Selected Papers from the Fourteenth International ... - STIBA Malang

148 Cristina Suárez-Gómez
(7) se þridda sinoð wæs eft, [ RC þæt wæs twa
the third synod was again Rel was two hund
bisceopa], under þam gingran þeodosige.
hundred bishops under the young Theodosius
“The third synod, which had two hundred bishops, was celebrated again under
the young Theodosius.’ [Q O3 IR RELT LWSTAN 1: 59]
• Gap relativization strategy, represented by zero relative clauses, as in (8):
(8) & on somnunge wæs monn [ RC Ø hæfde ðone
& in congregation was man Rel had the
dioul unclæne].
soul unclean
“There was a man in the congregation who had the soul unclean.”
[Q O3 XX NEWT LIND 4.33]
Relativizer zero existed in Old English, but such relative clauses were very uncommon.
In most cases the relativized item functions as subject.
Middle English keeps the same three-fold formal distinction of relative clauses. In
fact, Middle English displays the same relativizers as West-Saxon: invariable relativizers
þe and þat; relativizer zero; and, finally, pronominal relativizers, represented by
the demonstrative elements se and seþe. To these relativizers, it is necessary to add the
wh- pronominal set that emerged in this period (Fischer 1992: 199), illustrated in (9):
(9) And him behoten ðat an scolde cumen of his
and him promised that one should come from his
kenne [ RC ðurh hwam all mankenn scolde bien
family through rel all mankind should be
iblesced]
blessed
“And it was promised to him that one should not come from this family through
whom all manking should be blessed.” [Q M1 IR RELT VICES1 3: 109]
The most important differences between Old and Middle English lie in the distribution
and frequency of each relativization strategy, which are the object of study
in the following section.
4.2 Distribution
Relative clauses introduced by the invariable relativizer þe are by far the most frequently
used in late Old English, as illustrated in Table 2 (see Suárez Gómez 2004: 216),
introducing almost 80 per cent of the relative clauses of this period. Clauses introduced
by pronominal relativizers, either simple or compound, represent the second most
frequent group of relative clauses, with much less frequency than þe relative clauses
(18.7 per cent). In this period there are only a few sporadic instances of þat used