Selected Papers from the Fourteenth International ... - STIBA Malang
Selected Papers from the Fourteenth International ... - STIBA Malang
Selected Papers from the Fourteenth International ... - STIBA Malang
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
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.