The verb phrase from OE to
ME:
some examples to examine
(from Rigg’s English
language: a historical reader)
ME
(N) Foghlis of heuen and fischis of the see, that gas the wayes of the
se.
ME
(M): the briddis of the eir, and the fischis of the see; that passen bi
the pathis of the see
OE fléogende
fuglas and sæ:fiscas, þá farað geond þá sæ:wegas
ME
(N) What is ... son of man for thou visites him?
ME
(M) What is ... the sone of a virgyn, for thou visitist hym?
OE:
hwæt is sé mannes sunu þe þú oft ræ:dlíce néosast?
ME
(N) Of the mouth of noght spekand and sowkand thou has
made louynge for thi enmys
ME
(M) Of the mouth of 3onge children, not spekynge and soukynge
mylk, thou madist perfitly heriyng, for thin enemyes
[PDE:
on the lips of children and of babes you have found praise to foil your enemy]
ME
(N) For I sal see thi heuens, werkis of thi fyngirs, the mone and the
sternes...
ME
(M) For Y schal se thin heuenes, the werkis of thi fyngris; the moone
and sterris...
OE:
Ic ongite nú þæt weorc þínra fingra, þæt synd heofonas and móna and
sterorran...
ME verb morphology: overview
of issues
“The
story of the verb during Middle English is enormously involved, and nearly
impossible to tell coherently. The noun was bad enough, with only case and
number (and marginally gender) to worry about; here we have not only tense,
person, number, and mood, but a plethora of distinct strong and weak classes
with partially independent histories, and numerous odd but important verbs like
be, do, can, must. These complications make a neat category-by-category
narrative nearly impossible. Still, we have to start somewhere; and since the
‘victory of tense’ is the main theme of the story, this is a good place to
begin.’ (Lass, p. 125)
OE
verbal system already quite simple compared to IE and other Gmc languages
§
no
inflected passive
§
no
dual for verbs (Gothic still had it)
§
no
distinction of person
o in plural
o anywhere in the subjunctive
(-e sg., -en plural)
Sound
changes in ME further blur distinctions:
§
early:
levelling of vowels in unstressed final syllables
§
later:
loss of some word-final sounds)
o –(e)(n)
§
e.g.
infinitive: OE feallan -> fall(e)(n)
Distinctions
blurring because of sound changes (levelling of vowels in final unstressed
syllables)
§
Number
in the present indicative, 3 sg.(-eþ) and 1-3 pl. (-aþ)
§
Mood
in the past plural: indicative –on and subjunctive –en
What
remains distinct?
§
present
tense verb endings in some dialects
o 2 sg. –st (until
whole category disappears!)
o 3 sg. –th (and its
competitor –s)
§
tense
marking
o weak verb suffix
o strong verb ablaut
§
English
has a tendency for each part of speech to have one dominant parameter
·
verb:
tense
·
noun:
number
Analogical change
Weak
verbs
o characteristic of/productive
in Germanc languages
o “numerically preponderant
even in OE”
o “the natural analogical
target for restructuring the verb system in ME”
o conceptual base: marking
past tense with a suffix containing /t/ or /d/
In
ME, the category of weak verbs is augmented by (for instance)...
o borrowed words
o sometimes conjugated as
irregular weak verbs
§
e.g.
catch sounded like (now obsolete) OE læ:can (læhte)
o so that’s why it’s not catched
o some old strong verbs:
common through OE, increase late 14th-early 15th
o arbitrary:
§
OE
bacan ‘bake’ cf. OE wacan ‘wake’
o alternation between strong
and weak forms seen during ME, EModE
§
OE
helpan was strong, now it’s weak (helped)
§
in
ME, you find halpe & helpyd
(OE healp)
o sometimes the alternation
persists in PDE
§
e.g.
swell has weak past swelled but strong participle swollen
o semantic
distinction? (swelled head,
swollen glands)
§
sometimes
old strong past participle survives w/ adjectival meaning, e.g. graven
images
Exceptions
to this trend also often a result of analogy
o OE stician was weak: sticode,
but now it’s strong
o OF estriver:
infinitive sounded like strong class I (drive(n)
o [ON taka was already strong
in ON: tok -> take, took]
Other
results of analogical change
o strong verbs: some remained
strong but switched categories
o e.g. OE class 5 verbs take
on class 4 participles
§
(ge)specen -> (y)spoke(n)
§
(ge)wefen -> (y)wove(n)
o all OE strong verbs levelled
their 2 past tenses under 1 form
o but there were 2 forms to
choose from: for instance, class I OE
§
OE
wrát, writon -> wrote
§
OE
bát, biton -> bit
·
took
ages: look at OED!
·
e.g.
writ a past tense for a long time
o stages:
o level past singular under
the vowel of 1,3sg.
§
e.g.
in OE, 2 sg. write (vs 1,3 sg wrát)
o then eliminate number
opposition
§
e.g.
between wrote and writ(en)
o all strong verbs: levelling
of i-mutated 2,3 sg. present forms
o OE helpe, hilpst, hilpð,
helpað -> ME help-
Other
changes
o in the midlands, assumption
that the reflex of OE –on meant ‘plural’, not ‘past plural’
o OE helpað -> ME helpen
§
probably
influenced by the ‘preterite-present verbs’, which had –on in the
present (old past!)
·
OE
we sculon ‘we must’
o not relevant in PDE, since
present tense verbs aren’t inflected for plural any more
o in some verbs with irregular
forms, analogical levelling through the paradigm
o e.g. OE giefan, gæf
/v/ and /f/ -> ME yive, yaf ->> eventually /v/
ME verb morphology: the fate
of some non-finite forms
Non-finite
o i.e. forms that are not
inflected for tense, number, person
·
infinitives,
present and past participles
Infinitive: OE –an -> ME –en
-> ME –(e)(n)
o by the late 14th
century, about half are unmarked (i.e. without -en)
·
of
the marked ones, most are be-n “be”
o i.e. it’s often the most
common words that most resist change
Strong
past participle: OE ge- -en -> ME y- -en -> ME (y-) (-en)
In
OE
· ge- used to have
‘collectivising/perfective’ sense
o
e.g. wrítan ‘to write’, gewrit ‘something written’
· often meaningless in OE
(verbs with/out ge)
Later
changes
· began to drop off past
participles as early as C10th in the north
o
more
stable in the south
· south often conservative
· variation exploited in verse
o
e.g.
Adam lay ybounden, bounden in a bond ...
Verbal
noun
PDE
·
in
PDE, a form in –ing with noun-like properties (e.g. can be
subject/object of a sentence)
o I love running. Running
wrecked my knees.
OE
-> ME
·
in
OE, depending upon the verb class, either –ing or –ung
o e.g., from rædan, ræ:ding
‘lesson’; from leornian, leornung ‘learning’
o in ME, levelled as –ing
ME: Fro the voice of my sorowynge
ME: Of the vois of my weilyng
[OE: has a different rendering of the Latin with
present participle, gnorniende ‘sorrowing’]
Present
participle
PDE:
o
in
PDE, a form in –ing with adjective-like properties (e.g. can modify a
noun)
o
My
running nose
o
in
PDE, used to form the progressive/continuous/durative (BE + PrP)
o
I
am running.
OE->ME
o
in
OE, -ende: Đær wæron sume of ðæm bócerum sittende
There were some of the scribes sitting
o
in
OE, not grammaticalized: “durative aspect is inherent in the meaning of
most verbs”
OE ðéos woruld .. néalæcð ðam ende
this
world is approaching the end...
In
ME
o dialect variation:
o in the north, -and (from
Scandinavian –andi)
o in the midlands, -ende
o in the south, -inde
§
interference from French: -a(u)nt
to be conuersaunt with wymmen
o later: replaced by ing(e)
Jhesus witynge alle
thingis
Why?
o
one
explanation: interference from construction with the verbal noun
OE: he wæs on huntinge [later a-hunting]
OE: he wæs huntende
later: he was hunting
ME dialect variation
(Millward workbook 6.16)
Present
third person singular
o Germanic -iþi
o OE –þ
o ME dialects diverge
o –eth in most dialects
o but –s in the north
§
Why?
·
in
Old Northumbrian, 3sg had sometimes fallen together under 2sg (which was
historically –s – the –st is an innovation)
Present
plural
·
OE
–að
·
Northumbrian
–as as well as –að
·
ME
dialects diverge
o north has –s (or nothing
at all)
o south keeps –eth
o midlands substitute –en
§
analogy
with plural
·
past
indicative: we haefdon ‘we had’
·
present
of pret-present verbs: we sculon ‘we must’
The
north generally:
·
language
contact in Danelaw catalyst for grammatical innovation
o new 3rd person
plural pronouns
o watch for prepositions: til,
fra
·
more
/s/
·
2sg,
3sg, 1-3 pl
·
nouns