:<br />
descriptive cognitive approaches. 2001. vi, 264 pp.<br />
204 DirVen, rené, Bruce hawKins and esra sanDiKCioGlu (eds.): Language and Ideology. Volume 1:<br />
<strong>the</strong>oretical cognitive approaches. 2001. vi, 301 pp.<br />
203 norriCK, neal r.: Conversational Narrative. Storytelling in everyday talk. 2000. xiv, 233 pp.<br />
202 leCarMe, Jacqueline, Jean lowenstaMM and ur shlonsKy (eds.): Research in Afroasiatic<br />
Grammar. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Third conference on Afroasiatic Languages, Sophia Antipolis, 1996. 2000.<br />
vi, 386 pp.<br />
201 Dressler, wolfgang u., oskar e. PFeiFFer, Markus a. PöChtraGer and John r. rennison<br />
(eds.): Morphological Analysis in Comparison. 2000. x, 261 pp.<br />
200 anttila, raimo: Greek and Indo-European Etymology in Action. Proto-Indo-European *aǵ-. 2000.<br />
xii, 314 pp.<br />
199 Pütz, Martin and Marjolijn h. VersPoor (eds.): Explorations in Linguistic Relativity. 2000.<br />
xvi, 369 pp.
198 nieMeier, susanne and rené DirVen (eds.): Evidence for Linguistic Relativity. 2000. xxii, 240 pp.<br />
197 CooPMans, Peter, Martin eVeraert and Jane GriMshaw (eds.): Lexical Specification and<br />
Insertion. 2000. xviii, 476 pp.<br />
196 hannahs, s.J. and Mike DaVenPort (eds.): Issues in Phonological Structure. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> an<br />
<strong>International</strong> Workshop. 1999. xii, 268 pp.<br />
195 herrinG, susan C., Pieter van reenen and lene sChøsler (eds.): Textual Parameters in Older<br />
Languages. 2001. x, 448 pp.<br />
194 ColeMan, Julie and Christian J. Kay (eds.): Lexicology, Semantics and Lexicography. <strong>Selected</strong> papers<br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Fourth G. L. Brook Symposium, Manchester, August 1998. 2000. xiv, 257 pp.<br />
193 KlausenBurGer, Jurgen: Grammaticalization. Studies in Latin and Romance morphosyntax. 2000.<br />
xiv, 184 pp.<br />
192 alexanDroVa, Galina M. and olga arnauDoVa (eds.): The Minimalist Parameter. <strong>Selected</strong> papers<br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Open Linguistics Forum, Ottawa, 21–23 March 1997. 2001. x, 360 pp.<br />
191 sihler, andrew l.: Language History. An introduction. 2000. xvi, 298 pp.<br />
190 BenMaMoun, elabbas (ed.): Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Annual Symposium on<br />
Arabic Linguistics. Volume XII: Urbana-Champaign, Illinois, 1998. 1999. viii, 204 pp.<br />
189 niColoV, nicolas and ruslan MitKoV (eds.): Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing II.<br />
<strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> RANLP ’97. 2000. xi, 422 pp.<br />
188 siMMons, richard Vanness: Chinese Dialect Classification. A comparative approach to Harngjou, Old<br />
Jintarn, and Common Nor<strong>the</strong>rn Wu. 1999. xviii, 317 pp.<br />
187 FranCo, Jon a., alazne lanDa and Juan Martín (eds.): Grammatical Analyses in Basque and<br />
Romance Linguistics. <strong>Papers</strong> in honor of Mario Saltarelli. 1999. viii, 306 pp.<br />
186 MišesKa toMić, olga and Milorad raDoVanoVić (eds.): History and Perspectives of Language<br />
Study. <strong>Papers</strong> in honor of Ranko Bugarski. 2000. xxii, 314 pp.<br />
185 authier, Jean-Marc, Barbara e. BulloCK and lisa a. reeD (eds.): Formal Perspectives on Romance<br />
Linguistics. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 28th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL XXVIII),<br />
University Park, 16–19 April 1998. 1999. xii, 334 pp.<br />
184 saGart, laurent: The Roots of Old Chinese. 1999. xii, 272 pp.<br />
183 Contini-MoraVa, ellen and yishai toBin (eds.): Between Grammar and Lexicon. 2000.<br />
xxxii, 365 pp.<br />
182 Kenesei, istván (ed.): Crossing Boundaries. Advances in <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>ory of Central and Eastern European<br />
languages. 1999. viii, 302 pp.<br />
181 MohaMMaD, Mohammad a.: Word Order, Agreement and Pronominalization in Standard and<br />
Palestinian Arabic. 2000. xvi, 197 pp.<br />
180 Mereu, lunella (ed.): Boundaries of Morphology and Syntax. 1999. viii, 314 pp.<br />
179 rini, Joel: Exploring <strong>the</strong> Role of Morphology in <strong>the</strong> Evolution of Spanish. 1999. xvi, 187 pp.<br />
178 Foolen, ad and Frederike van der leeK (eds.): Constructions in Cognitive Linguistics. <strong>Selected</strong> papers<br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Fifth <strong>International</strong> Cognitive Linguistics Conference, Amsterdam, 1997. 2000. xvi, 338 pp.<br />
177 CuyCKens, hubert and Britta e. zawaDa (eds.): Polysemy in Cognitive Linguistics. <strong>Selected</strong> papers<br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>International</strong> Cognitive Linguistics Conference, Amsterdam, 1997. 2001. xxviii, 296 pp.<br />
176 Van hoeK, Karen, andrej a. KiBriK and leo noorDMan (eds.): Discourse Studies in Cognitive<br />
Linguistics. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 5th <strong>International</strong> Cognitive Linguistics Conference, Amsterdam, July<br />
1997. 1999. vi, 187 pp.<br />
175 GiBBs, Jr., raymond w. and Gerard J. steen (eds.): Metaphor in Cognitive Linguistics. <strong>Selected</strong> papers<br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 5th <strong>International</strong> Cognitive Linguistics Conference, Amsterdam, 1997. 1999. viii, 226 pp.<br />
174 hall, t. alan and ursula Kleinhenz (eds.): Studies on <strong>the</strong> Phonological Word. 1999. viii, 298 pp.<br />
173 treViño, es<strong>the</strong>la and José leMa (eds.): Semantic Issues in Romance Syntax. 1999. viii, 309 pp.<br />
172 DiMitroVa-VulChanoVa, Mila and lars hellan (eds.): Topics in South Slavic Syntax and<br />
Semantics. 1999. xxviii, 263 pp.<br />
171 weiGanD, edda (ed.): Contrastive Lexical Semantics. 1998. x, 270 pp.<br />
170 laMB, sydney M.: Pathways of <strong>the</strong> Brain. The neurocognitive basis of language. 1999. xii, 418 pp.<br />
169 GhaDessy, Mohsen (ed.): Text and Context in Functional Linguistics. 1999. xviii, 340 pp.<br />
168 ratCliFFe, robert r.: The “Broken” Plural Problem in Arabic and Comparative Semitic. Allomorphy and<br />
analogy in non-concatenative morphology. 1998. xii, 261 pp.<br />
167 BenMaMoun, elabbas, Mushira eiD and niloofar haeri (eds.): Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics.<br />
<strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Annual Symposium on Arabic Linguistics. Volume XI: Atlanta, Georgia, 1997. 1998.<br />
viii, 231 pp.<br />
166 leMMens, Maarten: Lexical Perspectives on Transitivity and Ergativity. Causative constructions in<br />
English. 1998. xii, 268 pp.
165 BuBeniK, Vit: A Historical Syntax of Late Middle Indo-Aryan (Apabhraṃśa). 1998. xxiv, 265 pp.<br />
164 sChMiD, Monika s., Jennifer r. austin and Dieter stein (eds.): Historical Linguistics 1997. <strong>Selected</strong><br />
papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 13th <strong>International</strong> Conference on Historical Linguistics, Düsseldorf, 10–17 August 1997.<br />
1998. x, 409 pp.<br />
163 loCKwooD, David G., Peter h. Fries and James e. CoPelanD (eds.): Functional Approaches to<br />
Language, Culture and Cognition. <strong>Papers</strong> in honor of Sydney M. Lamb. 2000. xxxiv, 656 pp.<br />
162 hoGG, richard M. and linda van BerGen (eds.): Historical Linguistics 1995. Volume 2: Germanic<br />
linguistics.. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 12th <strong>International</strong> Conference on Historical Linguistics, Manchester,<br />
August 1995. 1998. x, 365 pp.<br />
161 sMith, John Charles and Delia Bentley (eds.): Historical Linguistics 1995. Volume 1: General issues<br />
and non-Germanic Languages.. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 12th <strong>International</strong> Conference on Historical<br />
Linguistics, Manchester, August 1995. 2000. xii, 438 pp.<br />
160 sChweGler, armin, Bernard tranel and Myriam uriBe-etxeBarria (eds.): Romance<br />
Linguistics: Theoretical Perspectives. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 27th Linguistic Symposium on Romance<br />
Languages (LSRL XXVII), Irvine, 20–22 February, 1997. 1998. vi, 349 pp. + index.<br />
159 JosePh, Brian D., Geoffrey C. horroCKs and irene PhiliPPaKi-warBurton (eds.): Themes in<br />
Greek Linguistics II. 1998. x, 335 pp.<br />
158 sánChez-MaCarro, antonia and ronald Carter (eds.): Linguistic Choice across Genres. Variation<br />
in spoken and written English. 1998. viii, 338 pp.<br />
157 leMa, José and es<strong>the</strong>la treViño (eds.): Theoretical Analyses on Romance Languages. <strong>Selected</strong> papers<br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 26th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL XXVI), Mexico City, 28–30 March,<br />
1996. 1998. viii, 380 pp.<br />
156 Matras, yaron, Peter BaKKer and hristo KyuChuKoV (eds.): The Typology and Dialectology of<br />
Romani. 1997. xxxii, 223 pp.<br />
155 ForGet, Danielle, Paul hirsChBühler, France Martineau and María luisa riVero (eds.):<br />
Negation and Polarity. Syntax and semantics. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> colloquium Negation: Syntax and<br />
Semantics. Ottawa, 11–13 May 1995. 1997. viii, 367 pp.<br />
154 siMon-VanDenBerGen, anne-Marie, Kristin DaViDse and Dirk noël (eds.): Reconnecting<br />
Language. Morphology and Syntax in Functional Perspectives. 1997. xiii, 339 pp.<br />
153 eiD, Mushira and robert r. ratCliFFe (eds.): Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
Annual Symposium on Arabic Linguistics. Volume X: Salt Lake City, 1996. 1997. vii, 296 pp.<br />
152 hiraGa, Masako K., Chris sinha and sherman wilCox (eds.): Cultural, Psychological and<br />
Typological Issues in Cognitive Linguistics. <strong>Selected</strong> papers of <strong>the</strong> bi-annual ICLA meeting in Albuquerque,<br />
July 1995. 1999. viii, 338 pp.<br />
151 lieBert, wolf-andreas, Gisela reDeKer and linda r. wauGh (eds.): Discourse and Perspective in<br />
Cognitive Linguistics. 1997. xiv, 270 pp.<br />
150 VersPoor, Marjolijn h., Kee Dong lee and eve sweetser (eds.): Lexical and Syntactical<br />
Constructions and <strong>the</strong> Construction of Meaning. Proceedings of <strong>the</strong> Bi-annual ICLA meeting in<br />
Albuquerque, July 1995. 1997. xii, 454 pp.<br />
149 hall, t. alan: The Phonology of Coronals. 1997. x, 176 pp.<br />
148 wolF, George and nigel loVe (eds.): Linguistics Inside Out. Roy Harris and his critics. 1997.<br />
xxviii, 344 pp.<br />
147 hewson, John: The Cognitive System of <strong>the</strong> French Verb. 1997. xii, 187 pp.<br />
146 hinsKens, Frans, roeland van hout and w. leo wetzels (eds.): Variation, Change, and<br />
Phonological Theory. 1997. x, 314 pp.<br />
145 hewson, John and Vit BuBeniK: Tense and Aspect in Indo-European Languages. Theory, typology,<br />
diachrony. 1997. xii, 403 pp.<br />
144 sinGh, rajendra (ed.): Trubetzkoy's Orphan. Proceedings of <strong>the</strong> Montréal Roundtable on<br />
“Morphonology: contemporary responses” (Montréal, October 1994). In collaboration with Richard<br />
Desrochers. 1996. xiv, 363 pp.<br />
143 athanasiaDou, angeliki and rené DirVen (eds.): On Conditionals Again. 1997. viii, 418 pp.<br />
142 salMons, Joseph C. and Brian D. JosePh (eds.): Nostratic. Sifting <strong>the</strong> Evidence. 1998. vi, 293 pp.<br />
141 eiD, Mushira and Dilworth B. ParKinson (eds.): Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
Annual Symposium on Arabic Linguistics. Volume IX: Washington D.C., 1995. 1996. xiii, 249 pp.<br />
140 BlaCK, James r. and Virginia MotaPanyane (eds.): Clitics, Pronouns and Movement. 1997. 375 pp.<br />
139 BlaCK, James r. and Virginia MotaPanyane (eds.): Microparametric Syntax and Dialect Variation.<br />
1996. xviii, 269 pp.<br />
138 saCKMann, robin and Monika BuDDe (eds.): Theoretical Linguistics and Grammatical Description.<br />
<strong>Papers</strong> in honour of Hans-Heinrich Lieb. 1996. x, 375 pp.
137 liPPi-Green, rosina l. and Joseph C. salMons (eds.): Germanic Linguistics. Syntactic and<br />
diachronic. 1996. viii, 192 pp.<br />
136 MitKoV, ruslan and nicolas niColoV (eds.): Recent Advances in Natural Language Processing.<br />
<strong>Selected</strong> <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> RANLP ’95. 1997. xii, 472 pp.<br />
135 Britton, Derek (ed.): English Historical Linguistics 1994. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 8th <strong>International</strong> Conference<br />
on English Historical Linguistics (8 ICEHL, Edinburgh, 19–23 September 1994). 1996. viii, 403 pp.<br />
134 eiD, Mushira (ed.): Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Annual Symposium on Arabic<br />
Linguistics. Volume VIII: Amherst, Massachusetts 1994. 1996. vii, 261 pp.<br />
133 zaGona, Karen (ed.): Grammatical Theory and Romance Languages. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 25th<br />
Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages (LSRL XXV) Seattle, 2–4 March 1995. 1996. vi, 330 pp.<br />
132 hersChensohn, Julia: Case Suspension and Binary Complement Structure in French. 1996. xi, 200 pp.<br />
131 hualDe, José ignacio, Joseba a. laKarra and r.l. trasK (eds.): Towards a History of <strong>the</strong> Basque<br />
Language. 1996. 365 pp.<br />
130 eiD, Mushira (ed.): Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Annual Symposium on Arabic<br />
Linguistics. Volume VII: Austin, Texas 1993. 1995. vii, 192 pp.<br />
129 leVin, saul: Semitic and Indo-European. Volume I: The Principal Etymologies. With observations on<br />
Afro-Asiatic. 1995. xxii, 514 pp.<br />
128 Guy, Gregory r., Crawford FeaGin, Deborah sChiFFrin and John BauGh (eds.): Towards a<br />
Social Science of Language. <strong>Papers</strong> in honor of William Labov. Volume 2: Social interaction and discourse<br />
structures. 1997. xviii, 358 pp.<br />
127 Guy, Gregory r., Crawford FeaGin, Deborah sChiFFrin and John BauGh (eds.): Towards a Social<br />
Science of Language. <strong>Papers</strong> in honor of William Labov. Volume 1: Variation and change in language and<br />
society. 1996. xviii, 436 pp.<br />
126 Matras, yaron (ed.): Romani in Contact. The history, structure and sociology of a language. 1995.<br />
xvii, 208 pp.<br />
125 sinGh, rajendra (ed.): Towards a Critical Sociolinguistics. 1996. xiii, 342 pp.<br />
124 anDersen, henning (ed.): Historical Linguistics 1993. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 11th <strong>International</strong><br />
Conference on Historical Linguistics, Los Angeles, 16–20 August 1993. 1995. x, 460 pp.<br />
123 aMastae, Jon, Grant GooDall, M. MontalBetti and M. Phinney (eds.): Contemporary<br />
Research in Romance Linguistics. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> XXII Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages, El<br />
Paso/Juárez, February 22–24, 1992. 1995. viii, 381 pp.<br />
122 sMith, John Charles and Martin MaiDen (eds.): Linguistic Theory and <strong>the</strong> Romance Languages. 1995.<br />
xiii, 240 pp.<br />
121 hasan, ruqaiya, Carmel Cloran and David G. Butt (eds.): Functional Descriptions. Theory in<br />
practice. 1996. xxxvi, 381 pp.<br />
120 stonhaM, John t.: Combinatorial Morphology. 1994. xii, 206 pp.<br />
119 liPPi-Green, rosina l.: Language Ideology and Language Change in Early Modern German. A<br />
sociolinguistic study of <strong>the</strong> consonantal system of Nuremberg. 1994. xiv, 150 pp.<br />
118 hasan, ruqaiya and Peter h. Fries (eds.): On Subject and Theme. A discourse functional perspective.<br />
1995. xii, 414 pp.<br />
117 PhiliPPaKi-warBurton, irene, Katerina niColaiDis and Maria siFianou (eds.): Themes in<br />
Greek Linguistics. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> First <strong>International</strong> Conference on Greek Linguistics, Reading, September<br />
1993. 1994. xviii, 534 pp.<br />
116 Miller, D. Gary: Ancient Scripts and Phonological Knowledge. 1994. xvi, 139 pp.<br />
115 eiD, Mushira, Vicente Cantarino and Keith walters (eds.): Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics.<br />
<strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Annual Symposium on Arabic Linguistics. VolumeVI: Columbus, Ohio 1992. 1994.<br />
viii, 238 pp.<br />
114 eGli, urs, Peter e. Pause, Christoph sChwarze, arnim von steChow and Götz wienolD<br />
(eds.): Lexical Knowledge in <strong>the</strong> Organization of Language. 1995. xiv, 367 pp.<br />
113 Moreno FernánDez, Francisco, Miguel Fuster and Juan Jose CalVo (eds.): English Historical<br />
Linguistics 1992. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 7th <strong>International</strong> Conference on English Historical Linguistics, Valencia,<br />
22–26 September 1992. 1994. viii, 388 pp.<br />
112 Culioli, antoine: Cognition and Representation in Linguistic Theory. Texts selected, edited and<br />
introduced by Michel Liddle. Translated with <strong>the</strong> assistance of John T. Stonham. 1995. x, 161 pp.<br />
111 toBin, yishai: Invariance, Markedness and Distinctive Feature Analysis. A contrastive study of sign<br />
systems in English and Hebrew. 1994. xxii, 406 pp.<br />
110 siMone, raffaele (ed.): Iconicity in Language. 1995. xii, 315 pp.<br />
109 PaGliuCa, william (ed.): Perspectives on Grammaticalization. 1994. xx, 306 pp.
108 lieB, hans-heinrich: Linguistic Variables. Towards a unified <strong>the</strong>ory of linguistic variation. 1993.<br />
xiv, 261 pp.<br />
107 Marle, Jaap van (ed.): Historical Linguistics 1991. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 10th <strong>International</strong> Conference on<br />
Historical Linguistics, Amsterdam, August 12–16, 1991. 1993. xviii, 395 pp.<br />
106 aertsen, henk and robert J. JeFFers (eds.): Historical Linguistics 1989. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 9th<br />
<strong>International</strong> Conference on Historical Linguistics, New Brunswick, 14–18 August 1989. 1993. xviii, 538 pp.<br />
105 hualDe, José ignacio and Jon ortiz de urBina (eds.): Generative Studies in Basque Linguistics. 1993.<br />
vi, 334 pp.<br />
104 KurzoVá, helena: From Indo-European to Latin. The evolution of a morphosyntactic type. 1993.<br />
xiv, 259 pp.<br />
103 ashBy, william J., Marianne Mithun and Giorgio Perissinotto (eds.): Linguistic Perspectives on<br />
Romance Languages. <strong>Selected</strong> <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> XXI Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages, Santa<br />
Barbara, February 21–24, 1991. 1993. xxii, 404 pp.<br />
102 DaVis, Philip w. (ed.): Alternative Linguistics. Descriptive and <strong>the</strong>oretical modes. 1996. vii, 325 pp.<br />
101 eiD, Mushira and Clive holes (eds.): Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Annual<br />
Symposium on Arabic Linguistics. Volume V: Ann Arbor, Michigan 1991. 1993. viii, 347 pp.<br />
100 MuFwene, salikoko s. and lioba Moshi (eds.): Topics in African Linguistics. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> XXI<br />
Annual Conference on African Linguistics, University of Georgia, April 1990. 1993. x, 304 pp.<br />
99 Jensen, John t.: English Phonology. 1993. x, 251 pp.<br />
98 eiD, Mushira and Gregory K. iVerson (eds.): Principles and Prediction. The analysis of natural<br />
language. <strong>Papers</strong> in honor of Gerald Sanders. 1993. xix, 382 pp.<br />
97 BroGyanyi, Bela and reiner liPP (eds.): Comparative-Historical Linguistics: Indo-European and<br />
Finno-Ugric. <strong>Papers</strong> in honor of Oswald Szemerényi III. 1993. xii, 566 pp.<br />
96 lieB, hans-heinrich (ed.): Prospects for a New Structuralism. 1992. vii, 275 pp.<br />
95 Miller, D. Gary: Complex Verb Formation. 1993. xx, 381 pp.<br />
94 haGèGe, Claude: The Language Builder. An essay on <strong>the</strong> human signature in linguistic morphogenesis.<br />
1993. xii, 283 pp.<br />
93 liPPi-Green, rosina l. (ed.): Recent Developments in Germanic Linguistics. 1992. xii, 163 pp.<br />
92 Poyatos, Fernando: Paralanguage: A linguistic and interdisciplinary approach to interactive speech and<br />
sounds. 1993. xii, 478 pp.<br />
91 hirsChBühler, Paul and e.F.K. Koerner (eds.): Romance Languages and Modern Linguistic<br />
Theory. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> XX Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages, University of Ottawa,<br />
April 10–14, 1990. 1992. viii, 416 pp.<br />
90 KinG, larry D.: The Semantic Structure of Spanish. Meaning and grammatical form. 1992. xii, 287 pp.<br />
89 BurriDGe, Kate: Syntactic Change in Germanic. Aspects of language change in Germanic with particular<br />
reference to Middle Dutch. 1993. xii, 287 pp.<br />
88 shielDs, Jr., Kenneth: A History of Indo-European Verb Morphology. 1992. viii, 160 pp.<br />
87 BroGyanyi, Bela and reiner liPP (eds.): Historical Philology: Greek, Latin, and Romance. <strong>Papers</strong> in<br />
honor of Oswald Szemerényi II. 1992. xii, 386 pp.<br />
86 Kess, Joseph F.: Psycholinguistics. Psychology, linguistics, and <strong>the</strong> study of natural language. 1992.<br />
xiv, 360 pp.<br />
85 Broselow, ellen, Mushira eiD and John McCarthy (eds.): Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics.<br />
<strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Annual Symposium on Arabic Linguistics. Volume IV: Detroit, Michigan 1990. 1992.<br />
viii, 282 pp.<br />
84 DaVis, Garry w. and Gregory K. iVerson (eds.): Explanation in Historical Linguistics. 1992.<br />
xiv, 238 pp.<br />
83 FiFe, James and erich PoPPe (eds.): Studies in Brythonic Word Order. 1991. x, 360 pp.<br />
82 Van Valin, Jr., robert D. (ed.): Advances in Role and Reference Grammar. 1992. xii, 569 pp.<br />
81 lehMann, winfred P. and helen-Jo Jakusz hewitt (eds.): Language Typology 1988. Typological<br />
Models in <strong>the</strong> Service of Reconstruction. 1991. vi, 182 pp.<br />
80 CoMrie, Bernard and Mushira eiD (eds.): Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Annual<br />
Symposium on Arabic Linguistics. Volume III: Salt Lake City, Utah 1989. 1991. xii, 274 pp.<br />
79 antonsen, elmer h. and hans henrich hoCK (eds.): STAEFCRAEFT: Studies in Germanic<br />
Linguistics. <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 1st and 2nd Symposium on Germanic Linguistics, University of<br />
Chicago, 4 April 1985, and University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 3–4 Oct. 1986. 1991. viii, 217 pp.<br />
78 KaC, Michael B.: Grammars and Grammaticality. 1992. x, 259 pp.<br />
77 Boltz, william G. and Michael C. shaPiro (eds.): Studies in <strong>the</strong> Historical Phonology of Asian<br />
Languages. 1991. viii, 249 pp.
76 wiCKens, Mark a.: Grammatical Number in English Nouns. An empirical and <strong>the</strong>oretical account. 1992.<br />
xvi, 321 pp.<br />
75 Droste, Flip G. and John e. JosePh (eds.): Linguistic Theory and Grammatical Description. Nine<br />
Current Approaches. 1991. viii, 354 pp.<br />
74 laeuFer, Christiane and terrell a. MorGan (eds.): Theoretical Analyses in Romance Linguistics.<br />
<strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages XIX, Ohio State University, April<br />
21–23, 1989. 1991. viii, 515 pp.<br />
73 staMenoV, Maxim i. (ed.): Current Advances in Semantic Theory. 1991. xi, 565 pp.<br />
72 eiD, Mushira and John McCarthy (eds.): Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Annual<br />
Symposium on Arabic Linguistics. Volume II: Salt Lake City, Utah 1988. 1990. xiv, 332 pp.<br />
71 o’GraDy, william: Categories and Case. The sentence structure of Korean. 1991. vii, 294 pp.<br />
70 Jensen, John t.: Morphology. Word structure in generative grammar. 1990. x, 210 pp.<br />
69 wanner, Dieter and Douglas a. KiBBee (eds.): New Analyses in Romance Linguistics. <strong>Selected</strong> papers<br />
<strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages XVIII, Urbana-Champaign, April 7–9, 1988. 1991.<br />
xviii, 385 pp.<br />
68 Ball, Martin J., James FiFe, erich PoPPe and Jenny rowlanD (eds.): Celtic Linguistics/<br />
Ieithyddiaeth Geltaidd. Readings in <strong>the</strong> Brythonic Languages. Festschrift for T. Arwyn Watkins. 1990.<br />
xxiv, 470 pp.<br />
67 lehMann, winfred P. (ed.): Language Typology 1987. Systematic Balance in Language. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
Linguistic Typology Symposium, Berkeley, 1–3 Dec 1987. 1990. x, 212 pp.<br />
66 anDersen, henning and e.F.K. Koerner (eds.): Historical Linguistics 1987. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 8th<br />
<strong>International</strong> Conference on Historical Linguistics, Lille, August 30-September 4, 1987. 1990. xii, 577 pp.<br />
65 aDaMson, sylvia M., Vivien a. law, nigel VinCent and susan wriGht (eds.): <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 5th<br />
<strong>International</strong> Conference on English Historical Linguistics. 1990. xxi, 583 pp.<br />
64 BroGyanyi, Bela (ed.): Prehistory, History and Historiography of Language, Speech, and Linguistic<br />
Theory. <strong>Papers</strong> in honor of Oswald Szemerényi I. 1992. x, 414 pp.<br />
63 eiD, Mushira (ed.): Perspectives on Arabic Linguistics. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Annual Symposium on Arabic<br />
Linguistics. Volume I: Salt Lake City, Utah 1987. 1990. xiii, 290 pp.<br />
62 FraJzynGier, zygmunt (ed.): Current Progress in Chadic Linguistics. Proceedings of <strong>the</strong> <strong>International</strong><br />
Symposium on Chadic Linguistics, Boulder, Colorado, 1–2 May 1987. 1989. vi, 312 pp.<br />
61 CorriGan, roberta l., Fred r. eCKMan and Michael noonan (eds.): Linguistic Categorization.<br />
Proceedings of an <strong>International</strong> Symposium in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, April 10–11, 1987. 1989. viii, 348 pp.<br />
60 KirsChner, Carl and Janet ann DeCesaris (eds.): Studies in Romance Linguistics. <strong>Selected</strong><br />
Proceedings <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> XVII Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages. 1989. xii, 496 pp.<br />
59 Voorst, Jan van: Event Structure. 1988. x, 181 pp.<br />
58 arBeitMan, yoël l. (ed.): Fucus: A Semitic/Afrasian Ga<strong>the</strong>ring in Remembrance of Albert Ehrman.<br />
1988. xvi, 530 pp.<br />
57 BuBeniK, Vit: Hellenistic and Roman Greece as a Sociolinguistic Area. 1989. xvi, 331 pp.<br />
56 hoCKett, Charles F.: Refurbishing our Foundations. Elementary linguistics <strong>from</strong> an advanced point of<br />
view. 1987. x, 181 pp.<br />
55 hall, Jr., robert a.: Linguistics and Pseudo-Linguistics. 1987. vii, 147 pp.<br />
54 weiDert, alfons: Tibeto-Burman Tonology. A comparative analysis. 1987. xvii, 512 pp.<br />
53 sanKoFF, David: Diversity and Diachrony. 1986. xii, 430 pp.<br />
52 FasolD, ralph w. and Deborah sChiFFrin (eds.): Language Change and Variation. 1989. viii, 450 pp.<br />
51 ChatterJee, ranjit: Aspect and Meaning in Slavic and Indic. With a foreword by Paul Friedrich. 1989.<br />
xxiii, 137 pp.<br />
50 ruDzKa-ostyn, Brygida (ed.): Topics in Cognitive Linguistics. 1988. x, 704 pp.<br />
49 wauGh, linda r. and stephen ruDy (eds.): New Vistas in Grammar: Invariance and Variation.<br />
Proceedings of <strong>the</strong> Second <strong>International</strong> Roman Jakobson Conference, New York University, Nov. 5–8, 1985.<br />
1991. x, 540 pp.<br />
48 GiaCalone-raMat, anna, onofrio CarruBa and Giuliano Bernini (eds.): <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> 7th<br />
<strong>International</strong> Conference on Historical Linguistics. 1987. xvi, 672 pp.<br />
47 lehMann, winfred P. (ed.): Language Typology 1985. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Linguistic Typology Symposium,<br />
Moscow, 9–13 Dec. 1985. 1986. viii, 200 pp.<br />
46 PriDeaux, Gary D. and william J. BaKer: Strategies and Structures. The processing of relative clauses.<br />
1987. ix, 197 pp.<br />
45 KooPMan, willem F., Frederike van der leeK, olga FisCher and roger eaton (eds.): Explanation<br />
and Linguistic Change. 1986. viii, 300 pp.
44 JunGraithMayr, herrmann and walter w. Mueller (eds.): Proceedings of <strong>the</strong> Fourth<br />
<strong>International</strong> Hamito-Semitic Congress. 1987. xiv, 609 pp.<br />
43 aKaMatsu, tsutomu: The Theory of Neutralization and <strong>the</strong> Archiphoneme in Functional Phonology.<br />
1988. xxi, 533 pp.<br />
42 MaKKai, adam and alan K. MelBy (eds.): Linguistics and Philosophy. Festschrift for Rulon S. Wells.<br />
1985. xviii, 472 pp.<br />
41 eaton, roger, olga FisCher, willem F. KooPMan and Frederike van der leeK (eds.): <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong> 4th <strong>International</strong> Conference on English Historical Linguistics, Amsterdam, April 10–13, 1985. 1985.<br />
xvii, 341 pp.<br />
40 Fries, Peter h. and nancy M. Fries (eds.): Toward an Understanding of Language. Charles C. Fries in<br />
Perspective. 1985. xvi, 384 pp.<br />
39 Benson, James D., Michael J. CuMMinGs and william s. GreaVes (eds.): Linguistics in a Systemic<br />
Perspective. 1988. x, 452 pp.<br />
38 BroGyanyi, Bela and Thomas KröMMelBein (eds.): Germanic Dialects. Linguistic and Philological<br />
Investigations. 1986. ix, 693 pp.<br />
37 GriFFen, toby D.: Aspects of Dynamic Phonology. 1985. ix, 302 pp.<br />
36 KinG, larry D. and Ca<strong>the</strong>rine a. Maley (eds.): <strong>Selected</strong> papers <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> XIIIth Linguistic Symposium<br />
on Romance. Languages, Chapel Hill, N.C., 24–26 March 1983. 1985. x, 440 pp.<br />
35 CollinGe, n.e.: The Laws of Indo-European. 1985. xviii, 273 pp.<br />
34 FisiaK, Jacek (ed.): <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> VIth <strong>International</strong> Conference on Historical Linguistics, Poznaön,<br />
22–26 August 1983. 1985. xxiii, 622 pp.<br />
33 VersteeGh, Kees: Pidginization and Creolization. The Case of Arabic. 1984. xiii, 194 pp.<br />
32 CoPelanD, James e. (ed.): New Directions in Linguistics and Semiotics. 1984. xi, 269 pp.<br />
31 GuillauMe, Gustave (1883–1960): Foundations for a Science of Language. Texts selected by Roch Valin.<br />
Translated and with an introduction by Walter Hirtle and John Hewson. 1984. xxiv, 175 pp.<br />
30 hall, Jr., robert a.: Proto-Romance Morphology. Comparative Romance Grammar, vol. III. 1984.<br />
xii, 304 pp.<br />
29 PaProtté, wolf and rené DirVen (eds.): The Ubiquity of Metaphor: Metaphor in language and<br />
thought. 1985. iii, 628 pp.<br />
28 Bynon, James (ed.): Current Progress in Afro-Asiatic Linguistics. <strong>Papers</strong> of <strong>the</strong> Third <strong>International</strong><br />
Hamito-Semitic Congress, London, 1978. 1984. xi, 505 pp.<br />
27 BoMharD, allan r.: Toward Proto-Nostratic. A New Approach to <strong>the</strong> Comparison of Proto-Indo-<br />
European and Proto-Afroasiatic. With a foreword by Paul J. Hopper. 1984. xi, 356 pp.<br />
26 BalDi, Philip (ed.): <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> XIIth Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages, University Park,<br />
April 1–3, 1982. 1984. xii, 611 pp.<br />
25 anDersen, Paul Kent: Word Order Typology and Comparative Constructions. 1983. xvii, 245 pp.<br />
24 lehMann, winfred P. and yakov MalKiel (eds.): Perspectives on Historical Linguistics. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong><br />
a conference held at <strong>the</strong> meeting of <strong>the</strong> Language Theory Division, Modern Language Assn., San Francisco,<br />
27–30 December 1979. 1982. xii, 379 pp.<br />
23 Danielsen, niels: <strong>Papers</strong> in Theoretical Linguistics. Edited by Per Baerentzen. 1992. xxii, 224 pp.<br />
22 unterMann, Jürgen und Bela BroGyanyi (hrsg.): Das Germanische und die Rekonstruktion der<br />
Indogermanischen Grundsprache. Akten des Freiburger Kolloquiums der Indogermanischen Gesellschaft,<br />
Freiburg, 26–27 Februar 1981.. Proceedings of <strong>the</strong> Colloquium of <strong>the</strong> Indogermanische Gesellschhaft,<br />
Freiburg, 26–27 February 1981. 1984. xvii, 237 pp.<br />
21 ahlQVist, anders (ed.): <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Fifth <strong>International</strong> Conference on Historical Linguistics,<br />
Galway, April 6–10 1981. 1982. xxix, 527 pp.<br />
20 norriCK, neal r.: Semiotic Principles in Semantic Theory. 1981. xiii, 252 pp.<br />
19 raMat, Paolo (ed.): Linguistic Reconstruction and Indo-European Syntax. Proceedings of <strong>the</strong><br />
Colloquium of <strong>the</strong> 'Indogermanische Gesellschaft'. University of Pavia, 6–7 September 1979. 1980.<br />
viii, 263 pp.<br />
18 izzo, herbert J. (ed.): Italic and Romance. Linguistic Studies in Honor of Ernst Pulgram. 1980. xxi, 338 pp.<br />
17 lieB, hans-heinrich: Integrational Linguistics I. 1984. xxiii, 527 pp.<br />
16 arBeitMan, yoël l. and allan r. BoMharD (eds.): Bono Homini Donum. Essays in Historical<br />
Linguistics, in Memory of J. Alexander Kerns. (2 volumes). 1981. xvi, 557, viii, 581 pp.<br />
15 anDerson, John a. (ed.): Language Form and Linguistic Variation. <strong>Papers</strong> dedicated to Angus McIntosh.<br />
1982. viii, 496 pp.<br />
14 Closs trauGott, elizabeth, rebecca laBruM and susan C. shePherD (eds.): <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />
Fourth <strong>International</strong> Conference on Historical Linguistics, Stanford, March 26–30 1979. 1980. x, 437 pp.
13 Maher, J. Peter, allan r. BoMharD and e.F.K. Koerner (eds.): <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> Third <strong>International</strong><br />
Conference on Historical Linguistics, Hamburg, August 22–26 1977. 1982. xvi, 434 pp.<br />
12 FisiaK, Jacek (ed.): Theoretical Issues in Contrastive Linguistics. 1981. x, 430 pp.<br />
11 BroGyanyi, Bela (ed.): Studies in Diachronic, Synchronic, and Typological Linguistics. Festschrift for<br />
Oswald Szemérenyi on <strong>the</strong> Occasion of his 65th Birthday. 1979. xiv, 487, x, 506 pp. (2 vols.).<br />
10 PriDeaux, Gary D. (ed.): Perspectives in Experimental Linguistics. <strong>Papers</strong> <strong>from</strong> <strong>the</strong> University of Alberta<br />
Conference on Experimental Linguistics, Edmonton, 1–14 Oct. 1978. 1979. xi, 176 pp.<br />
9 hollien, harry and Patricia hollien (eds.): Current Issues in <strong>the</strong> Phonetic Sciences. Proceedings of<br />
<strong>the</strong> IPS-77 Congress, Miami Beach, Florida, 17–19 December 1977. 1979. xxi, 587pp., xiii, 608 pp.<br />
8 wilBur, terence h.: Prolegomena to a Grammar of Basque. 1979. x, 188 pp.<br />
7 Meisel, Jürgen M. and Martin D. PaM (eds.): Linear Order and Generative Theory. 1979. ix, 512 pp.<br />
6 anttila, raimo: Historical and Comparative Linguistics. 1989. xvi, 460 pp.<br />
5 itKonen, esa: Grammatical Theory and Metascience. A critical investigation into <strong>the</strong> methodological and<br />
philosophical foundations of 'autonomous' linguistics. 1978. x, 355 pp.<br />
4 hoPPer, Paul J. (ed.): Studies in Descriptive and Historical Linguistics. Festschrift for Winfred P.<br />
Lehmann. 1977. x, 502 pp.<br />
3 Maher, J. Peter: <strong>Papers</strong> on Language Theory and History. Volume I: Creation and Tradition in Language.<br />
With a foreword by Raimo Anttila. 1979. xx, 171 pp.<br />
2 weiDert, alfons: Componential Analysis of Lushai Phonology. 1975. xiv, 139 pp.<br />
1 Koerner, e.F.K. (ed.): The Transformational-Generative Paradigm and Modern Linguistic Theory. 1975.<br />
viii, 462 pp.