Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T09:26:39.467Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Structural variation in Old English root clauses

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 November 2008

Susan Pintzuk  and
Eric Haeberli
Susan Pintzuk
Affiliation:
University of York
Eric Haeberli
Affiliation:
University of Geneva
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A standard observation concerning basic constituent order in Old English (OE) is that the position of finite verbs varies by clause type. In root clauses, the finite verb tends to occur toward the beginning of the clause, and we frequently find Verb Second (V2) order. In contrast, in subordinate clauses, finite verbs generally occur toward the end of the clause, and these clauses are frequently verb-final. We challenge the traditional assumption that verb-final orders and, hence, the occurrence of the finite verb in a head-final structural position are rare in OE root clauses. We present new data demonstrating that the frequency of head-final structure in OE root clauses is much higher than previously acknowledged. We then explore some of the implications of this finding for the general structural analysis of OE.

Type
Research Article
Information
Language Variation and Change , Volume 20 , Issue 3 , October 2008 , pp. 367 - 407
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

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

REFERENCES

Allen, Cynthia L. (1980). Topics in diachronic English syntax. New York: Garland Press.Google Scholar
Bosworth, Joseph. (1954). An Anglo-Saxon dictionary. Edited and enlarged by Toller, T. Northcote. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bean, Marian. (1983). The development of word order patterns in Old English. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. (1986). Barriers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Clark Hall, John R. (1991). A concise Anglo-Saxon dictionary, 4th ed.Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Fischer, Olga, van Kemenade, Ans, Koopman, Willem, & van der Wurff, Wim. (2000). The syntax of early English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Haeberli, Eric. (2002a). Observations on the loss of verb second in the history of English. In Zwart, J.-W. & Abraham, W. (eds.), Studies in comparative Germanic syntax. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 245–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haeberli, Eric (2002b). Inflectional morphology and the loss of verb-second in English. In Lightfoot, D. (ed.), Syntactic effects of morphological change. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 88–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haeberli, Eric, & Haegeman, Liliane. (1995). Clause structure in Old English: evidence from negative concord. Journal of Linguistics 31:81–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haeberli, Eric, & Pintzuk, Susan. (2006). Revisiting verb (projection) raising in Old English. York Papers in Linguistics Series 2 6:77–94.Google Scholar
Kayne, Richard. (1994). The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kemenade, Ans van. (1987). Syntactic case and morphological case in the history of English. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koopman, Willem. (1995). Verb-final main clauses in Old English prose. Studia Neophilologica 67:129–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kroch, Anthony, & Taylor, Ann. (2000). Verb-complement order in Middle English. In Pintzuk, S., Tsoulas, G., & Warner, A. (eds). Diachronic syntax: Models and mechanisms. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 132–163.Google Scholar
Mitchell, Bruce. (1985). Old English syntax. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, Davita J. (2005). Objects in Old English: Scrambled, shifted or in situ? Ph.D. dissertation, University of York.Google Scholar
Pintzuk, Susan. (1993). Verb seconding in Old English. The Linguistic Review 10:5–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pintzuk, Susan (1999). Phrase structures in competition: Variation and change in Old English word order. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Pintzuk, Susan (2002). Verb-object order in Old English: Variation as grammatical competition. In Lightfoot, D. (ed.), Syntactic effects of morphological change. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 276–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pintzuk, Susan (2005). Arguments against a universal base: Evidence from Old English. English Language and Linguistics 9:115–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pintzuk, Susan, & Taylor, Ann. (2006). The loss of OV order in the history of English. In van Kemenade, A. & Los, B. (eds.), Blackwell handbook of the history of English. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Skeat, Walter W. (1966). Ælfric's lives of saints. Early English Text Society, vols. 76, 82, 94, 114. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Taylor, Ann, Warner, Anthony, Pintzuk, Susan, & Beths, Frank. (2003). The York-Toronto-Helsinki parsed corpus of Old English prose. Available through the Oxford Text Archive, http://ota.oucs.ox.ac.uk/headers/2462.Google Scholar
Traugott, Elizabeth. (1992). Syntax. In Hogg, R. M. (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language. Vol. 1: The beginnings to 1066. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 168–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wurmbrand, Susi. (2005). Verb clusters, verb raising, and restructuring. In Everaert, M. & van Riemsdijk, H. (eds.), The Blackwell companion to syntax. vol. 1–5. Oxford: Blackwell. 227–341.Google Scholar