Why worser is better: The double comparative in 16th- to 17th-century English

2001 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 193-208 ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Schlüter

In Early Modern English, double comparatives were often encountered in both spoken and written language. The present article investigates the redundantly marked comparative worser in relation to its irregular, but etymologically justified, counterpart worse. My aim is to examine the diachronic development of the form as well as its distribution in the written language of the 16th and 17th centuries. Two detailed corpus studies are used to reveal the set of parameters underlying the variation between worse and worser, which include system congruity, semantics, and standardization effects. However, the focus here is on the tendency to maintain an alternation of stressed and unstressed syllables, known as the Principle of Rhythmic Alternation. This prosodic principle (which has been argued to be particularly influential in English) turns out to be responsible for most of the results obtained in the analysis of the corpus data.

2000 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 295-316 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gunnar Bergh ◽  
Aimo Seppänen

In the course of their history, English wh-relatives are known to have undergone a syntactic change in their prepositional usage: having originally occurred only with pied-piped prepositions, they came to admit preposition stranding as an alternative pattern. The present article presents an overview of this process, showing a modest beginning of stranding in Late Middle English, an increase in Early Modern English, and then a clear decrease in the written language of today, against a more liberal use in spoken English, standard as well as nonstandard. The drop in the incidence of stranding is thus not an expression of a genuine grammatical change but due to notions of correctness derived from the grammar of Latin and affecting written usage. The general trend of the development outlined is mirrored by relative that, with which the pied piping attested in Middle English completely disappeared from the language.


Diachronica ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger Lass

SUMMARY The received wisdom among historians of English is that the modern quality/length distinction in the pairs /I, i:/, /u, u:/ is of ancient date, going back at least to Middle English, if not Old English or earlier (WGmc * /i, e:/, * /u, o:/ are the main sources). In a recent paper (Lass 1989), I claimed that these pairs were distinct only in length (/i, i:/, etc.) until well into the 17th century. This was contested by Minkova & Stockwell (1990) on the grounds that, inter alia, no such systems exist in modern West Germanic, and therefore cannot be reconstructed for earlier periods. In the present paper it is shown that in fact such systems are attested in geographically peripheral West Germanic dialects (Dutch, South German), and argued that this supports the conservative interpretation of the orthoepic descriptions of these pairs, which consistently show qualitative identity until the 1680s. RÉSUMÉ Selon l'opinion reçue dans l'érudition parmi les historiens de la langue anglaise la distinction qualité/longueur dans les paires A, i:/, /u, u:/ a des origines lointaines, remontant au moins à l'anglais moyen, peut-être même au viel anglais ou plus loin encore (germain occ. * /i, e:/, * /u, o:/ comme sources principales). Dans un article récent (Lass 1989), j'avais émis l'hypothèse que ces paires ne restaient distinctes qu'au niveau de la longueur (/i, i:/, etc.) et cela jusqu'à la fin du XVIIe siècle. Une telle opinion fut contestée par Minkova & Stockwell (1990) qui, en autres chose, se basèrent sur l'argument de tels systèmes n'existent pas dans les langues ouest-germaniques modernes et que, par conséquent, on ne pouvait pas reconstruire un tel système pour des périodes plus anciennes. Dans le présent article il est démontré qu'en effet de tels systèmes sont attestés dans des dialectes ouest-germains qui se trouvent géogra-phiquement à la périphérie (le hollandais, l'allemand méridional). Selon l'argument présenté ici, cette évidence mène à une interpretation conservatrice des descriptions orthoépiques de ces paires qui démontrent, d'une façon consistante, une telle identité qualitative jusqu'aux années 1680. ZUSAMMENFASSUNG Der traditionellen, von Historikern der englischen Sprache rezipierten Auf-fassung zufolge ist die Unterscheidung Qualität/Länge der Paare /I, i:/, /u, u:/ von hohem Alter, wenigstens bis zum Mittelenglischen zurückgehend, wenn nicht gar zum Altenglischen oder soger früher (WGerm. * /i, e:/, * /u, o:/ als deren Hauptquellen). In einem jüngeren Aufsatz (Lass 1989) vertrat ich die Auffassung, daß diese Paare (/i, i:/, usw.) bis weit ins 17. Jahrhundert hinein bestanden hätten. Diese Auffassung ist von Minkova & Stockwell (1990) zu-riickgewiesen worden, und zwar u.a. mit dem Hinweis darauf, daB solche Systeme in modernen westgermanischen Sprachen nicht bestünden und daher auch nicht fur frühere Zeiträume rekonstruiert werden könnten. Im vorlie-genden Artikel wird nachgewiesen, daB in der Tat solche Systeme in geogra-phisch am Rande befindlichen westgermanischen Dialekten (Niederländisch, Siiddeutsch) vorhanden sind. Dies sollte die vom Autor vertretene konservative Interpretation der orthoepischen Beschreibungen dieser Phonem-Paare unter-stiitzen, die bis in die 80er Jahre des 17. Jahrhunderts hinein in konsistenter Weise qualitative Identitaten aufgewiesen haben.


2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (1) ◽  
pp. 129-151
Author(s):  
Andreas Baumann ◽  
Christina Prömer ◽  
Nikolaus Ritt

Abstract This paper explores the hypothesis that morphotactically ambiguous segment sequences should be dispreferred and selected against in the evolution of languages. We define morphotactically ambiguous sequences as sequences that can occur both within morphemes and across boundaries, such as final /nd/ or /mz/ in ModE, which occur in simple forms like wind or alms and in complex ones like sinned or seems. We test the hypothesis in two diachronic corpus studies of Middle and Early Modern English word forms ending in clusters of sonorants followed by /d/ or /t/ and /s/ or /z/. These clusters became highly frequent after the loss of unstressed vowels in final syllables and were highly ambiguous when they emerged. Our data show that the ambiguity of these final clusters was indeed reduced so that the distribution of the final clusters became increasingly skewed: clusters ending in voiceless coronals became significantly clearly indicative of simple forms, while clusters ending in voiced ones came to signal inflectional complexity more reliably.


2017 ◽  
Vol 7 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 134-159
Author(s):  
Zeltia Blanco-Suárez ◽  
Mario Serrano-Losada

Abstract The article traces the diachronic development of the assumed evidential needless to say. This parenthetical expression allows the speaker to make certain assertions regarding the obviousness of what s/he is about to say, thus serving as an evidential strategy that marks the information conveyed as being based on inference and/or assumed or general knowledge. Parenthetical needless to say has its roots in the Early Modern English needless to-inf construction (meaning ‘it is unnecessary to do something’), which originally licensed a wide range of infinitives. Over the course of time, however, it became restricted to uses with utterance verbs, eventually giving rise to the grammaticalized evidential expression needless to say. In fact, it is only in Late Modern English that the evidential pragmatic inferences become conventionalized and that the first parenthetical uses of the construction are attested. In Present-day English, parenthetical needless to say occurs primarily at the left periphery with forward scope.


Diachronica ◽  
1994 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 199-212 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephen J. Nagle

SUMMARY The English double-modal combinations such as might could, used by over 20,000,000 speakers in the southern United States and by much smaller populations in Scotland and Northern Ireland, are nonetheless unknown to speakers of standard and colloquial varieties of other types of English. In syntactic theory, they are somewhat problematic for versions of generative syntax that hold that in English the modal auxiliary is the head of its clause, ruling out modal combinations. This article assumes, based on previous investigations (Nagle 1993, Montgomery & Nagle 1994), that today's double modals are innovations. It then argues that their rise in Early Modern English reflects a conspiracy of syntactic and semantic factors. RÉSUMÉ Les combinaisons anglaises des expressions modales doubles comme might could, malgr6 le fait que'elles sont utilisées par 20 millions locuteurs au sud des Etats Unis et en Ecosse et Irlande du Nord par une population beau-coup moins grande, ne sont pas connus parmi les locuteurs d'autres variantes anglaises, standard ou colloquial. En theorie syntaxique, elles s'averent un peu problématiques pour des types de syntaxe generative qui maintiennent que la modale auxiliaire represente la 'tete' de sa clause, ainsi excluant les combinaisons modales. Le present article, se basant sur des investgations precedantes (Nagle 1993, Montgomery & Nagle 1994), suppose que les modales doubles d'aujourd'hui représentent des innovations. II constate que son apparition dans 1'anglais moderne du XVIIe siecle reflete une 'conspiration' de facteurs syn-taxiques et semantique. ZUSAMMENFASSUNG Kombinationen doppelter Modalwörtern im Englischen wie might could, die von iiber 2 Millionen Sprechern in den Siidstaaten verwendet werden und auch von einer geringeren Bevolkerungszahl in Schottland und Nordirland, sind unter Sprechern anderer Varietaten, des Standards wie auch der Um-gangssprache, nicht bekannt. Fur die Syntaxtheorie, vor allem fur gewisse generative Modelle, sind solche Verwendungen dieser Art problematisch, und zwar deshalb, weil sie behaupten, daB das modale Hilfszeitwort gewisser-maßen den 'Kopf der jeweiligen Wortgruppe darstelle. Auf vorangegangene Forschungen (Nagle 1993, Montgomery & Nagle 1994) aufbauend, nimmt der vorliegende Aufsatz an, daB es sich bei diesen doppelten Modalkombinationen um Neuerungen handelt. Ihr Aufkommen im Frühneuenglischen sei eine 'Ver-schworung' syntaktischer und semantischer Faktoren.


2012 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 303-320
Author(s):  
Dana Percec

Abstract The paper discusses the ironic manner in which gender relations are often tackled in the early modern English romance, from Shakespeare’s comedies to Sidney’s pastorals or Lady Mary Wroth’s poetry. Strong female characters, effeminate males and the subversive, often ambiguous, manner in which the theme of love is approached in 16th- and 17th - century English literature are some of the aspects to be discussed.


2008 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-102 ◽  
Author(s):  
HENDRIK DE SMET

This article examines the use of three gerund constructions in Middle and Early Modern English on the basis of corpus data covering the period 1250–1640. The constructions examined are verbal gerunds (eating the apple), bare nominal gerunds (eating of the apple), and definite nominal gerunds (the eating of the apple). It is argued that the success of verbal gerunds in the history of English can only be understood against the background of the interaction with their nominal counterparts. An analysis is offered of how the system of gerund constructions is functionally organised, comparing discourse-functional behaviour, distribution, and internal syntax across the three gerund types. It is shown that verbal gerunds closely resemble bare nominal gerunds in terms of discourse-functional behaviour and distribution, but are syntactically more flexible. As a result, verbal gerunds could replace bare nominal gerunds, copying their function but adding syntactic flexibility. By contrast, definite nominal gerunds, being functionally distinct from the other two types, developed a number of specialised uses, which ensured their survival. These conclusions throw light on issues of functional motivation in the development of the English gerund. Historical change is seen to be grounded in synchronic functional organisation. At the same time, it is shown that the only existing explanation for the rise of verbal gerunds (attributing their success to their ability to combine with prepositions) can only be partly correct.


Author(s):  
Clara Molina

This paper explores the diachronic transition of the adjective sorry from lexical towards grammatical status which resulted in its entrenchment as a formulaic pragmatic marker. As attested by Helsinki Corpus data, the gradual emergence of a number of context-bound complementation patterns (each one linked to distinct semantic nuances of the term) was matched by an increasing detachment of sorry from the domain of sadness, within which the adjective had been central since the earliest times. After the developments had been completed in Early Modern English, the increasingly frequent use of sorry in everyday discourse made for the entrenchment of the novel pragmaticalized instances, which have only gained salience in the language ever since. The processes presented in this paper provide insights into the factors involved in diachronic change and contribute to the ongoing discussion of pragmatic markers.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document