Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T08:35:59.431Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The interchangeability of Old English verbal prefixes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

Michiko Ogura
Michiko Ogura
Affiliation:
Chiba University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Old English prefixed verbs are numerous. At times prefixes are used to convey different shades of meaning, but often the meanings seem, in context, not to convey definite distinctions in sense. Prefixes and prefixed verbs must have been important in Old English, judging from their numbers and morphological distinctions, but most prefixes had adverbial and/or prepositional counter-parts, and verbs with adverbs or prepositional phrases (whether preposed or postposed to verbs) could be used alongside prefixed verbs.

Type
Research Article
Information
Anglo-Saxon England , Volume 24 , December 1995 , pp. 67 - 93
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Note: P = prefix/particle, V = verb, P′ ≠ P, i.e. P′ is different from P, V′ ≠ V, i.e. V′ is different from V. For the abbreviated titles of Old English works I follow Mitchell, B., Ball, C. and Cameron, A., ‘Short Titles of Old English Texts’, ASE 4 (1975), 207–21Google Scholar and ‘Addenda, and Corrigenda, ’, ASE 8 (1979), 331–3.Google Scholar I use A Microfiche Concordance to Old English, ed. Venezky, R. L. and diPaolo Healey, A. (Toronto, 1980)Google Scholar and A Microfiche Concordance to Old English: The High-Frequency Words, ed. Venezky, R. L. and Butler, S. (Toronto, 1985)Google Scholar in addition to the following editions:

PsGlA The Vespasian Psalter, ed. Kuhn, S. M. (Ann Arbor, MI, 1965)Google Scholar

PsGlD Der altenglische Regius-Psalter, ed. Roeder, F. (Halle, 1904; repr. Tübingen, 1973)Google Scholar

Gosp (Mt, Mk, Lk, Jn) The Gospel according to St. Matthew, St. Mark, St. Luke, and St. John, ed. Skeat, W. W. (Cambridge, 1871–1887; repr. Darmstadt, 1970)Google Scholar

GD Bischof Wærferths von Worcester Übersetzung der Dialoge Gregors des Grossen, ed. Hecht, H., Bibliothek der angelsächsischen Prosa 5 (Leipzig, 1900)Google Scholar

BenR Die angelsächsischen Prosabearbeitungen der Benediktinerregel, ed. Schröer, A., Bibliothek der angelsächsischen Prosa 2(Kassel, 1885–1888; repr. Darmstadt, 1964)Google Scholar

BenRGl The Rule of S. Benet, ed. Logeman, H., EETS 90 (London, 1888; repr. New York, 1981)Google Scholar

Chron Two of the Saxon Chronicles Parallel, ed. Plummer, C. and Earle, J., 2 vols. (Oxford, 1892–1899)Google Scholar

2 Note: P″ ≠ P′ ≠ P, i.e. P, P′ and P″ are all different prefixes/particles.

3 According to Ker, the date of the interlinear gloss to Regula S. Benedicti in London, British Library, Cotton Tiberius A. iii, fols. 2–173, is s. ximed. Among manuscripts of the Old English translations, Cambridge, Corpus Christi College 178, pp. 287–457, which is Schroer's manuscript A and is dated s. xi1, seems earlier than the gloss. This is why I put BenR first and then BenRGlin the table. As will be seen, major correspondences of prefixes, like on-fon and under-fon, show the same order of interchange as those in the pairs of versions of other works. For manuscript datings, see Ker, N. R., Catalogue of Manuscripts containing Anglo-Saxon (Oxford, 1957, reissued with Appendix, 1990)Google Scholar and Gneuss, H., ‘A Preliminary List of Manuscripts Written or Owned in England up to 1100’, ASE 9 (1981), 1–60.Google Scholar

4 In ASPR, vols. 1, 5 and 6 use and, and the rest ond, although in most cases the Old English abbreviation 7 was used in manuscripts.

5 Brinton, L. J., The Development of English Aspectual Systems (Cambridge, 1988), pp. 189–90.Google Scholar

6 Native prefixes (or preposed adverbs) were replaced by loan prefixes to some extent, e.g. eft-by re- and of- or fram- by de-.

7 See Ogura, M., ‘Simple Verbs, Prefixed Verbs, and Verb-Particle Combinations in OE and eME Works’, Stud. in Mod. Eng. 8 (1991), 55–73.Google Scholar

8 Monosyllabicity is not the sole factor that made prefixes obsolete, as the cases wið- and ðurh- clearly show. Wið- survived because of the semantic shift of the adverbial counterpart (from ‘against’ to ‘together with’) and ðurh-, probably because it had many meanings and was relatively infrequent.

9 See Ogura, M., ‘Verbs Prefixed with Ofer- and Under- in OE and ME’, Chiba Rev. 15 (1993), 1–25.Google Scholar

10 Cf. Hel. 5016b, where bi- is attached to quam in a manuscript variant: that ik io te tbesumu liobte quam [biquam C]. I use Heliand und Genesis, ed. Behaghel, O., 9th ed. (Tübingen, 1984), and have consulted Eduard Sievers's edition (Halle, 1878), whenever necessary.Google Scholar

11 McLintock, D. R., ‘“To Forget” in Germanic’, TPS (1972), 79–93.Google Scholar

12 Ibid. p. 92.

13 This might be a free translation, meaning ‘we should not forget the devil’, in contrast with Li, ‘now we recognize that you have [the] devil’, though ne seems to be glossing nunc in the manuscript.

14 Cf. Hel. 3668a godes rîki fargaf [gafC] gôdun mannun and 5252b sô ina imu the kêsur fargaf [gafC] the rîkeo fan Rûmu.

15 ChronE 1137 (263.32) iafen up can be regarded as an emphatic phrasal expression for eME iafen, which as a simplex was weakened in sense and reinforced by an Old Norse equivalent.

16 Ogura, , ‘Simple Verbs’, p. 69.Google Scholar

17 The Heliand also shows the two kinds of element order as variants: Hel. 4097b endi hêt ina standen up [upp standan C].

18 Of course these pairs of verbs can be used distinctively. In OE Bede, two Latin verbs are rendered by bebeodan and onbeodan respectively: Bede 1.25 (58.4–5): ‘Noman hi eac swylce him wealhstodas of Franclande mid, swa him Gregorius bebead [praecipiente] 7 þa sende to Æþelbyrhte ærenddracan 7 onbead [mandauit], þæt he of Rome come 7 þæt betste ærende lædde.’

19 All these examples correspond to negare, but cf. GD 78.28 wiðsoc (C) vs forsoc (H) rendering recusavit.

20 There is often phonological confusion of weakened ge- [Ɨ] and a– [Ə], which is not obvious from the spelling.

21 It could be accidental, but Ru1 shows renderings similar to Tatian in a few instances: e.g. Mt XXVIII.2 [accedens] (Li) geneolecde vs (Ru1) togangende, cf. Tatian 217.1 zuogangenti, and Mt X.28 [occidunt … occidere] (Li) ofslaes … of[s]lae vs (Ru1) slæhþ … ofslæan, cf. Tatian 44.19 slahent … arslahan.

22 The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, ed. Thorpe, B., 2 vols. (London, 1861) I, 84–5.Google Scholar Whitelock translates ‘pay no regard to’; see The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle: a Revised Translation, ed. Whitelock, D., with Douglas, D. C. and Tucker, S. I. (London, 1961; rev. 1965), p. 31.Google Scholar

23 Ogura, ‘Verbs Prefixed’.

24 OED2 cites examples of oversee in the sense ‘to fail or omit to see, neglect, pass over, disregard’ from 1023 (Wulfstan) to 1774, and those of overlook in the sense ‘to disregard, ignore’ from 1524; the former seems to have been supplanted by the latter in this sense. Also note the interchange of for- and ouer- in Cursor (Trin-C) 8211: God pat al baþ to kepe And al ouerlokeþ [Vsp: for-lokes] in his sizt.

25 And in Modern English the verb-adverb combination shows a figurative development in meaning, quite different from the simplex, like make and make out.

26 van der Gaaf, W., ‘The Passive of a Verb accompanied by a Preposition’, ES 12 (1930), 1–24, at 13.Google Scholar

27 Mitchell, B., ‘Prepositions, Adverbs, Postpositions, Separable Prefixes, or Inseparable Prefixes, in Old English?’ NM 79 (1978), 240–57, at 247.Google Scholar

28 Forðferde in example (44) could have been written as forð ferde.

29 The emendation is made by Trautmann and Holthausen (1st ed., but a weakened form ferfleon in 3rd to 6th ed.); see Beowulf and Judith, ed. Dobbie, E. V. K., ASPR 4 (New York, 1953), 247Google Scholar (notes on Beowulf). Cf. BT: ‘it might be better to take ofer separate from fleón: – Nelle ic beorges weard ofer fleon fotes trem – I mean not to flee the dragon [by retiring] over even part of a foot's space’, and CHM s.v. oferfleon: ‘to fly over, Æ flee from, yield to B 2525’. Another problem is that furður is not in the manuscript. Cf. also Beo 1543 oferwearp [ofer wearp MS] þa werigmod wigena strengest, where the same metrical problem is found.

30 See Cynewulf's ‘Juliana’, ed. Woolf, R. (London, 1955, repr. Exeter, 1977), p. 36Google Scholar and Glossary. Cf. Codex Exoniensis, ed. Thorpe, B. (London, 1842), p. 262Google Scholar, line 26 mod ne oncyrreð ‘we the mind pervert not’. A Microfiche Concordance cites Jul 338 as the only instance of oðcyrran.

31 ÆLS (Basil) 191 to ge-bringan may be better represented as to-ge-bringan, because it is written without a space in British Library, Cotton Julius E. vii.

32 For further discussion on the meaning and Aktionsart of ge-, see Lindemann, J.W.R., Old English Preverbal Ge-: its Meaning (Charlottesville, NC, 1970), pt II.Google Scholar

33 Cf. Hel. 1838a He im thô bêðiu befalh ge to seggennea sînom uuordun, where ge is an adverb denoting ‘always’, but there is a variant: Te giseggeanne [C].

34 Ancrene Wisse, ed. Tolkien, J.R.R., EETS os 249 (London, 1960)Google Scholar, and The English Text of the Ancrene Riwle edited from Cotton MS. Nero A. XIV, ed. Day, M., EETS os 225 (London, 1957).Google Scholar

35 In Lk XIX.4 the verb is faran, a simplex, and so the example is not relevant here.

36 See Ogura, M., Verbs in Medieval English. Semantic and Syntactic Conflict (Berlin, forthcoming), ch. 5.Google Scholar

37 The use of meaningless or separable ge-, which had already been pointed out by Samuels in the Lindisfarne gloss, seems also to apply to BL, Cotton Tiberius A. iii: see Samuels, M. L., ‘The Ge-Prefix in the Old English Gloss to the Lindisfarne Gospel’, TPS (1949), 62–116.Google Scholar

38 Note: V = verb (stem), P = prefix, (P) = an optional prefix, Pa = particle (which may function as a prefix when preposed to V), and (Pa) = an optional particle.

39 De Liflade ant te Passiun of Seinte iuliene, ed. d'Ardenne, S.R.T.O., EETS os 248 (London, 1961).Google Scholar

40 Roberts, M. H., ‘The Antiquity of the Germanic Verb-Adverb Locution’, JEGP 35 (1936), 466–81, at 480.Google Scholar

41 See Tatian, ed. Sievers, E. (Paderborn, 1872, repr. 1960), Glossary. E.g. quëman and biquëman for venire; bi-ginnan and in-ginnan for incipere; stîgan, ar-stîgan, in-stîgan and nidar-stîgan for descendere. Cf. ar-uuelzen for revolvere, nidar-gi-uuelzen for provolvere, zuo-gi-uuelzen for advolvere; helden for declinare, int-helden for reclinare, nidar-helden for inclinare.Google Scholar

42 A somewhat different, shortened version of this paper was read at the sixth meeting of the International Society of Anglo-Saxonists at Wadham College, Oxford, in August 1993. I am grateful to Bruce Mitchell, Fellow Emeritus of St Edmund Hall, Oxford, for his comments on grammatical points. My thanks are also due to E. G. Stanley (Pembroke College, Oxford), for his help in finding indispensable books and articles on the subject and to Malcolm Godden (Pembroke College, Oxford), for his helpful comments on an earlier version.