A Corpus-based Approach of Indefinite Relative Pronoun Whatever : from Old English to Early Modern English

2015 ◽  
Vol 22 (4) ◽  
pp. 159-174
Author(s):  
Juyeon Cho ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Early Modern ◽  
Old English ◽  
Relative Pronoun ◽  
Early Modern English

From ‘quickly’ to ‘fairly’: on the history ofrather

2008 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 345-359 ◽  
Author(s):  
MATTI RISSANEN
Keyword(s):  
Eighteenth Century ◽  
Early Modern ◽  
Middle English ◽  
Old English ◽  
Type I ◽  
Early Modern English ◽  
Semantic Development ◽  
Syntactic Development

In this article I describe the semantic and syntactic development of the moderatorratherfrom Old to Present-day English using a variationist approach.Ratheroriginates in an Old English comparative adverb indicating speed, and hence time, but the loss of the indication of speed and movement can already be traced in the Old English period. In Middle English the ‘preferential’ senses ofrather(e.g. the type ‘I would rather do X than Y’) become more common than the temporal senses. This contrastive meaning constitutes the unmarked use ofratherin Early Modern English, but it gradually weakens in the course of the Modern English period. The moderator use becomes popular in the second half of the eighteenth century. The semantic development outlined above goes hand in hand with a syntactic development from an original adjunct into a subjunct and conjunct, and finally into a modifier of adjectives and adverbs.

Parenthetical reporting clauses in the history of English: the development of quotative inversion

2018 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 183-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
ANNA CICHOSZ
Keyword(s):  
Early Modern ◽  
Old English ◽  
Direct Speech ◽  
Factors Influencing ◽  
Early Modern English ◽  
History Of ◽  
Main Factors ◽  
Diachronic Analysis ◽  
Late Modern ◽  
Annotated Corpora

This study is a corpus-based diachronic analysis of English reporting parentheticals, i.e. clauses introducing direct speech, placed after or in the middle of the reported message. The aim of the investigation is to trace the development of the construction throughout the history of English, establishing the main factors influencing the choice between VS and SV patterns (i.e. with and without quotative inversion respectively), showing how various reporting verbs were increasingly attracted to the construction, and demonstrating the gradual morphological reduction of the main reporting verbs: quoth and say. The study is based on syntactically annotated corpora of Old, Middle, Early Modern and Late Modern English, and uses other corpora to illustrate more recent changes. The study reveals that reporting clauses do not show regular quotative inversion with all subject types until the Early Modern English period and links this development to the emergence of the comment clause with say. It is also claimed that quotative inversion is not directly derived from the V-2 rule and that parenthetical reporting clauses have functioned as a separate construction since the Old English period.

Investigating the past of the futurate present

2021 ◽  
pp. 210-238
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Cowper ◽  
Daniel Currie Hall ◽  
Bronwyn M. Bjorkman ◽  
Rebecca Tollan ◽  
Neil Banerjee
Keyword(s):  
Early Modern ◽  
Middle English ◽  
Old English ◽  
Distinct Class ◽  
The Past ◽  
Early Modern English ◽  
Present Tense ◽  
Primary Form

Using a corpus of 1118 future-referring clauses from each of five versions of the Christian Gospels, this paper explores the effect that the development of English modals as a distinct class had on the range of meanings expressed by the simple present tense. It is shown that in Old English, the simple present tense was the primary form used to express future meanings, while by Early Modern English modals were obligatory in such clauses. In late Middle English, modals were very frequently used, but are shown not to be obligatory. The change is attributed to the advent, in the late 1500s, of a contrastive interpretable feature modality, spelled out by the modals. Thereafter, a clause lacking this contrastive feature could not be interpreted as future-referring except in planned or scheduled contexts. The featural implications of the present-day decline of the true modals are then briefly considered.

Differences in the metrical behavior of Old English finite verbs: evidence for grammaticalization

2000 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
MICHAEL GETTY
Keyword(s):  
Early Modern ◽  
Old English ◽  
Modern Period ◽  
Early Modern English ◽  
The Battle Of Maldon ◽  
Syntactic Differences

This paper deals with the metrical behavior of a class of verbs in Old English whose descendants became the syntactically distinct auxiliaries of the modern period (have, be, may, will, shall, and associated forms). Contrasting two poems from the Old English period (Beowulf and The Battle of Maldon), I show that while the verbs in question show consistently stressed metrical placement in Beowulf, in Maldon they show a pronounced tendency to be placed in unstressed metrical positions, while verbs outside the eventual class of auxiliaries differ indiscriminately. In this way, the poetry suggests a phonological difference between pre-auxiliaries and other verbs perhaps centuries before corresponding morphological and syntactic differences fully emerged in the Middle and early Modern English periods.

The Early Modern English Short Vowels Noch Einmal, Again

Diachronica ◽  
1992 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-13 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger Lass
Keyword(s):  
Early Modern ◽  
Present Article ◽  
Middle English ◽  
Old English ◽  
17Th Century ◽  
West Germanic ◽  
Short Vowels ◽  
Early Modern English ◽  
Xviie Siecle

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.

The subjunctive in main clauses

2020 ◽  
pp. 21-57
Author(s):  
Lilo Moessner
Keyword(s):  
Early Modern ◽  
Middle English ◽  
Old English ◽  
Weak Type ◽  
The Other ◽  
Strong Type ◽  
Early Modern English ◽  
Continuous Frequency ◽  
Root Modality

This chapter deals with the frequency development of the subjunctive and its competitors as well as with their distribution across text categories in main clauses in the periods Old English (OE), Middle English (ME), and Early Modern English (EModE). The results of the analysis of these parameters are interpreted as a change from a preferred weak type of root modality in OE to a strong type in ME, which is reversed in EModE. A more or less continuous frequency decrease of subjunctives from OE until late ME contrasts with a frequency rise of modal contructions and imperatives. Yet the frequency rise of imperatives is reversed in ME. The subjunctive is the preferred realisation of the verbal syntagms in text category STA (legislative texts) in all periods. The other text categories with big shares of relevant verbal syntagms have changing preferences of their realisations.

Referential Null Subjects in Early English

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristian A. Rusten
Keyword(s):  
Early Modern ◽  
Old English ◽  
Fixed Effects ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Null Subjects ◽  
Empirical Examination ◽  
Early Modern English ◽  
History Of ◽  
Verbal Agreement ◽  
Early English

This book offers a large-scale quantitative investigation of referential null subjects as they occur in Old, Middle, and Early Modern English. Using corpus linguistic methods, and drawing on five corpora of early English, the book empirically addresses the occurrence of subjectless finite clauses in more than 500 early English texts, and excerpts of texts, spanning nearly 850 years of the history of English. The book gives an in-depth quantitative analysis of c.80,000 overt and null referential pronominal subjects in 181 Old English texts. On the basis of this substantial data material, the book re-evaluates previous conflicting claims concerning the occurrence and distribution of null subjects in Old English. The book critically addresses the question of whether the earliest stage of English can be considered a canonical or partial pro-drop language. It also provides an empirical examination of the role played by central licensors of null subjects proposed in the theoretical literature, including verbal agreement and Aboutness topicality. The predictions of two important pragmatic accounts of null arguments are also tested. In order to provide a longitudinal perspective, results are provided from an investigation of c.139,000 overt and null referential pronominal subjects occurring in more than 300 Middle and Early Modern English texts and text samples. Throughout, the book builds its arguments by means of powerful statistical tools, including generalized fixed-effects and mixed-effects logistic regression modelling, and is the most comprehensive examination so far provided of null subjects in the history of English.

Co-occurrence and iteration of intensifiers in Early English

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 249-273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Belén Méndez-Naya
Keyword(s):  
Early Modern ◽  
Old English ◽  
Special Focus ◽  
Extensive Literature ◽  
Content Type ◽  
English Prose ◽  
Early Modern English ◽  
Early English ◽  
Linguistic Phenomenon

This article focuses on an aspect of intensification which has not, so far, received due attention in the extensive literature on the topic: intensifier iteration (very very hot) and co-occurrence (very extremely hot), with a special focus on Old, Middle and Early Modern English as represented in the York-Toronto-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Old English Prose and the Penn Parsed Corpora of Historical English. The results show that in earlier English, intensifier iteration is less frequent than co-occurrence; that while the former is clearly associated with emphasis, the latter also intersects with grammaticalization and renewal; and that co-occurrence is particularly salient in periods of instability when the competition of intensifiers is at its height. Iteration and co-occurrence of intensifiers are analysed in this article as cases of the widespread cross-linguistic phenomenon of accretion.

scholarly journals The development of the Englishbe+ V-ende/V-ingperiphrasis: from emphatic to progressive marker?

2014 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 361-386 ◽  
Author(s):  
KRISTIN KILLIE
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Early Modern ◽  
Old English ◽  
Quantitative Data ◽  
Reinforcing Effect ◽  
Early Modern English

The article discusses the grammaticalization of thebe+ V-ende/V-ingperiphrasis as a progressive marker. On the basis of quantitative data, it is claimed that the periphrasis started out as an emphatic alternative to the simple tenses. Its length, unusualness and optionality made it well suited as an emphatic marker. In the Early Modern English period (c. 1500–1700), the periphrasis was reinterpreted as an emphatic progressive marker. The prototypical – so-called focalized – use of the construction gradually became obligatory (from the nineteenth century onwards). This caused the focalized use of the periphrasis to lose its emphasis, while the so-called durative use of the construction has remained optional and emphatic to this day, like the subjective uses of the periphrasis. The article also explores the question of influence from Latin on the periphrasis in the Old English period (i.e. up toc.1100), concluding that any such influence is likely to have consisted in a reinforcing effect.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document