Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-74d7c59bfc-cm54f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-02-11T13:58:48.492Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Linguistic Representations of Women in Old English Prose

A Corpus-Based Phraseological Study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 January 2026

Anna Cichosz
Affiliation:
University of Lodz
Tomasz Dobrogoszcz
Affiliation:
University of Lodz

Summary

This Element traces the origins and earliest manifestations of gender bias in the English language. The analysis is based on a corpus of Old English prose texts, written between the ninth and the eleventh centuries. The results are interpreted in the historical, cultural and literary context of Anglo-Saxon England and early medieval Europe. The investigation shows a significant difference in the way women and men are presented in Old English texts, with the former clearly associated with family life, portrayed in the context of their physical appearance, marriage and childbearing, rarely involved in meaningful activities and presented as possessions of their male relatives. Situating the linguistic representations of women in the context of Christianity, the Element demonstrates that late Old English can be seen as a vehicle of language bias that will establish male domination for centuries to come. This title is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.

Information

Type
Element
Information
Online ISBN: 9781009625791
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication: 05 February 2026
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BYCreative Common License - NC
This content is Open Access and distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence CC-BY-NC 4.0 https://creativecommons.org/cclicenses/

Linguistic Representations of Women in Old English Prose A Corpus-Based Phraseological Study

Introduction

When Luce Irigaray considers the differences between women’s and men’s discourses, she draws attention to the historicality of social communication practices: ‘Language is a product of the sedimentations of languages of former eras. Every era has its specific needs, creates its own ideals, and imposes them as such. Some are more historically durable than others: sexual ideals are a good example here. These ideals have gradually imposed their norms on our language’ (Irigaray, Reference Irigaray1993: 30).

Examining ‘cultural injustices’ and ‘generalized sexism’ manifested in language, she notes that positive valuation of the masculine and negative appraisal of the feminine has been a linguistic condition lasting for centuries (Irigaray, Reference Irigaray1993: 68). It is only natural, then, that feminist interrogations of language as a tool of discrimination will look both into the present and into the past, encroaching on the territory traditionally ascribed to sociolinguistics and historical linguistics, bringing new insights and a fresh perspective on linguistic data.

Sociolinguistics has analysed the relation between gender and language from two research perspectives. On the one hand, numerous studies have focused on the analysis of the way in which women and men differ in their use of language (including, e.g., Lakoff, Reference Lakoff1975; Spender, Reference Spender1980; Fishman, Reference Fishman, Thorne, Kramarae and Henley1983). On the other hand, many other scholars have investigated the way in which men and women are represented in language, which led to the coinage of the term linguistic sexism (Pauwels, Reference Pauwels, Holmes and Meyerhoff2005). Despite its patent advantages, the former perspective cannot be applied to a great number of historical texts, since female authors are practically absent from medieval records of any European language, including English. As a result, scholars quite unanimously admit that ‘there might not be much material to throw light on matters such as social gender differences in Old English’ (Nevalainen & Raumolin-Brunberg, 2014: 18), since:

[t]he texts we do have are all the result of a tiny literate proportion of society – we can have no idea of how the average farm worker or travelling merchant spoke. Such persons remain, forever, a hidden majority. The literate community, furthermore, were, for the most part, members of religious communities, and this necessarily further limits the type of language which was written down. Those who wrote down our texts, although not necessarily those who composed the thoughts that were written down, were from a highly restricted stratum of the society. They were also likely to be from only a restricted age group, and virtually none of them were female.

Therefore, even though Anglo-Saxon textual records are relatively rich, the impact of social variables such as gender, age, education or social class on the English language may be analysed only from the early modern period onwards (Nevalainen & Raumolin-Brunberg, 2014), because in the sixteenth century a growing number of English-speaking women became literate and started to produce private correspondence.Footnote 1 Nevertheless, even for earlier stages of English it is technically possible to analyse the way in which women and men are represented in historical texts. So far, there have been no comprehensive corpus-based diachronic studies of this topic in the context of English, which means that it is still not clear how the linguistic image of men and women has evolved over the centuries. The aim of this Element is to fill in this gap and take a closer look at gender representation in the earliest records of English by means of advanced corpus methods, interpreting the results in a larger framework of feminist theory.

Considering the historical origins of the disadvantaged socio-cultural position of women, Cixous (Reference Cixous1976: 876) argues that they were ‘led into self-disdain by the great arm of parental-conjugal phallocentrism’ which was ‘self-admiring, self-stimulating [and] self-congratulatory’ (879), and manifested also in the power of discourse. If, as feminist linguists claim, gender-based oppression is and has been orchestrated through language, it seems particularly rewarding to trace this oppression back to early medieval times, to the stereotypical representations of gender differences which this Element attempts to demonstrate in the context of the English language. These representations contributed to the formulation of linguistic identity of women and men, informing English-speaking culture for subsequent centuries and legitimising its gender bias. Irigaray (Reference Irigaray1993: 31) identifies gender bias in language as an effect of an intentional strategy: ‘Man seems to have wanted, directly or indirectly, to give the universe his own gender as he has wanted to give his own name to his children, his wife, his possessions.’

1 Old English Written Records and Linguistic Insights into Anglo-Saxon Culture

Old English (OE) is a very well-attested early medieval language: the total length of all surviving texts written by Anglo-Saxons in their vernacular amounts to the impressive figure of 3 million words. This calculation includes poetry, interlinear glosses from Latin and prose texts, many of which have been preserved in multiple copies. The York–Toronto–Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Old English Prose (YCOE, Taylor et al., Reference Taylor, Warner, Pintzuk and Beths2003) includes texts which cover 1.5 million words, omitting textual overlaps and word-for-word glosses of questionable value for syntactic investigations. The number might not be impressive from a contemporary corpus perspective, but for a historical language it is a considerable amount of data, allowing for the formulation of reliable conclusions based on recurrent patterns. Therefore, OE is a very good choice for a historical linguist wishing to study the earliest stage of development of an Indo-European language, and it provides a unique opportunity to analyse the relations between culture and language in the early medieval European context.

Naturally, our knowledge of Anglo-Saxon literary culture is mostly based on the well-known Germanic poetry records, including, for example, Beowulf, The Wanderer, The Seafarer and The Dream of the Rood. These works, however, famous as they are, constitute a really small portion of OE textual records. The York–Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Old English Poetry (Pintzuk & Plug, Reference Pintzuk and Plug2001) includes only 71,490 words in total, which is a significantly lower number than the 1.5 million words of the YCOE. What is more, the texts included in the prose corpus, even though most of them are fully focused on the Catholic faith, are quite varied in character. The most frequent genres are homilies (390,925 words altogether), lives of saints (298,316 words), chronicles (236,165 words), biblical translations (136,948 words), religious treatises (129,993 words) and medical remedies (68,315 words), while some minor text types include law collections, prefaces, travelogues, charters and wills. Thus the analysis of OE prose records may provide much more insight into the linguistic reality of Anglo-Saxon England than the study of poetic records, not only because of the sheer quantity of the data, but also because prose works, which are predominantly non-literary texts, may reflect a more conventionalised linguistic image of women in Anglo-Saxon society. Since literary language, which aspires to produce an aesthetic effect rather than conveying straightforward information, avoids patterns and regularities, the analysis of non-literary prose records might yield linguistic evidence with more reality value.

It is only predictable that written historical sources from the Anglo-Saxon period – chronicles, ecclesiastical documents, legal codes or wills – focus chiefly on the male part of society, making women significantly absent. Moreover, the civilisation reflected in Anglo-Saxon poetry was co-ordinated by tribal warfare and naturally centred on men, who formed the warrior class, while women could only assume ‘the non-roles of … peaceweaver and mourner for the dead’ or become symbolic treasure facilitating political goals (Bennett, Reference Bennett, Harwood and Overing1994: 43–45). Many marriages of the epoch were arranged, particularly but not solely in aristocratic circles; Anglo-Saxon women were ‘linked to male kin-groups’ and matrimony meant exchanging the custody of one man for ‘a new role of submission to another’ (Leyser, Reference Leyser1995: 47). The gendered division of population demanded that female activity concentrate on the family and local community matters, not public spheres. The division of labour in the peasant class also depended on sex: heavy agricultural work and craftsmanship was the males’ responsibility, while women engaged in ‘a wide variety of smaller tasks centered on the household’ (Bennett, Reference Bennett, Erler and Kowaleski1988: 18). Fell (Reference Fell1986: 40) notes that early Anglo-Saxon culture ‘distinguished male and female roles as those of the warrior or hunter and of the cloth-maker’. Indeed, archaeological evidence reveals that women were often buried with thread boxes, needles, spindle whorls, table linen or other pieces of cloth (Fell, Reference Fell1986: 40–44; Leyser, Reference Leyser1995: 3–15); their burial places also indicate involvement in other domestic activities, such as the preparation and the serving of food and drink (Fell, Reference Fell1986: 47–49) or medical assistance (Leyser, Reference Leyser1995: 15).

Examining the position of women in Anglo-Saxon society is especially problematic because the scholarly tradition that dominated the field until the 1990s continuously concealed the female presence from the study of historical reality, leaving ‘no place for a woman scholar who wanted to read as a woman’ (Bennett, Reference Bennett, Harwood and Overing1994: 43). Norris et al. (Reference Norris, Stephenson, Trilling, Norris, Stephenson and Trilling2023: 10) explain these discriminating patriarchal academic paradigms with the fact that the field of early medieval English studies was established ‘at the height of British imperialism’, and it developed in a political environment which ‘supported claims to White, male, European superiority’. Lees (Reference Lees and O-Keeffe1997: 148) also claims that ‘the institutional structures of the discipline’ have persistently marginalised ‘the role of women in the formation of [Anglo-Saxon] culture’. Desmond in turn notes that standard literary history studies (such as Greenfield’s Reference Greenfield1965 A Critical History of Old English Literature), rooted in masculine ideology and purporting neutral objectivity, fail to notice the ‘tremendous importance of women in Anglo-Saxon culture, as authors, characters, or voices’ (Desmond, Reference Desmond1990: 575).

As in other fields of cultural and literary studies, feminist criticism attempts to redefine the framework of scholarly approaches to OE texts: it challenges masculinist biased presuppositions, reconsiders the omissions of patriarchal paradigms of historical inquiry, retrieves silenced women’s voices and reclaims suppressed women’s perspectives. Early feminist studies of Anglo-Saxon literature, by such authors as Anne Klinck and Elaine Tuttle Hansen, already in the late 1970s examined OE poetry with the view of situating female anguish, confinement and submission in the context of early medieval English culture as well as moral implications of its poetic representation (Overing, Reference Overing1990: 76–77). Yet a wave of a more determined feminist response rose in the mid 1980s with the publications of Christine E. Fell, Jane Chance and Helen Damico, who strived to recognise women’s position in Anglo-Saxon society by means of presenting notable female individuals – queens, aristocrats, saints, abbesses – ‘to advance the argument that Anglo-Saxon society was relatively … egalitarian’ and to establish the ‘so-called “golden age” for Anglo-Saxon women’ (Lees, Reference Lees and O-Keeffe1997: 148–149). In her monumental 1984 work Women in Anglo-Saxon England, Fell, a historian, inspects multiple records of the epoch – vernacular literature, hagiography, legal documents, letters, inventories, archaeological evidence – to demonstrate the position and agency of women in early medieval English culture. In her study published two years later, Woman as Hero in Old English Literature, Chance (Reference Chance1986: 111) contradicts Fell’s confident view of female significance, pointing out that ‘Anglo-Saxon society demanded passivity, rather than leadership and initiative, from most of its women.’ The scholar finds ‘exceptions’ (111) of strong female individuals but notes that they were ‘permitted an active political role in kingdoms as chaste rulers or strong abbesses, and some became saints who were even allowed to adopt heroic behavior … once their chastity and sanctity had been attested’ (xv): that is to say, ‘the escape from passivity may only be accomplished by … an obliteration of femininity … women may be not-weak as long as they are not-women’ (Overing, Reference Overing1990: 78). Damico (Reference Damico1984) in turn seeks to subvert the pattern of female passivity in early medieval England by re-examining one of the most eminent examples of Old English poetic discourse, Beowulf, to interpret Queen Wealhtheow as ‘an autonomously powerful military figure, with the additional mythic and distinctively menacing qualities of the valkyrie’ (Bennett et al., Reference Bennett, Lees and Overing1990: 17).

Since the 1990s, feminist studies of Anglo-Saxon culture have continued with a rising awareness that gender actively interrelates to other aspects of human identity and cannot be reviewed in isolation. Recent feminist approaches to the field show an interesting dichotomy. On the one hand, a number of scholars endeavour to evidence substantial marginalisation and objectification of women in early medieval England. Overing (Reference Overing1990: 69–70), for instance, finds Beowulf ‘an overwhelmingly masculine poem’ which does not provide any place for women ‘in [its] masculine economy’: she believes that the Anglo-Saxon ‘system of masculine alliance allows women to signify [only] in a system of apparent exchange’, but not ‘in their own right’ (74), leaving them ‘profoundly silent’ (70) and ‘excluded figures’ (75). Similarly, Fee (Reference Fee1996: 290) discerns in Beowulf’s parallel between the rituals of ring-giving and peace-weaving the analogy which ‘exists between objects of material treasure and objectified women in the culture of the poem’: according to the transactional nature of Anglo-Saxon marriage, women ‘serve as commodities which are exchanged in order to safeguard a particular social or political agenda’ (285). On the other hand, there are concurrent approaches which intend to reclaim female agency in early medieval England and demonstrate that in the texts of this period ‘women are often depicted in roles which … are invested with more importance and capability’ than later (Harris, Reference Harris2014). This agency could be visible in their discourse, like Wealhtheow’s speeches, which, for Damico (Reference Damico2015: 206), prove her authority as ‘a female sovereign central to the administrative power of the court’. Alternatively, it could be part of other activities: for instance, Lee (Reference Lee, Norris, Stephenson and Trilling2023: 53) discerns it in their production of embroidery, ‘artifacts that provide a unique window to the participation … in the political, socio-economic, and intellectual life of the period’.

The relatively privileged status of women in Anglo-Saxon society was postulated and amply illustrated by Fell. The historian refers to numerous legal documents which testify to measures meant to protect women’s standing. Among them, there is morgengifu, ‘morning-gift’, the money that the prospective husband had to pay to effectuate marriage; importantly, it was ‘paid not to the father or kin, but to the woman herself’, and she could fully control it, for example, spend it, give it away, or bequeath it (Fell, Reference Fell1986: 56), because finances in marriage were ‘held to be the property of husband and wife, not of husband only’ (57). Fell also points to legal provisions regarding the economic status of widows or the protection of women against seduction and rape. She evokes instances of wills written by women or those in which men left property to their wives, mothers or daughters. Archaeological evidence or place names originated in this period also attest to women’s financial independence. Fell’s findings, as well as other related publications, indicate that even though women were not equal to men in terms of their legal and economic status, they ‘enjoyed a significant degree of autonomy’ (Desmond Reference Desmond1990: 585).

Yet Fell (Reference Fell1986: 14) discerns a ‘complete shift of pattern … within a single century after 1066’: the status of women in medieval England became aggravated after the Norman Conquest. This observation follows the postulate of Doris Stenton from her long-recognised work The English Woman in History: ‘[W]omen [in Anglo-Saxon England] were … more nearly the equal companions of their husbands and brothers than at any other period before the modern age. In the higher ranges of society this rough and ready partnership was ended by the Norman Conquest, which introduced into England a military society relegating women to a position honourable but essentially unimportant’ (Stenton, Reference Stenton1957: 348). This decline of female position could be seen, for instance, in economical rights: Anglo-Norman women could no longer hold land and make wills independently (Fell, Reference Fell1986: 154; Leyser, Reference Leyser1995: 74). Many historians interpret this as a result of changes in the inheritance system, which became based on male primogeniture (Fell, Reference Fell1986: 149; Leyser, Reference Leyser1995: 83). It was also, however, related to a modified approach to the feudal system: if in post-Conquest England ‘all land belonged to the king, … its use was conditional on the performance of military service’ and therefore ‘only men could hold land’ (Leyser, Reference Leyser1995: 86).

This conventional argument about the post-Conquest radical shift in the situation of women in England has been an object of criticism. Anne L. Klinck (Reference Klinck1982: 109), for instance, argues that ‘there is a much closer resemblance between the situation obtaining in late Anglo-Saxon England and post-Conquest England than there is between the early and late Anglo-Saxon period’ and, therefore, ‘to describe Anglo-Saxon England as a time when women enjoyed an independence which they lost as a result of changes introduced by the Norman Conquest is misleading’. Many feminist scholars claim that what really brought the change was the growing socio-cultural influence of Christianity and, especially, the institutional dimension of the church. Fell herself notes that ‘Christianity as interpreted by the fathers of the church developed a full set of theories on the inferiority of women’, but she puts into doubt ‘the extent of their actual application within society’ (Fell, Reference Fell1986: 13): even though she admits that we can easily find ‘traces of anti-female propaganda in letters or homilies from the pens of clergy and in the penitentials’, she authoritatively deems them ‘ineffectual in practice’ (13–14). For Chance (Reference Chance1986: xvii), however, the significance of the church should not be underestimated: she notes that the ‘two archetypes of women that ordered the Anglo-Saxon social world’ – Eve and the Virgin Mary – were of obvious religious roots, ‘drawn from the Bible’. In her later work, Chance openly asserts that women in medieval England, just like in any other European country of the era, ‘were always propelled by the misogyny of the church, and a masculine church at that’ (Chance, Reference Chance2007: 7). Perhaps the most persuasive work demonstrating the impact of the church on the degradation of the female position in late Anglo-Saxon society is Stephanie Hollis’ Anglo-Saxon Women and the Church. The scholar postulates that the deterioration of the standing of women, especially monastic women, dates ‘from at least as early as the 8th century’ (Hollis, Reference Hollis1992: 7), and that from Alfred’s reign ‘the literature reveals an increase in the prestige and authority of male ecclesiastics and a reduction in the status of women [which] parallels the overall tendency of canon law’ (1). Hollis strongly opposes Fell’s downplaying of ‘the social actualization of the church’s heritage of doctrines inimical to women’ (7) and points out it is impossible to deny ‘the social dominance of an institution whose most committed members were responsible for the composition and preservation of the only written evidence available to us’ (6). She sees this actualisation in numerous Anglo-Saxon texts, for instance in Bede’s hagiography, which propagates the opinion that ‘women constitute a separate and inferior class’ (8), or in Theodore’s penitential canons, which represent numerous ‘repressive conceptions of women … harboured by at least some churchmen, which fairly certainly included the most influential of them’ (8). The critic sees the conversion of England as a long process of cultural negotiation in which ‘[p]atristic-derived conceptions of women, … through mapping on to indigenous prejudices and inequalities, established themselves only slowly in Anglo-Saxon England’ (10) and contends that, at the end of the day, ‘what the assimilation of Roman-Christianity achieved was the alterization of women’ (10). This process must have been reflected in language and therefore, given the historical context, it seems both logical and necessary to take a look at the OE prose records, which are dominated by religious texts, in order to investigate the influence of Roman Christianity on the linguistic image of Anglo-Saxon women.

2 Language and Gender

Feminists have always considered language an important territory of their emancipatory struggle. Yet the onset of substantial and systematic research in feminist linguistics started only in the 1970s and 1980s. One of the landmark publications was Robin Lakoff’s Language and Woman’s Place (Reference Lakoff1975), which, by means of depicting ‘a culture-wide ideology that scorns and trivializes both women and women’s ways of speaking’ (Bucholtz, Reference Bucholtz, Ehrlich, Meyerhoff and Holmes2014: 26), revealed the political capacity of language to devalue and disempower women. An even more radical approach is pursued by Dale Spender in Man Made Language (Reference Spender1980). A wholehearted proponent of the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis, Spender notes that ‘it is language which determines the limits of our world [and] constructs our reality’ (Spender, Reference Spender1980: 139), so that this reality is determined by its linguistic representation. Naturally, then, those who control language are especially privileged, as they also control our notion of reality; Spender claims that men are the superior class which ‘has controlled language in its own interest, constructing sexist categories and meanings through which all speakers of the language view the world’ (Hendricks & Oliver, Reference Hendricks, Oliver, Oliver and Hendricks1999). In her very comprehensive study of the intersections between feminism and linguistics, Feminism and Linguistic Theory (Reference Cameron1992), Deborah Cameron points out that in the view of radical feminist theorists ‘male language is a species of Orwellian thought-control’ (Cameron, Reference Cameron1992: 129); if, as they believe, ‘words embody sexism because their meaning and usage is fixed by men from an antifeminist perspective’, then language can be considered ‘a cause of oppression, and not just a symptom of it’ (104).Footnote 2 Cameron emphasises the indebtedness of many feminist linguists to the theory of Jacques Lacan, who postulates that human subjectivity is formed through being introduced to the symbolic order of language. In this way, the roots of our identity reach the past generations because ‘language, with its structure, exists prior to each subject’s entry into it at a certain moment in [their] mental development’ (Lacan, Reference Lacan2006: 413). The French psychoanalyst also notes the patriarchal nature of the symbolic order, claiming that ‘[i]t is in the name of the father that we must recognize the basis of the symbolic function which, since the dawn of historical time, has identified his person with the figure of the law’ (230). This has obvious political consequences which feminist linguists have pointed out: ‘inserting oneself into culture means submitting to patriarchy’ (Cameron, Reference Cameron1992: 169).

Whether or not feminist linguists advocate the Sapir–Whorf theory and Lacan’s position, they mostly agree that language is a gendered phenomenon and that its ideologies inform our socio-political reality. They also concur that linguistic representations of men and women can function as

part of a society’s apparatus for maintaining gender distinctions and hierarchies. At the most basic level, they help to naturalize the notion of the sexes as ‘opposite’, with differing natures and social roles or responsibilities. Often, too, they naturalize the social inequalities which are associated with gender difference. [Some] feminine qualities are readily invoked to explain and justify the exclusion or marginalization of women in powerful or public roles, while at the same time reinforcing the idea of their natural suitability for other, more menial, tasks. … Ideological representations do not in and of themselves accomplish the subordination of women. Their contribution is rather to justify inequality, making the relationship of women and men in a particular society appear natural and legitimate rather than arbitrary and unfair.

Sexist bias is a very complex mechanism manifested on many different levels of language organisation. Feminist linguists indicate that ‘the lexicon and grammatical system of English contains features that exclude, insult and trivialise women’ (Cameron, Reference Cameron1992: 101).Footnote 3 As Weatherall (Reference Weatherall2002: 13) notes, linguistic manifestations of sexism may roughly be divided into three categories: ‘language that ignores women; language that defines women narrowly; and language that depreciates women’.

One of the most conspicuous issues raised by feminists, clearly related to Weatherall’s (Reference Weatherall2002) ‘ignoring’ type, is ‘the practice of considering the man/the male as the prototype for human representation’ (Pauwels, Reference Pauwels, Holmes and Meyerhoff2005: 553). This is related to the use of he and other masculine generics such as ‘chairman’, ‘mankind’, ‘guys’ or ‘fireman’ (Weatherall, Reference Weatherall2002: 14), the fact that the terms for human and male are often the same (cf. English man, whose sense 1 in the Oxford English Dictionary is defined as ‘a human being (irrespective of sex or age)’) or the frequently derivative nature of female terms (e.g. according to Etymoline the English term woman is an alternation of the compound wifmann, composed of wif ‘woman, wife’ and man ‘man, human being’). What is more, the occupational titles for women are rarely morphologically marked (with actress as a rare exception), and in English it is much more common to mark gender overtly for women (female doctor) than for men (male secretary) (Marco, Reference Marco1997), though English is now adopting a corrective strategy of making terms neutral or unmarked for gender, unlike, for example, French or Polish, where the terms are overtly marked as gender specific (Weatherall, Reference Weatherall2002: 17), for instance, French la ministre or Polish ministra as the overtly female equivalent of minister.

Another aspect of this problem, fitting Weatherall’s (Reference Weatherall2002) ‘narrowing’ type, is that women are often (or at least more often than men) discussed in terms of their physical appearance and family relationships, while in the case of men the focus is rather on their profession (Key, Reference Key1975). A related issue is the European practice of taking the husband’s name after getting married, the fact that female titles, unlike male ones, used to reveal the woman’s marital status (Miss and Mrs vs. the more recent, neutral Ms), and the tendency for female nicknames to be based on appearance and often (though not always) show connotations of beauty (e.g. Blondie, Sweetie, Midget), while male nicknames are rather based on activity and show connotations of power and hardness (e.g. Chaser, Mad Dog) (Phillips, Reference Phillips1990; Weatherall, Reference Weatherall2002: 23). Finally, within the ‘depreciating’ type of language sexism, there is a tendency of masculine terms to have more positive connotations than their feminine equivalents (cf. bachelor vs. spinster or mister vs. mistress), which results from the fact that with time female terms tend to undergo semantic derogation (Schultz, Reference Schulz1975), changing from once neutral to abusive, ‘ending as a sexual slur’ (Pauwels, Reference Pauwels, Holmes and Meyerhoff2005: 554).

Obviously, all of these linguistic aspects of the problem are a logical and clear result of the long-lasting patriarchal structure of European societies, with women’s roles limited to those of mothers, wives and lovers, fully dependent on men and often selected and judged on the basis of their physical appearance. The picture is changing right now, and the growing awareness of gender bias in English-language communities is a fact (Pauwels, Reference Pauwels, Holmes and Meyerhoff2005: 561). The aim of this Element is to take a step back, get to the roots of the issue and investigate the problem of gender representation in the earliest records of English in order to determine how gender bias operated in the Anglo-Saxon reality.

Our initial hypothesis was that at least some of the tendencies which feminist linguists observed in the English language in the 1970s and 1980s should already be visible in the OE data, and many of them should also be identifiable on the basis of recurrent collocations – that is, the fixed combinations of two lexemes that this Element is about to analyse. Therefore, the Element examines to what extent the most frequent collocations centred around a number of gendered nouns reflect the position of women in the Anglo-Saxon society. Our investigation seeks the ways in which OE phraseology suggests a marked difference in the social roles of Anglo-Saxon men and women. Drawing from other sources, we assumed at the outset that linguistic data should show connotations of power, hardness and activity for men, as opposed to beauty, physicality and sexuality for women. We expected that the collocations based on female terms would be more often associated with family relationships and physical appearance, while the equivalent male terms would rather collocate with lexemes focusing on profession or signalling domination. We also believe that establishing which of Weatherall’s types of linguistic manifestations of sexism (ignoring, narrowing and depreciating) may be revealed by a corpus-based analysis of collocations should become useful in the operationalisation of linguistic sexism for various language studies.

For the purpose of the Element, in order to analyse the linguistic image of women in OE, it was necessary to preselect a number of women terms and their male equivalents. The procedure was as follows: first, A Thesaurus of Old English (Roberts et al., Reference Roberts, Kay and Grundy2000) was browsed in search of all female-gendered nouns attested in this language. Next, the frequency of these words was checked in the VARIOE morphological dictionary for YCOE (Cichosz et al., 2022), and the words were arranged according to their frequency (cf. Table 1).

Table 1

Women terms from A Thesaurus of Old English with their YCOE frequency

a
A table lists women terms from A Thesaurus of Old English attested in the Y C O E corpus sorted by frequency. See long description.
Table 1aLong description

The table consists of three columns: 1. Old English words, 2. their Modern English equivalents, 3. their frequency in the corpus, from the most frequent one wif (female person/woman; wife/married woman) - 1404 attestations, to duruþinen (female doorkeeper) - 2 attestations.

b
A continuation of the table lists women terms from A Thesaurus of Old English attested in the Y C O E corpus sorted by frequency. See long description.
Table 1bLong description

Continuation of Table 1a. It lists women terms from fostermodor (foster-mother) - 2 attestations, to wifcild (female child) - 1 attestation.

The list of women terms which we checked was much longer, but it turned out that many of the words included in the thesaurus are limited to poetry records or texts not included in YCOE since they are not attested in the corpus. Table 2 presents these items.

Table 2

Women terms from A Thesaurus of Old English not attested in YCOE

a
A table listing Old English words for women along with their modern English translations. See long description.
Table 2aLong description

The table has 2 columns: Old English word and Translation. It reads as follows. Acennicge: mother. Æwe: wife or married woman. Bearncennicge: mother. BepÆcestre: harlot, whore, or adulteress. burgrun(e): enchantress. Byrþre: mother. Cumendre: godmother. CummÆdre: godmother. Ides: female person or woman. Laf: widow; what is left. Locbore: free woman. Lufestre: harlot, whore, or adulteress. Lybbestre: witch or sorceress. Lytle: woman slave. Mennen: handmaiden. Meowle: female person or woman; maiden.

b
A continuation of the table listing Old English words for women along with their modern English translations. See long description.
Table 2bLong description

The table has 2 columns: Old English word and Translation. It reads as follows. Dryhtcwen: queen or empress. Duruþeowen: female doorkeeper. Ealdre: abbess. Ealdwif: old woman. Efenþeowen: female servant. Firenhicge: harlot, whore, or adulteress. Firenhicgend: harlot, whore, or adulteress. Fiþelestre: female fiddler. Folccwen: queen or empress. Forþwif: wife or married woman; noble lady. Fostormodor: foster-mother. Freo: female person or woman. Freodohtor: own daughter. Freowif: free woman. Frowe: female person or woman. Galdricge: enchantress. GefÆdre: godmother. Geomeowle: old woman. Geongre: woman deputy or stewardess. Gesinge: wife or married woman. HÆmedwif: wife or married woman. Heahrun: enchantress. Hearpestre: female harpist: hellerune: enchantress. Helrynegu: enchantress. Hleapestre: female dancer. Hordestre: woman deputy or stewardess. Hore: harlot, whore, or adulteress. Hyseberþre: mother of a son.

Myltestre: prostitute. Nefe: granddaughter. NunfÆmne: nun. NydhÆmestre: harlot, whore, or adulteress. Offestre: foster-mother. Plegestre: female athlete. Portcwene: prostitute. RihtÆþelewen: rightful wife: Sangestre: female singer. Scand: harlot, whore, or adulteress. ScinnlÆce: witch or sorceress. ScrÆtte: harlot, whore, or adulteress. Scylcen: loose woman. Scynnecge: loose woman. Sigewif: witch or sorceress. Steopdohtor: stepdaughter. Sunucennicge: mother of a son. þenestre: female servant. þeodcwen: queen or empress. þinen: female servant. þir: female servant. þyften: female servant. Timpestre: female player. Unrihtwif: mistress. Wilnincel: female servant. Witege: prophetess. Widuwe: widow. WyrtgÆlstre: witch who works with herbs.

The only women terms from Table 2 which are potentially present in YCOE for which it is impossible to check it automatically because of their morphological overlap with the equivalent men terms are witege ‘prophetess’ (overlapping with witega ‘prophet’) and widuwe ‘widow’ (overlapping with widuwa ‘widower’). What is more, the primary sense of the word laf is ‘what is left’, and only the secondary meaning is ‘widow (f)’. Since it would be impossible to tell the difference without manual inspection in context, the word was discarded. Finally, despite its high frequency, the word mægþ had to be eliminated from the dataset since its secondary sense – that is, ‘family’ – turned out to be dominant in the data and the lexeme failed to appear in collocations reflecting its primary sense ‘maiden, girl’.

Table 3 presents the final selection of female-gendered nouns with the male-gendered terms chosen on the basis of their semantic equivalence.Footnote 4 The numbers in brackets represent corpus frequencies of the terms. We decided to set the frequency threshold at fifty (which makes nunne ‘nun’ with the frequency of fifty-two the least frequent item in the dataset) since less frequent terms failed to render a substantial number of recurrent collocations in VARIOE.

Table 3The final dataset taken into account in the study
Word groupFemale-gendered termsEquivalent male-gendered terms
general termswif ‘woman’ (1,404), fæmne ‘woman, girl, maiden’ (313) wifmann ‘woman, female servant’ (118)wer ‘man’ (1,732)
parentmodor ‘mother’ (530)fæder ‘father’ (2,162)
childmægden ‘girl, maiden’ (430), dohtor ‘daughter’ (380)sunu ‘son’ (1,889), cnapa ‘boy, servant’ (152)
siblingsweostor ‘sister, nun’ (190)broþor ‘brother, monk’ (1,281)
person with a higher social positioncwen ‘queen, noblewoman’ (172), hlæfdige ‘lady, noblewoman’ (60), abbodesse ‘abbess’ (69), nunne ‘nun’ (52)cyning ‘king’ (4,599), hlaford ‘lord’ (754), abbod ‘abbot’ (575), munuc ‘monk’ (442)

As shown in Table 3, the terms were grouped into five main categories (some of which are represented by single nouns): general terms, parents, children/young adults, siblings and people of higher social status. The last group is most varied but we wanted to see how social position interacts with gender in the Anglo-Saxon context, and the results (cf. Sections 3.1.5, 3.3.5, 4.1.5 and 4.2.5) show that this particular category is really interesting.

The recently released VARIOE dictionary of OE collocations (Pęzik & Cichosz, Reference Pęzik and Cichosz2021), which was the primary tool used for the research presented in this Element, is based on lemmatised YCOE data – that is, every word form in the corpus was aligned to its base form, which for nouns means the singular nominative form with the dominant spelling. This is a prerequisite of any phraseological study since OE, as an inflected language, uses a great variety of morphological forms for nouns, adjectives, pronouns and verbs. Moreover, without a spelling standard, the lexemes may appear in many different spelling forms, which increases the variation and makes lemmatisation even more important because without it, it would be impossible to perform any kind of automated searches of recurrent collocations.Footnote 5 In addition, OE inflections allowed for a relatively flexible sentence structure and a collocation does not necessarily follow a fixed word order – for example, an adjective could both precede and follow a noun, an object could be placed both before and after a lexical verb, etcetera. VARIOE takes this flexibility into consideration, searching for a given part of speech in close proximity to another one, allowing for intervening phrases and changes in relative order.Footnote 6 The collocation patterns offered by VARIOE that we have decided to use are:

ADJ + N: an adjective preceding or following a noun (irrespective of case, with some intervening elements possible), for example, (se) halga gast ‘(the) holy ghost’

GEN + N: a genitive noun in close proximity to a head noun (irrespective of case, with intervening elements possible), for example, Godes gast ‘God’s spirit’

N + CONJ + N: two nouns linked by a conjunction (irrespective of case, with some intervening elements possible), for example, dæg and niht ‘day and night’

V + N: a verb form (finite or non-finite) in close proximity to a noun in the dative, accusative or genitive case (with some intervening elements possible), for example, lufian God ‘to love God’

N + V: a noun in the nominative case in close proximity to a verb form (finite or non-finite) (with some intervening elements possible), for example, God cwæð ‘God said’.

Since recurrent patterns returned by VARIOE are based on linear co-occurrence, some of the results are linguistic noise that needs to be filtered out. Thus each collocation had to be inspected in context, and on the basis of the analysis of examples we decided whether a given pair of words may indeed be treated as a collocational pattern.Footnote 7 All the data shown in Sections 3 and 4 underwent this clean-up operation and the results can reliably be treated as fully-fledged collocations of the gendered OE nouns analysed in this Element. In the analysis we focus on recurrent patterns – that is, for a collocation to qualify for further processing, it needed to appear at least twice in the YCOE corpus.

The analysis is illustrated with numbered YCOE corpus examples. Following the Leipzig glossing rules, the first line of each example is the original OE text, the second line provides a word-by-word gloss, while the third line is an idiomatic present-day English translation. Every example contains a YCOE identifier, which shows the text file name, for example, cobede for Bede’s Ecclesiastical History, and the numbers indicating the precise location of the fragment in the OE manuscript.

During the analysis, all of the identified collocations were subjected to a simple semantic analysis in order to identify the main tendencies in the data. In the case of adjectives, the lexemes were divided into positive (indicating an objectively positive trait of a person in the early medieval Christian context, such as good, pious or law-abiding), negative (indicating an objectively negative trace of character, such as cruel, evil or dishonest), physical (related to physicality and general appearance, such as beautiful, old or pregnant) and neutral (including quantifier-like adjectives such as other, same or next, indicating other features such as ethnicity, religious denomination, social position, financial situation, e.g. Hebrew or poor, as well as any adjective nor fitting the other categories, e.g. eternal).

The genitival modifiers were also divided into a few semantic groups based around family (indicating all sorts of family relations, e.g. someone’s wife, brother or child), faith (centred around God or the Catholic Church, e.g. God’s woman, abbess of the monastery), body (parts of the body or inner organs, e.g. someone’s eyes, heart or blood) and power (describing someone’s authority in the form of orders, possession, servants or office), with ‘other’ as the category covering all the remaining semantic fields.

In the case of verb-based collocations, both with subjects and objects, the classification relies on the verb and includes some basic categories such as being (to be, to become), saying (to speak, to answer), possession (both as a stable state, e.g. to have, to own, and the process of transfer, e.g. to give), state (both stable, e.g. to live, and the process of change, e.g. to grow, to die), motion (to go, to leave, to sit down), cognition (to think, to understand), perception (to see, to hear), emotion (to love, to hate) or commitment (to promise, to swear), as well as verbs in the passive voice and modal verbs.

All the tables provide frequency (total number of attestations in the corpus), though for reasons of clarity, in most tables only the data above a certain frequency threshold are presented, which is clearly indicated in the table captions. However, the analysis takes all the recurrent collocations into account, and all the figures presented in Sections 3 and 4 are based on the complete dataset.

3 Collocations on the Level of the Noun Phrase

3.1 Adjectival Modifiers (A + N and N + A)

3.1.1 General Nouns

The first category of collocations that we extracted from the YCOE corpus are recurrent adjective + noun combinations. In the case of the basic woman terms – that is, wif, fæmne and wifmann – there are 52 recurrent collocations of this type, amounting to 317 tokens in total (see table 4), which we classified as neutral, positive, negative or physical, according to the methodology presented in Section 2.

Table 4Most frequent adjectival collocates of , and ‘woman’ (> 5) in YCOE
NumberLemmaFootnote 9TranslationCategoryΣ
1halig+fæmneholy womanpositive53
2oþer+wifother womanneutral32
3eadig+fæmneblessed womanpositive24
4clæne+fæmneimmaculate womanphysical20
5earm+wifpoor womanneutral13
6yfel+wifevil womannegative12
7halig+wifholy womanpositive11
8agen+wifown womanneutral10
9æþele+fæmnenoble womanpositive9
10æwfæst+wifreligious womanpositive6
11cristen+wifChristian womanneutral6
12eald+wifold womanphysical6
13chanaeisc+wifCanaanite womanneutral5
14samaritanisc+ wifSamaritan womanneutral5
other105
total recurrent317

It is interesting to note that among the most frequent collocations there is one extremely negative (yfel ‘evil’) and one extremely positive (halig ‘holy’), as illustrated by (1) and (2).

  1. (1)

    Eornostlicenisnanwyrmcynn.newildeoracyn.
    trulynot-isnosnake-kindnorwild-animalkind
    onyfelnyssegelicyfelumwife
    onevilnesssimilarevilwoman
    ‘Truly, there is no kind of snake or wild animal similar in their evilness to an evil woman.’ (cocathom1,+ACHom_I,_32:457.186.6500)

  1. (2)

    ÐætonBerccingumþammynstremidheofonliceleohte
    thatonBerchingthemonasterywithheavenlylight
    getacnodwæs,hwærgesettebeonsceoldonþalichaman
    shownwaswhereplacedbeshouldthebodies
    haligrafæmnena.
    holy.GENwomen.GEN
    ‘How heavenly light showed the place where the bodies of holy women should be buried in the Berching monastery.’ (cobede,BedeHead:4.18.15.90)

Next, it should be indicated that there is a relatively high proportion of adjectives describing physicality, many of which are related to a woman’s ability or inability to bear children: clæne ‘clean, pure, immaculate’, eald ‘old’, blind ‘blind’,Footnote 10 bearneaca ‘pregnant, big with child’, dead ‘dead’, bearneacnigende ‘pregnant, child-carrying’, unwæstmbære ‘sterile’, untimende ‘barren’, fæger ‘fair, beautiful’, as illustrated in (3). It is noteworthy that the concern with female physicality focuses on nothing else but women’s reproductive potential.

  1. (3)

    andæfterþamBoclicanregole,nesceoldenanman
    andafterthebiblicalrulenotshouldnoman
    bearneacnigendumwifegenealæcan,Nemonoðseocum,neþam
    pregnantwomanapproachnormonth-sicknorthis
    ðeforyldeuntymendebyð.
    thatforagebarrenis
    ‘And according to the Bible, no man should have sexual intercourse with a pregnant woman or a menstruating one, or the one who is barren because of old age.’ (coaelhom,+AHom_20:111.2991)

Moreover, a few adjectives apart from yfel ‘evil’ are clearly negative – that is, synfull ‘sinful,’ deofolseoc ‘devil-sick’, ungeleafull ‘unbelieving’, see (4) – while the positive ones are related to a woman’s obedience to the rules and the regulations of the Christian faith: halig ‘holy’, arwurþ ‘honourable’, æwfæst ‘pious’, geleafful ‘righteous’, god ‘good’, æw ‘lawful’, æþele ‘noble’. The negative adjectives, then, relate mostly to a woman’s deviation from faith and her consequent iniquities, while the positive ones are very broad in meaning and they do not reveal much about the qualities of the woman’s character or about her skills, as in (5).

  1. (4)

    AcwiteþumanÞæticeomsynfulwif
    butknowyoumanthatIamsinfulwoman
    ‘But you should know, man, that I am a sinful woman.’ (comary,LS_23_[MaryofEgypt]:284.191)

  1. (5)

    Þawistonhi,þætþærneahwunodesumeawfæst
    Thenknewtheythattherenearlivedsomepious
    wif.
    woman
    ‘Then they learned that a pious woman lived nearby.’ (cogregdH,GD_2_[H]:12.126.25.1205)

All in all, the majority of adjectives used to describe wif ‘woman’ are positive or neutral in meaning (39 per cent and 37 per cent respectively), 6 per cent are negative, while as many as 18 per cent are related to the woman’s physicality (cf. Figure 1). By contrast, the collocations of wer ‘man’ are predominantly positive, as shown in Table 5 and illustrated with (6).

  1. (6)

    Minegebroðra.werædaðnuætGodesðenungum
    mybrotherswereadnowatGod’sservice
    beðaneadiganwereIOB.
    abouttheblessedmanJob
    ‘My brothers, during the God’s service we will read about the blessed man Job.’ (cocathom2,+ACHom_II,_35:260.1.5801)

A pie chart displays four categories in descending order of proportion: 39% “positive”, 37% “neutral”, 18% “physical”, and 6% “negative”. “Positive” and “neutral” make up the majority, with smaller portions for “physical” and “negative”.

Figure 1 Semantic categories of recurrent adjectival collocates of wif, fæmne and wifmann ‘woman’ in YCOE.

Table 5Most frequent adjectival collocates of ‘man’ (> 5) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationCategoryΣ
1halig+werholy manpositive453
2arwurþ+werhonourable manpositive144
3eadig+werblessed manpositive54
4ilca+wersame manneutral39
5æþele+wernoble manpositive28
6god+wergood manpositive26
7æwfæst+werpious manpositive21
8oþer+werother manneutral17
9mære+wergreat manpositive15
10æfæst+werpious manpositive11
11geleafful+werfaithful manpositive10
12hæþen+werheathen manneutral8
13swilc+wersuch manneutral7
14rihtwis+werrighteous manpositive7
15agen+wer(sb’s) own manneutral5
16beorht+werglorious manpositive5
17apostolic+werapostolic manneutral5
18geþyldig+werpatient manpositive5
other60
all recurrent920

Apart from the dominance of adjectives with clearly positive connotations, the list notably lacks any lexemes describing a man’s physicality. The only two exceptions are strang ‘strong’ and eald ‘old’, both extremely rare considering the generally high frequency of wer in the corpus, and neither of them referring to a man’s sexuality, unlike the adjectives collocating with the women terms. Moreover, negatively connotating adjectives are also practically absent from the study sample, with blodig ‘cruel’ and unrihtwis ‘unrighteous’ representing this rare pattern. Interestingly, two out of these four infrequent collocations – that is, strang ‘strong’ and blodig ‘cruel’ – have connotations befitting the stipulated warrior’s position and signalling power and hardness, cf. (7) and (8). Such instances are not attested with women terms.

  1. (7)

    Ðasyndblodigewerasðewyrcaðmanslihtas,andða
    thesearecruelmenwhodoman-slaughtersandthese
    ðemannasawlabeswicaðtoforwyrde.
    thatmen’ssoulsleadtodestruction

    ‘These are cruel men who commit murder and these who lead people’s souls to destruction.’

    (coaelive,+ALS[Pr_Moses]:305.3038)

  1. (8)

    Þætwæronstrangewerasondsigefæsteonworoldgefeohtum
    thatwerestrongmenandvictoriousinworld-fights
    ‘These were strong men, victorious in worldly fights.’ (comart3,Mart_5_[Kotzor]:Ma9,A.3.326)

All in all, as shown in Figure 2, the adjectival collocates of wer are predominantly positive, and the difference between the analysed terms is really striking. As can been seen, then, the comparison of adjectival collocates of general OE terms describing women and men shows a significant difference in the linguistic image of both sexes. Men are mostly described in unreservedly positive terms, and even if not, the focus remains on their warrior qualities. Women, in contrast, are frequently valued in (morally) negative terms. An interesting group of collocates consists of adjectives related to the body, which in the Christian tradition is perceived as an imperfect part of a human being and a source of corruption; the particular sphere of interest is the reproductive capability, which signals the instrumental quality of the woman.

A pie chart displays four categories in descending order of proportion: 88% “positive”, 11% “neutral”, 1% “negative”, and 0% “physical”. “Positive” dominates the chart, with the “other” categories making up only a small fraction.

Figure 2 Semantic categories of recurrent adjectival collocates of wer ‘man’ in YCOE.

3.1.2 Parent Terms

The next gendered noun pair in the analysis is modor ‘mother’ and fæder ‘father’. Table 6 reveals that in the case of the former, adjectival collocations are not very numerous. What is more, many instances of modor are in fact references to Mary, the mother of Christ, which includes all the occurrences of halig ‘holy’ and eadig ‘blessed’, as in (9).

  1. (9)

    SeohaligemoderMariaþaafeddeþætcyldmidmicelre
    theholymotherMarythenfedthechildwithgreat
    arwyrðnysse.
    reverence
    ‘The holy mother Mary then fed the child with great reverence.’ (cocathom1,+ACHom_I,_1:187.246.258)

What is more, the spiritual mother (gastlice modor), which is the second most frequent adjectival collocation in Table 6, is actually a metaphor denoting the Catholic Church (cf. (10)).

  1. (10)

    Eallewehabbaðænneheofonlicnefæderandanegastlice
    ohwehaveoneheavenlyfatherandonespiritual
    modor,seoisecclesiagenamod,þætis
    motherthatisecclesiacalledthatis
    Godescirice,andþawesculonæfrelufianandwurðian.
    God’schurchandtheseweshouldalwaysloveandhonour
    ‘Indeed we have a heavenly father and a spiritual mother called ecclesia, which means God’s church, and we should always love and honour them.’ (coinspolD,WPol_2.1.2_[Jost]:99.140)

The most frequent reference to physicality is the adjective eald ‘old’, though in two cases the referent is Eve, the mother of all people, as in (11).

  1. (11)

    UreealdemoderEuausbeleacheofenanrices
    ouroldmotherEveuslockedheavenkingdom
    geat.
    gate
    ‘Our old (original) mother Eve locked the door to the kingdom of heaven for us.’
    (cocathom2,+ACHom_II,_1:11.295.244)

Figure 3 shows that the distribution of collocation types for modor is drastically different from the one obserwed in wer (Figure 2) since the proportion of positive collocations is almost three times lower (30 per cent vs. 88 per cent). Compared to the general women terms shown in Figure 1, there is a visibly lower proportion of physical collocations, which is clearly the result of the strong presence of St. Mary in this category. Naturally, the linguistic image of the mother of Christ does not concentrate on her body. (However, as later analysis will show, the corpus contains references to her womb.)

Table 6Recurrent adjectival collocates of ‘mother’ in YCOE
NumberAdjectiveTranslationCategoryΣ
1halig+modorholy motherpositive11
2gastlic+modorspiritual motherneutral10
3agen+modorown motherneutral10
4eald+modorold motherphysical5
5ilca+modorsame motherneutral4
6eadig+modorblessed motherpositive3
7leof+modorbeloved motherpositive3
8cristen+modorChristian motherneutral3
9lichamlic+modorphysical motherneutral2
10dreorig+modorsorrowful motherneutral2
11eorþlic+modorearthly motherneutral2
12ærest+modorfirst motherneutral2
total recurrent57
A pie chart displays four categories in descending order of proportion: 61% “neutral”, 30% “positive”, 9% “physical”, and 0% “negative”. “Neutral” is the dominant category, followed by “positive” and “physical”, with no representation for “negative”.

Figure 3 Semantic categories of recurrent adjectival collocates of modor ‘mother’ in YCOE.

As far as fæder ‘father’ is concerned, the most striking observation is the high frequency of the analysed pattern compared to modor (457 vs. 57 recurrent collocations).

Table 7 shows quite clearly that many of these are references to God, the father of all people, described as holy, almighty and eternal (cf. (12))

  1. (12)

    CristisancennedSunuofþamælmihtiganFæder;
    Christisonly begottensonofthealmightyfather
    ‘Christ is the only begotten son of the almighty Father.’ (coaelhom,+AHom_1:386.199)

Interestingly, the phrase leof fæder (‘dear father’) is often a vocative phrase directed at God, as in (13).

  1. (13)

    leoffæder,wegeanbidodon,þætþucome,swaswaþu
    dearfatherwewaitedthatyoucomesoasyou
    behete …
    promised
    ‘Dear Father, we waited for you to come as you promised … ’ (cogregdH,GD_2_[H]:22.148.24.1463)

In (14) eald ‘old’ refers to (numerous) male ancestors: this marks a difference to the collocation eald modor ‘old mother’, which usually refers to Eve, as in (11). Apparently, collectively understood familial ancestry is conceptualised only in paternal terms.

  1. (14)

    Hwæthitisgesædðætureealdanfæderaswæron
    whatitissaidthatouroldfatherswere
    ceapeshierdas.
    cattlekeepers
    ‘What! It is said that our old fathers (ancestors) were cowherds.’ (cocura,CP:17.109.4.716)

Figure 4 shows that, again, the proportion of positive adjectives is much higher for the male term (61 per cent for fæder and only 30 per cent for modor), and adjectives related to physicality are marginally used in the case of men (only 5 per cent).

Table 7Most frequent adjectival collocates of ‘father’ (> 5) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationCategoryΣ
1heofonlic+fæderheavenly fatherneutral87
2halig+fæderholy fatherpositive84
3eallmihtig+fæderalmighty fatherpositive69
4arwurþ+fædernoble fatherpositive51
5ilca+fædersame fatherneutral25
6eald+fæderold fatherphysical22
7leof+fæderdear fatherpositive21
8god+fædergood fatherpositive14
9agen+fæderown fatherneutral10
10ece+fædereternal fatherneutral8
11wis+fæderwise fatherpositive8
12mildheort+fædermerciful fatherpositive6
13arfæst+fæderhonourable fatherpositive5
14soþ+fædertrue fatherpositive5
other42
total recurrent457
A pie chart displays four categories in descending order of proportion: 61% “positive”, 33% “neutral”, 5% “physical”, and 1% “negative”.

Figure 4 Semantic categories of recurrent adjectival collocates of fæder ‘father’ in YCOE.

The collocation analysis of the two parental terms yields results similar to the examination of general female and male terms. It has to be noted, nonetheless, that these findings are of more limited relevance: because of their use in religious contexts, both modor and fæder have referents which do not relate to the linguistic image of women and men in Old English. An interesting observation concerns the historical lineage of Anglo-Saxon society: given that ancestors are denoted as ‘old fathers’ and not ‘old mothers’, it can be assumed that the socio-cultural legacy of Anglo-Saxons was found in paternality, which certainly agrees with a tendency generally observed in other cultures and languages.

3.1.3 Terms Denoting Children and Young Adults

In the ‘child and young adult’ category illustrated in Table 8, the two female nouns, mægden ‘maiden’ and dohtor ‘daughter’, are regularly presented in the context of their sexual purity (clæne ‘clean, immaculate’ and ungewemmed ‘untouched, immaculate’). The holy and immaculate maiden is of course the Virgin Mary who became Christ’s mother, so once again the data are dominated by a single female referent.

  1. (15)

    SeylcaGodessunugeceashimtomederþæthalige
    thesameGod’ssonchosehimtomothertheholy
    mæden,Mariangehaten
    maidenMarycalled
    ‘God’s son also chose the holy maiden called Mary to be his mother.’ (colwstan1,+ALet_2_[Wulfstan_1]:13.29)

  1. (16)

    acCristnæsnagetealdtoþissere
    butChristnot-wasnotincludedtothis
    wiðmetenysse,seþeacennedwæsofðam
    comparisonthisthatbornwasofthe
    clænanmædene.
    cleanmaiden
    ‘But Christ was not included in this comparison, he who was born of the clean maiden.’ (colsigewZ,+ALet_4_[SigeweardZ]:855.343)

Sometimes, though, it is a young female, as in the biblical story about wise and foolish virgins, or in the case of Apollonius of Tyre, where the king’s daughter is one of the characters in the story, and leof ‘dear’ is again used in a vocative phrase.

  1. (17)

    Þastuntanmædenucwædontoðamsnoterum;
    thestupidmaidenssaidtothewise
    ‘The foolish maidens said to the wise ones’ (cocathom2,+ACHom_II,_44:327.14.7348)

  1. (18)

    andcwæð:leofedohtor,þugesingodest;
    andsaiddeardaughteryousinned
    ‘And said: Dear daughter, you have sinned’ (coapollo,ApT:16.2.303)

All in all, positive adjectives are the dominant category (cf. Figure 5). This stems mostly from the fact that the texts in the corpus often accentuate the virginity of maidens and daughters, a characteristic strongly valued by the Christian religion and consequently associated with positive features of character. Again, as with previously examined female nouns, the proportion of adjectives describing physicality is high, amounting here to 31 per cent.

Table 8Most frequent adjectival collocates of ‘maiden’ and ‘daughter’ (> 5) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationCategoryΣ
1halig+mægdenholy maidenpositive32
2clæne+mægdenimmaculate maidenphysical28
3æþele+mægdennoble maidenpositive8
4leof+dohtordear daughterpositive8
5oþer+mægdenother maidenneutral7
6stunt+mægdenfoolish maidennegative6
7ungewemmed+mægdenimmaculate maidenphysical5
8snotor+mægdenwise maidenpositive5
9agen+dohtorown daughterneutral5
other53
total recurrent152
A pie chart displays four categories in descending order of proportion: 45% “positive”, 31% “physical”, 20% “neutral”, and 4% “negative”. “Positive” is the largest category, followed by “physical”, with smaller portions for “neutral” and “negative”.

Figure 5 Semantic categories of recurrent adjectival collocates of mægden ‘maiden’ and dohtor ‘daughter’ in YCOE.

In the case of young males, the most frequent adjectives used to describe them can be classified as neutral (cf. Table 9). It is interesting to note, however, that a significant number of them describe the relation of a son to other (usually male) children (ancenned ‘only begotten’, frumcenned ‘firstborn’, oþer ‘other, second’, etc.). This emphasis on the distinction between firstborn and other sons might be linked with the development of a socio-cultural process which will later, in Norman times, lead to introducing primogeniture as a basis of land inheritance. Primogeniture, whose roots might be traced in the Bible, was not universally observed in early medieval Europe: the inheritance laws followed the pattern of Roman law, which did not distinguish between older and younger or between male and female heirs. Yet, the development of the medieval feudal system stipulated that the socio-political power of a lord depended on keeping the land estate large, so its division between family members was not favourable. Therefore, the Norman laws provided that the lord’s oldest son, not daughter, inherited the entire estate.

Table 9Most frequent adjectival collocates of ‘son’ and ‘boy’ (> 5) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationCategoryΣ
1ancenned+sunuonly begotten sonneutral46
2agen+sunuown sonneutral31
3oþer+sunuother/second sonneutral23
4leof+sunudear sonpositive23
5eald+sunuold sonphysical13
6frumcenned+sunufirstborn sonneutral11
7ilca+sunusame sonneutral9
8dead+sunudead sonphysical8
9geong+sunuyoung sonphysical7
10soþ+sunutrue sonpositive5
other36
total recurrent212

The importance of male over female offspring is visible in the higher frequency of the word sunu ‘son’ (1,889) compared to dohtor ‘daughter’ (380). This does not necessarily result from religious referents: while many uses of sunu are references to Jesus, the son of God, most of the collocations listed in Table 9 pertain to other, human sons.

  1. (19)

    ÆfterþæmLisimachusofsloghisagennesunuAgothoclen&
    afterthatLisimachuskilledhisownsonAgothoclenand
    Antipaterhisaþum.
    Antipaterhisson-in-law
    ‘Afterwards Lisimachus killed his own son Agothoclen and his son-in-law Antipater.’ (coorosiu,Or_3:11.82.13.1645)

Naturally, Jesus Christ is attested in the data, for example, in (20), but this referent does not dominate in the same way as Mary, the virgin and the mother, dominates the collocation sets for modor ‘mother’ and mæden ‘maiden’.

  1. (20)

    &cwæþ,herysminleofasunuonþamme
    andsaidhereismydearsononwhomme
    welgelicaþ;
    wellpleases
    ‘And said: Here is my dear son, in whom I am well pleased.’ (cowsgosp,Mt_[WSCp]:17.5.1128)

All the recurrent adjectival collocations combined prove to be mostly neutral in meaning (cf. Figure 6). For male terms, 16 per cent is quite a high result for collocates related to physicality, but almost all of them are related to the sons’ age or their death; not a single one describes their appearance. Frequently, neutral and physical collocates associate with family seniority, which can have a connection with primogeniture, as indicated previously.

A pie chart displays four categories in descending order of proportion: 57% “neutral”, 27% “positive”, 16% “physical”, and 0% “negative”. “Neutral” is the largest category, followed by “positive” and “physical”, with no representation for “negative”.

Figure 6 Semantic categories of recurrent adjectival collocates of sunu ‘son’ and cnapa ‘boy’ in YCOE.

3.1.4 Sibling Terms

The next set of terms from the semantic field ‘sibling’ prove extremely unevenly represented. In the case of sweostor ‘sister’ there are only three recurrent adjectival collocations amounting to only twelve occurrences in total, all of them completely neutral in meaning, as illustrated by Table 10. The complete asymmetry between sweostor and broþor is quite clearly indicated by Table 11, with 166 tokens representing the latter.

Table 10Recurrent adjectival collocates of ‘sister’ in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationCategoryΣ
1agen+sweostorown sisterneutral7
2ilca+sweostorsame sisterneutral3
3oþer+sweostorother sisterneutral2
total recurrent12
Table 11Most frequent adjectival collocates of ‘brother’ (> 5) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationCategoryΣ
1oþer+broþorother brotherneutral62
2geong+broþoryoung brotherphysical18
3agen+broþorown brotherneutral16
4ilca+broþorsame brotherneutral14
5leof+broþordear brotherpositive14
6eald+broþorold brotherphysical12
7dead+broþordead brotherphysical10
other20
total recurrent166

It is worth noting that most of the brothers referred to in the collocations are monks, disciples and generally ‘spiritual brothers’ as in (21), more often than actual siblings as in (22), which quite clearly shows the stronger association of females with family life and males with public service.

  1. (21)

    ÞacwæþIohannes,Bletsiað,Broþorþaleofestan,
    thensaidJohnblessbrothersthedearest
    urneGod
    ourGod
    ‘Then John said: Dear brothers, bless our God.’ (coblick,LS_20_[AssumptMor[BlHom_13])

  1. (22)

    IcandIonathas,mingingrabroðor,Faraðto
    IandJonathanmyyoungerbrothergoto
    Galaaðtoafligenneþahæðenan.
    Galatiatodrive awaytheheathens
    ‘I and Jonathan, my younger brother, (will) go to Galatia to drive away the heathens.’ (coaelive,+ALS_[Maccabees]:401.5101)

Since many of the OE texts discuss death of monks and their age, the proportion of physical collocates shown in Figure 7 is quite high, but the only lexemes attested in this group are geong ‘young’, eald ‘old’ and dead ‘dead’.

A pie chart displays four categories in descending order of proportion: 65% “neutral”, 24% “physical”, 11% “positive”, and 0% “negative”.

Figure 7 Semantic categories of recurrent adjectival collocates of broþor ‘brother’ in YCOE.

Generally, it has to be noted that the analysis of the female and male terms in the sibling category does not yield any noteworthy results, mostly due to an insufficient amount of data.

3.1.5 Terms Denoting Women and Men of High Social Status

The last group of gendered nouns represents a different cultural perspective, since it shows a combination of two sociolinguistic features: gender and social position. The category embraces female and male nouns designating people of high social status. The analysis clearly shows that queens, ladies, nuns and abbesses, who were definitely the highest-ranking females in Anglo-Saxon society, do not pattern with other women terms. Table 12 shows that the collocations, infrequent as they are, in most cases are positive and not a single one of them refers to the woman’s physicality. It is important to note that the queen or lady referred to in the data is often Mary, the mother of Jesus, as in (23), but the proportions are quite balanced and (24) is a representative example.

  1. (23)

    alaþuwuldorfæstehlæfdigeþeþonesoðanGod
    ohyougloriousladywhothetrueGod
    æfterflæscesgebyrdeacendest …
    afterflesh.GENoriginbore
    ‘Oh, you glorious lady, who gave birth to the true God in flesh.’ (comary,LS_23_[MaryofEgypt]:431.281)

  1. (24)

    HewæsseformacasereþeonCristgelyfde,
    hewasthefirstemperorwhoonChristbelieved
    SancteElenansunu,þæreeadigancwene
    SaintElenasontheblessedqueen
    ‘He was the first emperor who believed in Christ, the son of Saint Elena, the blessed queen.’ (colwstan1,+ALet_2_[Wulfstan_1]:47.87)

When we look at proportions, shown in Figure 8, the graph resembles a typical one for male-gendered nouns, with positive adjectives completely dominating and physical ones absent from the dataset.

Table 12Recurrent adjectival collocates of ‘queen’, ‘abbess’, ‘lady’ and ‘nun’ in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationCategoryΣ
1heofonlic+cwenheavenly queenneutral6
2eadig+cwenblessed queenpositive5
3ilca+cwensame queenneutral4
4halig+cwenholy queenpositive4
5halig+nunneholy nunpositive3
6ilca+abbodessesame abbessneutral2
7halig+abbodesseholy abbesspositive2
8arwurþ+abbodessehonourable abbesspositive2
9æþele+abbodessenoble abbesspositive2
10æþele+cwennoble queenpositive2
11god+cwengood queenpositive2
12gastlic+cwenspiritual queenneutral2
13wuldorfæst+hlæfdigeglorious ladypositive2
total recurrent38
A pie chart displays four categories in descending order of proportion: 63% “positive”, 37% “neutral”, and 0% for both “physical” and “negative”. “Positive” is the largest category, with no representation for “physical” or “negative”.

Figure 8 Semantic categories of recurrent adjectival collocates of cwen ‘queen’, abbodesse ‘abbess’, hlæfdige ‘lady’ and nunne ‘nun’ in YCOE.

In the case of high-ranking males, there is a real abundance of data, with 630 tokens attested and the most frequent ones listed in Table 13. While the heavenly king in (25) is a clear reference to Jesus Christ, and many instances of the lexeme hlaford ‘lord’ as in (26) are references to God, real kings are definitely present in the data (cf. (27) and (28)), and some of them are not positive characters.

  1. (25)

    &he,seheofonlicacyning,þæteallswiðe
    andhetheheavenlykingthatallvery
    geðyldeliceabærformancynneslufan&hælo.
    patientlyboreformankind’sloveandsalvation
    ‘And he, the heavenly king, who suffered everything with great patience for the love and salvation of mankind.’ (coverhomE,HomS_24.1_[Scragg]:259.232)

  1. (26)

    Webiddaðþe,leofhlaford,þætðugehyran
    webidyoudearlordthatyouhear
    wylleureword.
    willourwords
    ‘We bid you, dear Lord, that you hear our words.’ (cosevensl,LS_34_[SevenSleepers]:273.210)

  1. (27)

    andþætwordsprangGeondealþætlandþæt
    andthewordsprangthroughoutallthelandthat
    Apollonius,semæracyngc,Hæfdefundenhiswif,
    Apolloniusthegreatkinghadfoundhiswife
    ‘And it became known throughout the land that the great king Apollonius had found a wife.’ (coapollo,ApT:49.9.521)

  1. (28)

    Aconþærenihteþesearleasacyninghineon
    butonthenightthatthehonourlesskinghimon
    merigenacwellanwoldecomGodesengel
    morningkillwantedcameGod’sangel
    scinendeofheofenum
    shiningofheaven
    ‘But the night before the morning when the honourless king wanted to kill him, God’s angel came shining from heaven.’ (cocathom1,+ACHom_I,_37:505.240.7503)

Figure 9 shows that while the most frequent adjective category is neutral collocations, the proportion of positive ones is relatively high and, unsurprisingly, modifiers describing physicality are the least numerous group.

Table 13Most frequent adjectival collocates of ‘king’, ‘lord’, ‘abbot’ and ‘monk’ (> 10) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationCategoryΣ
1oþer+cyningother kingneutral37
2heofonlic+cyningheavenly kingneutral33
3ilca+cyningsame kingneutral26
4hæþen+cyningpagan kingneutral19
5mære+cyninggreat kingpositive17
6reþe+cyningjust kingpositive16
7eorþlic+cyningearthly kingneutral16
8cristen+cyningChristian kingneutral16
9soþ+cyningtrue kingpositive15
10god+cyninggood kingpositive15
11arleas+cyninghonourless kingnegative13
12leof+hlaforddear lordpositive13
13æþele+cyningnoble kingpositive11
14oþer+munucother monkneutral11
15unrihtwis+cyningunjust kingnegative10
16iudeisc+cyningJewish kingneutral10
17geong+cyningyoung kingphysical10
18halig+abbodholy abbotpositive10
other332
total recurrent630
A pie chart displays four categories in descending order of proportion: 52% “neutral”, 32% “positive”, 11% “negative”, and 5% “physical”. “Neutral” is the largest category, followed by “positive”, with smaller portions for “negative” and “physical”.

Figure 9 Semantic categories of recurrent adjectival collocates of cyning ‘king’, hlaford ‘lord’, abbod ‘abbot’ and munuc ‘monk’ in YCOE.

The analysis of this category yields particularly interesting results if we examine them against the data from the previous noun groups. It might at first seem paradoxical that high-ranking women have no negative collocates, nor those related to the body. However, since all the referents of female terms examined here are women of an esteemed social status, the results cannot be used to make assumptions about the general position and regard of women in Anglo-Saxon society. A queen or a lady is not supposed to be described in negative terms, either because she is the mother of Christ or because she is a higher-ranking person than the author of the text. An abbess or a nun, in turn, is part of the religious community of the church, which also guarantees her positive social recognition. Furthermore, the fact that Anglo-Saxon society was stratified means that only average (i.e. low-ranking) women were perceived in terms of their physical qualities.

3.2 Binominals (N + CONJ + N)

Studies show that when two nouns are joined by a conjunction, their order is not random and the factors which play a role in the variation are power or importance (the supreme item comes first), length (the shorter item comes first) and frequency (the more frequent item comes first) (Goldberg & Lee, Reference Goldberg and Lee2021). Therefore, for instance, when we compare the order of the two most general gendered nouns, wif and wer, bearing in mind that they are both one-syllable, three-sound words and that the frequency of their designates is comparable, a visible preference of one over the other in the initial position may only be interpreted as difference in power and importance. Table 14 shows very clearly that in the patterns involving two grown-up people of different gender, the male term virtually always comes first, as in (29) and (30).

  1. (29)

    Wæronhisfæder&hismodorbutahæðen.
    werehisfatherandhismotherbothheathen
    ‘His father and his mother were both heathen.’ (coverhom,LS_17.2_[MartinVerc_18]:9.2230)

  1. (30)

    Andhiðærgenamoninneealleþagehadodan
    andtheytheretookinalltheordained
    menandwerasandwif
    peopleandmenandwomen
    ‘And they took in all the ordained people, both men and women.’ (cochronC,ChronC_[Rositzke]:1011.21.1522)

Table 14The most frequent binominals with women terms (> 5) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationOrderΣ
1fæder+and+modorfather and mothermale > female68
2wif+and+cildwoman and childfemale > child35
3sunu+and+dohtorson and daughtermale > female21
4wer+and+wifman and womanmale > female21
5fæder+oþþe+modorfather or mothermale > female16
6modor+and+gebroþormother and brotherfemale > male13
7ge+wer+ge+wifFootnote 12man and womanmale > female11
8broþor+and+sweostorbrother and sistermale > female7
9ealdormann+and+sweostornobleman and sistermale > female7
10modor+and+broþormother and brotherfemale > male6
11sunu+oþþe+dohtorson or daughtermale > female6
12wif+and+dohtorwoman and daughterfemale > child6
13cild+and+modorchild and motherchild > female5
14ge+wæpenmann+ge+wifmannmen and womenmale > female5
15wif+and+bearnwoman and sonfemale > child5
16wif+oþþe+bearnwoman or sonfemale > child5
other104
all recurrent341

Figure 10 proves that the difference is quite overwhelming. When a pair consists of a female and a male, the order prioritising the male is ten times more frequent (58 per cent vs. 6 per cent). The discrepancy becomes much more striking when we consider that the order privileging women occurs only in the pairs modor+and+gebroþor and modor+and+broþor – that is, mother and brother – in which the female is favoured not because of the gender but due to her age and family position. This is analogous to wif+and+cild, where a woman is phrase-initial when occurring with the gender-neutral child. However, when a child is male, both orders are attested (cf. (31) and (32)).

  1. (31)

    &ðugæstintoðamarce,&ðinesuna,
    andyougointothearkandyoursons
    &ðinwif&ðinrasunawifmidðe.
    andyourwomanandyoursons’womenwithyou
    ‘And you shall go into the ark, and your sons and your wife and your sons’ wives with you.’ (cootest,Gen:6.18.294)

  1. (32)

    &Hæsteneswif&hissunatwegenmonbrohte
    AndHasten’swomanandhissonstwoonebrought
    toþæmcyninge
    totheking
    ‘And Hasten’s wife and his two sons were brought to the king.’ (cochronA-2a,ChronA_[Plummer]:894.52.1057)

A pie chart displays seven categories in descending order of proportion. See long description.

Figure 10 Recurrent binominals with female nouns in YCOE.

Figure 10Long description

The chart shows the following proportions: 58% “male > female”, 18% “female > child”, 7% “child > female”, 6% “female > male”, 6% “female > other”, 4% “two females”, and 1% “other > female”. The largest category is “male > female”, with the rest making up smaller portions.

In the case of male-gendered nouns (Table 15 and Figure 11), it is not only the male > female order which is visible in the data. Another phenomenon which surfaces is the frequent pairing of two male terms (e.g. fæder and sunu ‘father and son’). Importantly, at the same time, such binominals are infrequent in the case of women terms: while there are as many as 213 male + male binominals in the YCOE corpus, the equivalent figure for women is only 16. This could suggest that the units consisting of two people are in most cases culturally relevant only as long as at least one of the persons in the pair is male. Finally, it is interesting to note the absence of any binominals involving a grown-up man and a child, which is in sharp contrast to the high co-ocurrence of women with children and explicitly testifies to a strong socio-cultural connection of women with household and family and, likewise, to men’s separation from this sphere of life experience.

Table 15The most frequent binominals with men terms (> 10) in YCOE
NumberLemmaPatternOrderΣ
1fæder+and+modorfather and mothermale > female68
2fæder+and+sunufather and sontwo males63
3wer+and+wifman and womanmale > female21
4sunu+and+dohtorson and daughtermale > female21
5cyning+and+witaking and wise mantwo males18
6sunu+and+gastson and (holy) ghostmale > other17
7fæder+oþþe+modorfather or mothermale > female16
8cyning+and+ealdormannking and noblemantwo males16
9cyning+and+eorlking and earltwo males15
10ge+wer+ge+wifman and womanmale > female11
11god+and+fæderGod and fatherGod > male10
other192
total recurrent468
A pie chart displays six categories in descending order of proportion. See long description.

Figure 11 Recurrent binominals with male nouns in YCOE.

Figure 11Long description

The chart shows the following proportions: 46% “two males”, 36% “male > female”, 9% “male > other”, 6% “God > male”, 2% “female > male”, and 1% “human > male”. The largest category is “two males”, followed by “male > female”, with the remaining categories making up smaller portions.

3.3 Genitives (GEN + N)

3.3.1 General Terms

In the case of genitival modification, a gendered noun may be both the head noun (e.g., woman in mannes wif ‘man’s woman’) and the modifier (e.g., woman in wifes meolc ‘woman’s milk’). Table 16 shows that for the neutral female terms which are heads of the investigated phrases the modifiers are all human (or divine) and male, for example, God ‘god’, man ‘man’, broþor ‘brother’, cyning ‘king’, fæder ‘father’, sunu ‘son’ and cempa ‘warrior’ (cf. (33)), and in many of these the word wif should rather be understood as ‘wife’ (cf. (34)). When the female term is a modifier, the emerging pattern comprises mostly collocations with body parts and fluids, most of which are somehow related to reproduction and sexuality – that is, meolc ‘milk’, flewsa ‘flow, period’, breost ‘breast’ or innoþ ‘womb’. The collocation wifes meolc appears only in OE medical texts, where human milk is a part of some medical remedies, as in (35), while other collocations, such as (36), have a more balanced corpus distribution.

  1. (33)

    ondlocadetoþæreGodesfæmnanhwæþerheo
    andlookedtotheGod’swomanwhethershe
    sceoldehinecuceneþedeadne.
    wouldhimaliveordead
    ‘And (he) turned to the woman of God to check whether she wanted him alive or dead.’ (comart3,Mart_5_[Kotzor]:De31,A.1.4)

  1. (34)

    andsumemidoðresmanneswifegehæmdon;
    andsomewithotherman’swomanhad intercourse
    ‘And some had sexual relations with another man’s woman.’
    (comargaC,LS_14_[MargaretCCCC_303]:15.14.248)

  1. (35)

    gemengþætdustwiþwifesmeolucþe
    mixthepowderwithwoman’smilkwho
    wæpnedfede
    male childfed
    ‘Mix the powder with milk of a woman who fed a male child.’
    (colaece,Lch_II_[3]:47.1.2.3975)

  1. (36)

    NegesceopseælmihtigaGod.menforgalnysse.
    notmadethealmightyGodpeopleforlust
    acþæthigestrynon.midgesceadeheorateam.
    butthattheybegetwithdiscretiontheiroffspring
    andeftonheoraylde.midealleþætforlæton.
    andagainontheiragewithallthatleave
    ðonneðæswifesinnoð.unwæstmbærebiðgehæfd
    whenthewoman’swombunfruitfulisconsidered
    ‘The almighty God did not create people for lust, but so that they beget their offspring with discretion and again in old age completely refrain from it when the woman’s womb is considered sterile.’ (cocathom2,+ACHom_II,_21:185.172.4092)

Table 16Genitival modification of and with and ‘woman’ (> 5) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationGroupΣ
1Godes fæmneGod’s womanfaith34
2mannes wifman’s womanfamily12
3fæmnan mynsterwoman’s monasteryfaith10
4wifes meolcwoman’s milkbody9
5wifes bearnwoman’s sonfamily8
6fæmnan tidwoman’s day (saint)faith8
7broþor wifbrother’s womanfamily7
8wifes gemanawoman’s companybody7
9wifes flewsawoman’s flux (period)body6
10wifes huswoman’s houseother5
11wifes hæmeþþingwoman’s intercoursebody5
12wifes gebæruwoman’s stateother5
13cyninges wifking’s womanfamily5
14fæmnan lichamawoman’s bodybody5
other93
total recurrent210

Among the recurrent collocations are also terms directly related to sexual intercourse: wifes hæmeþþing ‘woman’s intercourse’, wifes gemana ‘woman’s company’ and wifes gemengness ‘woman’s intercourse’, illustrated in (37).

  1. (37)

    Seælmihtigafædergestryndeænnesunuofhim
    thealmightyfatherbegotonesonofhim
    sylfum,butanwifesgemanan
    selfwithoutwoman’scompany

    ‘The almighty father begot a son by himself, without a woman’s company.’

    (coaelhom,+AHom_22:12.3295)

Figure 12 shows that 56 out of 210 (26 per cent) recurrent collocations of this type represent the pattern which might suggest possession or subordination, ‘someone’s (male) woman’: these examples express family relations, but they clearly show that the position of the woman was inferior (with the exception of her relation to children), which agrees with the pattern revealed in the analysis of binominals. In the examples where wif is the modifier, the head noun never designates an adult male person. An impressive 29 per cent of collocations are related to woman’s physicality, or, to be more specific, her reproductive capabilities. This, along with references to the position in the family, situates the linguistic image of the Anglo-Saxon woman in the household realm. The fact that none of the collocates in this group describes the woman’s power over any aspect of her life further corroborates this observation.

A pie chart displays four categories in descending order of proportion: 29% “body”, 29% “faith”, 24% “family”, and 18% “other”. “Body” and “faith” are tied as the largest categories, followed by “family” and “other”.

Figure 12 Genitival modification of and with wif, fæmne and wifmann ‘woman’ in YCOE.

In the case of wer ‘man’, the situation is drastically different, as shown in Table 17. Even though the pattern ‘someone’s man’ is extremely well represented in the data (77 per cent of all recurrent genitival collocations), all 468 instances of such use are covered by two collocations – Godes wer ‘God’s man’ and Dryhtnes wer ‘Lord’s man’ – which shows that a man could only be subordinated to God, as in (38). This remarkably contrasts with genitives involving the women terms: God was merely one of the potential agents controlling a woman (namely, when she was a saint or a nun), but in other cases women were perceived as inferior to, or at least secondary to, human males.

  1. (38)

    AcþatowillanðæsGodesweresheoeardiendlicwæs
    butthentowilltheGod’smansheinhabitablewas
    geworden;
    become
    ‘But then, according to the will of God’s man, it [the land] became inhabitable.’ (cobede,Bede_4:29.366.10.3661)

Table 17Genitival modification of and with ‘man’ (> 5) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationGroupΣ
1Godes werGod’s manfaith402
2Dryhtnes werLord’s manfaith66
3lifes werman of (good) lifeother25
4weres gemanaman’s companybody12
5weres wifman’s womanfamily9
6weres tidman’s timeother7
7weres wundorman’s miraclefaith6
8weres mynsterman’s monasteryfaith6
9weres gemyndman’s memoryother5
other70
total recurrent608

The review of genitival modification of wer also shows two interesting patterns absent from the collocations of the women terms. The first concerns wer in the position of the modifier of words such as ‘time’ or ‘memory’ – that is, nouns which generally relate to human experience. The second case concerns phrases denoting ‘a man of something’, where the genitival modifier of wer is an inanimate abstract noun such as work, holiness or life; see (39).

  1. (39)

    Hesædeme,þætinðæreylcanbyrigTudertina
    hesaidmethatinthesamecityTudertine
    wæresumswyþegodesweorceswer,þamwæsnama
    wassomeverygoodwork’smanwhomwasname
    Marcellinus.
    Marcellinus
    ‘He told me that in the same city of Tudertine there was a man of very good work whose name was Marcellinus.’ (cogregdC,GD_1_[C]:10.83.24.951)

Evidently, this collocation pattern is dominated by God’s/Lord’s man. This can indicate men’s connection to the domain of profession and public life, since all the men of God were either future saints (and serving God was their basic activity) or members of the clergy. With only 5 per cent of collocations related to body and 1 per cent to family (cf. Figure 13), wer stands in stark contrast to the basic women terms, where both ‘body’ and ‘family’ cover a substantial portion of the data. Moreover, even if a man’s physicality is mentioned, it is rarely related to sexuality. The only exception is weres gemana ‘man’s company’, which is used in the sexual context, but all twelve cases refer to the lack of any man’s physical involvement during Mary’s immaculate conception as in (40).

  1. (40)

    Andwegelyfaðþæthineclænemædengebære,Sancta
    andwebelievethathimcleanmaidenboreSaint
    Maria,þenæfrenahteweresgemanan
    Marywhonevernot-hadman’scompany
    ‘And we believe that an immaculate maiden bore him, Saint Mary, who had never been in the company of a man.’(cowulf,WHom_7a:24.528)

A pie chart displays five categories in descending order of proportion: 78% “faith”, 14% “other”, 5% “body”, 2% “power”, and 1% “family”. “Faith” is the dominant category, with the others making up much smaller portions.

Figure 13 Genitival modification of and with wer ‘man’ in YCOE.

The only body parts mentioned in the male context are feet and hands (cf. (41)). This markedly contrasts with the women terms, dominated in this area by breost ‘breast’ and innoþ ‘womb.’ This again stresses that bearing children was considered to be women’s basic social duty, while men had a larger array of tasks to perform.

  1. (41)

    ofðæswereshanda&hisbroðorhandaic
    oftheman’shandandhisbrother’shandI
    ofgangeðæsmanneslif.
    requiretheman’slife

    ‘I will require the life of man at the hand of every man and his brother.’

    (cootest,Gen:9.5.378)

Given the higher uniformity and narrower semantic scope of the analysed women terms, we can hypothesise that the linguistic image of the Anglo-Saxon man allows a more varied existence than that which is granted to the woman. Also, the category of power, though infrequent, is represented by some of the collocations. On the other hand, the linguistic patterns do not situate the Anglo-Saxon man within the domain of the family society: collocations related to family relations are rare in this group (see Figure 13).

3.3.2 Parent Terms

In the next group of terms, covering the ‘parent’ sense, the womb (innoþ) and the bosom (bosm) once again prove to be the most important attributes of a woman, confirming the observations related to the basic OE women terms, with (42) as a representative example.

  1. (42)

    Sagamehwilcsunuwræceæresthisfæderonhys
    tellmewhichsonavengesfirsthisfatheronhis
    moderinnoðe.
    mother’swomb

    ‘Tell me which son avenges his father already in his mother’s womb.’

    (coadrian,Ad:12.1.31)

Table 18 shows quite clearly that similarly to the adjectival collocations, many of the patterns extracted from the corpus refer to one particular mother – that is, Mary, the mother of Jesus Christ, as in (43).

  1. (43)

    ÐacwæðþæshælendesmodortoÞamþenum,
    thensaidtheSaviour’smothertotheservants
    doðswa hwæt swaheeowsecge.
    dowhateverheyousay

    ‘Then the Saviour’s mother said to the servants: Do whatever he tells you.’

    (cowsgosp,Jn_[WSCp]:2.5.5845)

Table 18Genitival modification of and with ‘mother’ (> 3) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationGroupΣ
1hælend+modorSaviour’s motherfaith28
2modor+innoþmother’s wombbody24
3god+modorGod’s motherfaith22
4crist+modorChrist’s motherfaith17
5cyning+modorking’s motherfamily11
6man+modorman’s motherfamily6
7modor+bosmmother’s bosombody4
other23
total recurrent135

Therefore, the high proportion of ‘faith’, apparently at the expense of ‘family’, shown in Figure 14, is not surpising.

A pie chart displays four categories in descending order of proportion: 55% “faith”, 24% “body”, 18% “family”, and 3% “other”. “Faith” is the dominant category, with the others making up smaller portions.

Figure 14 Genitival modification of and with modor ‘mother’ in YCOE.

In the case of fæder, the data present a completely different picture. Table 19 shows that while faith remains an important category, father is mostly a modifier and often an actual or metaphorical owner of a number of objects (e.g. hus ‘house’, æht ‘property’, see (44)) and attributes (e.g. wille ‘will, wisdom ‘wisdom’, see (45)). Example (46) shows that a father could even metaphorically ‘own’ his god, which is without precedence in the analysed data (a mother or a woman in general absolutely could not).

  1. (44)

    GodcwæðþatoAbrame:Farofþinumlande
    GodsaidthentoAbramgoofyourland
    &ofðinremægðe&ofðinesfæderhuse
    andofyourfamilyandofyourfather’shouse
    ‘Then God said to Abraham: Leave your land and your family and your father’s house.’ (cootest,Gen:12.1.452)

  1. (45)

    acseðewyrcðminesfæderwillanþeonheofonum
    butthiswhoworksmyfather’swillwhoonheaven
    is.sefærðintoheofenanrice;
    isthisgoesintoheavenkingdom
    ‘But the one who follows the will of my father, who is in heaven, goes to the kingdom of heaven.’ (cocathom2,+ACHom_II,_30:235.11.5232)

  1. (46)

    IceomþinesfæderGod&IacobesGod;
    Iamyourfather’sgodandJacob’sgod
    ‘I am the god of your father and the god of Jacob.’ (cootest,Exod:3.6.2350)

Figure 15 shows that the data are very varied. ‘Faith’ is no longer a dominant category, ‘power’ proves to be very well represented, and while ‘family’ is quite important, it is clearly a minority type. Interestingly, the category ‘body’ proves rather frequent for a male term (12 per cent), but the body parts attested among the recurrent collocations are: stefn ‘voice’, hand ‘hand’, eage ‘eye’, bosm ‘bosom’, lic ‘(dead) body’, bearm ‘bosom’, fot ‘foot’, sarness ‘pain’, heorte ‘heart’, ansyn ‘face’ and bæc ‘back’, so they are quite varied and rather different in character from the ones visible in women terms.

Table 19Genitival modification of and with ‘father’ (> 5) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationGroupΣ
1fæder+godfather’s Godfaith35
2fæder+husfather’s housefamily19
3fæder+namafather’s nameother18
4fæder+willefather’s willpower15
5fæder+ricefather’s kingdomfaith13
6fæder+wisdomfather’s wisdomother10
7mynster+fæderfather of the monasteryfaith10
8fæder+sunufather’s sonfamily9
9fæder+bysenfather’s exampleother8
10þeod+fæderpeople’s fatherother7
11fæder+stefnfather’s voicebody7
12hælend+fæderJesus’ fatherfaith6
13fæder+æhtfather’s propertypower6
14fæder+weorcfather’s workother5
15fæder+hiwrædenfather’s familyfamily5
16fæder+handfather’s handbody5
other123
total recurrent301
A pie chart displays five categories in descending order of proportion: 28% “other”, 22% “faith”, 21% “family”, 17% “power”, and 12% “body”. “Other” is the largest category, with the rest distributed more evenly.

Figure 15 Genitival modification of and with fæder ‘father’ in YCOE.

3.3.3 Terms Denoting Children and Young Adults

In the category of children and young adults, ‘family’ surfaces as the dominant category in the case of females. Table 20 shows how the daughters and maidens would usually belong to someone (sixty-two out of seventy-four recurrent collocations, which is 84 per cent of the data), with innoþ ‘womb’ and nama ‘name’ as the most numerous exceptions. Examples (47) and (48) illustrate the main tendencies.

  1. (47)

    Midþiðesecyningþaswordgecwæð,ða
    withthisthatthekingthesewordssaidthen
    færingaþareodeinðæscyngesiungedohtor
    suddenlytherewentintheking’syoungdaughter

    ‘When the king said these words, suddenly his young daughter came in.’

    (coapollo,ApT:15.1.283)

  1. (48)

    Seðemiddeadlicumlichaman.Wearðacenned
    thiswhowithmortalbodybecameborn
    ofbeclyseduminnoðeþæsmædenes.
    ofclosedwombthemaiden.GEN

    ‘He who was born with a mortal body from the closed womb of a maiden.’

    (cocathom1,+ACHom_I,_16:308.31.2948)

As can be seen, then, ‘family’ proves to be the strongest category among genitival collocations (see Figure 16). For the male terms, concurrently, it is ‘faith’ which completely dominates the data (cf. Figure 17). The difference is driven by the fact that in many cases the referent is Jesus, Godes sunu ‘God’s son’ (as shown in (49)), and this single collocation represents 61 per cent of the data in Table 21. Moreover, the second most frequent collocation, mannes sunu ‘man’s son, the son of man’, is also a reference to Jesus. Nonetheless, in other cases human sons are referents, and since 95 per cent of the collocations represent the pattern ‘someone’s son’, it suggests a subordinate position of children, which is only natural for a medieval society. The most frequent collocation in which sunu is the modifier is suna lic ‘son’s (dead) body’ shown in (50).

  1. (49)

    &hehyregecyddeþætheoscoldegeberan
    andhehertoldthatsheshouldbear
    Godessunu.
    God’sson
    ‘And he told her that she should give birth to God’s son.’ (cowulf,WHom_7:38.409)

  1. (50)

    Angeleaffulyrðlingbærhisdeadansunalicto
    onereligiousfarmerborehisdeadson’sbodyto
    Benedictesmynstre.
    Benedict’smonastery
    ‘A religious farmer brought the body of his dead son to a Benedictine monastery.’ (cocathom2,+ACHom_II,_11:105.470.2272)

Although it has to be noted that the relatively low frequency of the collocations in this category limits their statistical relevance, they still confirm the results yielded in other categories of nouns, thus confirming a general tendency.

Table 20Genitival modification of and with ‘maiden’ and ‘daughter’ (> 3) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationGroupΣ
1cyning+dohtorking’s daughterfamily19
2god+mægdenGod’s maidenfaith16
3ealdormann+dohtornobleman’s daughterfamily8
4eorl+dohtorearl’s daughterfamily4
5broþor+dohtorbrother’s daughterfamily4
6mægden+namamaiden’s nameother3
7mægden+innoþmaiden’s wombbody3
8man+dohtorman’s daughterfamily3
other14
total recurrent74
A pie chart displays four categories in descending order of proportion: 65% “family”, 24% “faith”, 7% “body”, and 4% “other”. “Family” is the dominant category, with the others making up smaller portions.

Figure 16 Genitival modification of and with mægden ‘maiden’ and dohtor ‘daughter’ in YCOE.

A pie chart displays four categories in descending order of proportion: 77% “faith”, 19% “family”, and 2% each for “body” and “other”. “Faith” is the dominant category, with the others making up much smaller portions.

Figure 17 Genitival modification of and with sunu ‘son’ and cnapa ‘boy’ in YCOE.

Table 21Genitival modification of and with ‘son’ and ‘boy’ (> 5) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationGroupΣ
1god+sunuGod’s sonfaith434
2man+sunuman’s sonfaith111
3cyning+sunuking’s sonfamily42
4broþor+sunubrother’s sonfamily14
5ealdormann+sununobleman’s sonfamily10
6modrige+sunuaunt’s sonfamily9
7eorl+sunuearl’s sonfamily9
8sweostor+sunusister’s sonfamily8
9wiln+sunumaid’s sonfamily6
10sunu+licson’s bodybody5
11sunu+sunuson’s sonfamily5
12widuwa+sunuwidow’s sonfamily5
13fæder+sunufather’s sonfamily5
other52
total recurrent715
3.3.4 Sibling Terms

In the category ‘sibling’, sweostor ‘sister’ proves quite unvaried in its phraseological patterns (see Table 22). Only four recurrent genitival collocations were identified, three of which represent the semantic group of ‘family’, as shown in (51). The only attribute of a sister in the data is her soul, as in (52).

  1. (51)

    AndÆðelswiðcwen,seowæsÆlfredessweostor
    AndAethelswithqueenwhowasAlfred’ssister
    cinges,forðferde
    king’sdied
    ‘And Aethelswith, the sister of King Alfred, died.’ (cochronC,ChronC_[Rositzke]:889.1.839)

  1. (52)

    Huhegeseahhisswustorsawle,huheo
    howhesawhissister’ssoulhowshe
    utferdeoflichaman.
    out-wentofbody
    ‘How he saw his sister’s soul and how it left her body.’ (cogregdH,GDHead_2_[H]:94.2.960)

Figure 18 thus diverges from the patterns attested for the previous groups of female terms, but this can be explained by the low number of collocations and their limited diversity. Consequently, this is a category of minimal relevance for our study.

Table 22Genitival modification of and with ‘sister’ in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationGroupΣ
1cyning+sweostorking’s sisterfamily9
2sweostor+sunusister’s sonfamily8
3sweostor+sawelsister’s soulfaith5
4cild+sweostorchild’s sisterfamily2
total recurrent24
A pie chart displays four categories in descending order of proportion: 79% “faith”, 21% “family”, and 0% each for “body” and “other”. “Faith” is the dominant category, followed by “family”, with no representation for “body” and “other”.

Figure 18 Genitival modification of and with sweostor ‘sister’ in YCOE.

In the case of broþor ‘brother’, there is both more data and more variation, as shown in Table 23. While ‘family’, exemplified by (53), proves to be a strong category (which is confirmed by Figure 19), it is rather unexpected that ‘body’ is well attested as well. This result, however, is inflated by the the high frequency of eage ‘eye’, which in turn results from numerous references of Anglo-Saxon homilies to the parable from the Gospel of Matthew: ‘And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?’ (cf. (54)). (The word ‘brother’ in this parable does not denote a family relation, but a fellow human.) The only other collocation from this category is broþor blod ‘brother’s blood’, also a biblical reference, as shown in (55).

  1. (53)

    WæsheCenredesbroþorþæscyninges,seær
    washeCenred’sbrothertheking’swhobefore
    himricehæfde.
    himpowerhad
    ‘He was a brother of King Cenred who ruled before him.’ (cobede,Bede_5:21.476.25.4785)

  1. (54)

    Tohwigesihstþuþætmotonþinesbroþor
    towhyseeyouthedustonyourbrother’s
    egan
    eye
    ‘Why do you see the mote in your brother’s eye?’ (cowsgosp,Mt_[WSCp]:7.3.355)

  1. (55)

    þinesbroðorblodclypaðuptomeofeorðan.
    yourbrother’sbloodcallsuptomeofearth
    ‘Your brother’s blood is calling me from the earth.’ (cootest,Gen:4.10.189)

  1. (56)

    &heolustlicefromþambroðrumþæsmynstres
    andtheygladlyfromthebrothersthemonastery.GEN
    onfongnewæron.
    receivedwere
    ‘And they were gladly received by the brothers of the monastery.’ (cobede,Bede_3:17.234.2.2390)

Table 23Genitival modification of and with ‘brother’ (> 4) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationGroupΣ
1cyning+broþorking’s brotherfamily21
2broþor+eagebrother’s eyebody14
3broþor+sunubrother’s sonfamily14
4broþor+wifbrother’s womanfamily7
5mynster+broþorbrother of (the) monasteryfaith7
6broþor+sawelbrother’s soulfaith6
7eorl+broþorearl’s brotherfamily5
8broþor+dohtorbrother’s daughterfamily4
9broþor+gereordbrother’s speechother4
10broþor+þingbrother’s thingother4
11broþor+blodbrother’s bloodbody4
other50
total recurrent140
A pie chart displays five categories in descending order of proportion: 46% “family”, 21% “other”, 18% “body”, 14% “faith”, and 1% “power”. “Family” is the largest category, with the others making up smaller portions.

Figure 19 Genitival modification of and with broþor ‘brother’ in YCOE.

Finally, it should be noted that many ‘brothers’ in the dataset are in fact monks, as in (56).

Analogous to the nouns describing children and young adults, the results yielded by the sibling category are not very significant statistically; however, the analysis of the collocations from this group does not deviate from a pattern visible elsewhere.

3.3.5 Terms Denoting Women and Men of High Social Status

The last group of gendered nouns, including women of higher social position, proves very interesting in its collocational choices. As in the analysis of adjectival collocations, female terms for women of an esteemed status display a strong contrast with other female nouns. Table 24 and Figure 20 convincingly show that Anglo-Saxon women of higher social standing were mostly attested in collocations related to their power and authority, for example, abbudissan mynstre ‘abbess’ monastery’ in (57). However, even in the case of the woman who seems to have most power, the abbess, the data show a major limitation: while she can ‘own’ her monastery and her congregation, she fails to ‘own’ any people, unlike the men in power discussed later in this Element.

Table 24Genitival modification of and with ‘queen’, ‘abbess’, ‘lady’ and ‘nun’ in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationGroupΣ
1abbodesse+mynsterabbess’ monasterypower5
2cyning+cwenking’s queenfamily4
3mynster+abbodesseabbess of (the) monasterypower3
4abbodesse+þegnungabbess’ servicepower3
5middaneard+cwenqueen of the worldpower3
6abbodesse+forþforabbess’ deathother2
7gesamnung+abbodesseabbess’ congregationpower2
8god+nunneGod’s nunfaith2
9suþdæl+cwenqueen of the southpower2
10yfel+cwenqueen of evilother2
11þegen+cwenservant’s queenpower2
12god+cwenGod’s queenfaith2
13hlæfdige+forþforlady’s deathother2
total recurrent34
A pie chart displays five categories in descending order of proportion: 59% “power”, 17% “other”, 12% “family”, 12% “faith”, and 0% “body”. “Power” is the dominant category, with “body” not represented at all.

Figure 20 Genitival modification of and with cwen ‘queen’, abbodesse ‘abbess’, hlæfdige ‘lady’ and nunne ‘nun’ in YCOE.

‘The queen’ and ‘the lady’ are sometimes references to Mary, the mother of Jesus, as in (58), but the queen is also often a metaphor, as in (59). This example is particularly interesting, as it provides an insight into the imagery of Christian theology. The phrase describing the hierarchic nature of cardinal sins, ‘pride is the queen of all sins’, is not in itself biblical. It originated in St Gregory the Great’s Moralia (written in the late sixth century in Latin) and was later used by the Christian doctrine, for example, by Thomas Aquinas. The feminine personification of evil relies on a presupposition, convenient for male Christian philosophers, that all human sin is a consequence of the original sin, for which, ultimately, Eve is responsible.

  1. (57)

    Inðeosseabbudissanmynstrewæssumbroðorsyndriglice
    inthisabbess’monasterywassomebrotherparticularly
    midgodcundregifegemæred&geweorðad.
    withdivinegraceglorifiedandhonoured
    ‘In this abbess’ monastery there was a brother particularly glorified and honoured with God’s grace.’ (cobede,Bede_4:25.342.3.3426)

  1. (58)

    NecwæðheonaiceomGodesmoder.oððeiceom
    notsaidshenotIamGod’smotherorIam
    cwenneallesmiddaneardes.
    queenallworld

    ‘She did not say: I am God’s mother, or: I am the queen of all the world.’

    (cocathom1,+ACHom_I,_13:286.144.2480)

  1. (59)

    Seformaheafodleahtorysofermodignes,Seoysgecweden
    thefirstcardinal sinispridewhichissaid
    cweneallrayfela.
    queenall.GENevils.GEN

    ‘The first cardinal sin is pride, which is said to be the queen of all evils.’

    (coverhom,HomS_38_[ScraggVerc_20]:61.A.2581)

Metaphorical uses aside, Figure 20 presents a really exceptional picture, with ‘power’ dominant at 59 per cent, and the equivalent result for the male-gendered nouns being extremely close at 62 per cent (cf. Figure 21). Table 25 reveals, however, that while the quantitative result is virtually the same, the king’s power is often expressed by the possession of servants (e.g. cyninges þegen ‘king’s servant’ shown in (60) or cyninges gerefa king’s steward’).

  1. (60)

    AndþaonðæswifesgebærumonfundonÞæs
    andthenonthewoman’smannersfoundthe
    cingesþegnasðaunstilnesse
    king’sservantstherestlessness
    ‘And the king’s servants found restlessness in the woman’s behaviour.’ (cochronC,ChronC_[Rositzke]:755.14.367)

A pie chart displays five categories in descending order of proportion: 62% “power”, 18% “family”, 14% “other”, 4% “faith”, and 2% “body”. “Power” is the dominant category, with the others making up smaller portions.

Figure 21 Genitival modification of and with cyning ‘king’, hlaford ‘lord’, abbod ‘abbot’ and munuc ‘monk’ in YCOE.

Table 25Genitival modification of and with ‘king’, ‘lord’, ‘abbot’ and ‘monk’ (> 10) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationGroupΣ
1cyning+þegenking’s servantpower75
2cyning+sunuking’s sonfamily42
3cyning+dægking’s day(s)power27
4cyning+broþorking’s brotherfamily21
5cyning+dohtorking’s daughterfamily19
6cyning+riceking’s kingdompower17
7mynster+abbodabbot of the monasterypower17
8cyning+gerefaking’s stewardpower16
9abbod+hæsabbot’s orderpower15
10wuldor+cyningking of gloryother12
11þeod+cyningpeople’s kingpower11
12cyning+cyningking of (all) kingsother11
13cyning+hiredking’s familyfamily10
other541
total recurrent834

It may not seem obvious why the collocation cyninges dæg ‘king’s day’ was classified in the ‘power’ category, but, as (61) shows, it refers to the times of a king’s reign, which was a way of measuring time.

  1. (61)

    HuonAchaiewearþmicelflodonAmbictiones
    howonAchaiabecamegreatfloodinAmbiction’s
    dagumþæscyninges
    daystheking
    ‘How a great flood took place in Achaia in the days of King Ambiction.’ (coorosiu,OrHead:1.6.7)

Generally, ‘power’ is the dominant category, and (62) is another representative example.

  1. (62)

    nedohenanðingbutanþæsabbodeshæse
    nordohenothingwithouttheabbot’sorder
    ‘Nor shall he do anything without the abbot’s order.’ (cobenrul,BenR:27.7.6.96)

The similarities between Figures 20 and 21 are quite striking and they show, as in the analysis of adjectival collocations, that the only women whose linguistic image was comparable to men’s were those of a privileged social status. A higher-ranking woman was described with more positive adjectives, never associated with physicality, and the patterns of genitival modification also show that she in fact could possess some power, just like a man.

3.4 Quantitative Summary

This section is based on the analysis of a large number of recurrent collocations. In the case of adjectival modification, we took into account 576 phraseological units with female-gendered nouns and 2,385 equivalent units with male-gendered nouns, and the proportions between the particular adjective types are illustrated by Figure 22. All in all, in turns out that while the proportions of negative and neutral adjectives for all the analysed lexemes combined are rather similar between the female and the male group, the difference in the use of adjectives related to physicality and positive features is really striking (19 per cent vs. 6 per cent and 40 per cent vs. 56 per cent respectively) and it proves statistically significant (X2 (3, N = 2961) = 121.3653, p < 0.00001). The fact that physicality is the main factor discriminating the two groups confirms the hypothesis that female terms would rather collocate with adjectives describing physical appearance.

A vertical bar chart compares percentages for women and men across four categories. See long description.

Figure 22 Adjectival modifiers of all the gendered nouns: Summary.

Figure 22Long description

The horizontal axis represents four categories. The vertical axis represents the percentages, ranging from 0% to 60% in increments of 10. The bar chart depicts the following data. For women, the largest category is “positive” (40%), followed by “neutral” (36%), “physical” (19%), and “negative” (5%). For men, the largest category is “positive” (56%), followed by “neutral” (35%), “physical” (6%), and “negative” (3%).

As far as binominals are concerned, the analysis was based on 341 units with female-gendered nouns and 468 phrases with their male equivalents. Figure 23 illustrates a few important differences that the study revealed. First of all, two female terms rarely collocate with each other (5 per cent), while binominals with two male terms are the dominant category in this group (46 per cent). Next, it is rather striking that male terms precede female terms in the majority of binominals including women (58 per cent), while only 2 per cent of the data show a reverse situation for men. The final discrepancy lies in the ability of women terms to collocate with children terms (25 per cent), and the complete lack thereof in the male dataset. The difference is confirmed by statistics: (X2 (4, N = 809) = 556.2729, p < 0.00001) and it shows a big difference in the social position of men and women and the clear superiority of the former. At the same time, it confirms women’s close relation to family and children, reflecting their main social role.

A vertical bar chart compares percentages for women and men across five categories. See long description.

Figure 23 Binominals with all the gendered nouns: Summary.

Figure 23Long description

The horizontal axis represents five categories. The vertical axis represents the percentages, ranging from 0% to 70% in increments of 10. The bar chart depicts the following data. For women, the largest category is “after different-gendered” (58%), followed by “with child” (25%), “other” (7%), “before different-gendered” (6%), and “two same-gendered” (5%). For men, the largest category is “two same-gendered” (46%), followed by “before different-gendered” (36%), “other” (16%), “after different-gendered” (2%), and “with child” (0%).

In the case of genitival modification, the analysis covered 477 phraseological units built around women terms and 2,598 equivalent units with men terms. Figure 24 illustrates the general difference between the groups, proving that all the categories differ considerably. The most striking discrepancy is visible in collocations describing power (4 per cent for women vs. 20 per cent for men) and body (21 per cent vs. 5 per cent respectively), which are almost complete reversals of each other. The remaining differences concerning family (31 per cent for women vs. 16 per cent for men) and faith (35 per cent vs. 45 per cent respectively) complete the picture, demonstrating how Anglo-Saxon women are usually shown in term of their family relations and physicality, while men are rather portrayed against the background of their profession, which in early medieval times translates into power relations (i.e. social class and position in society) and faith (i.e. respect in the eyes of the Catholic Church). As expected, this huge difference proves statistically significant (X2 (4, N = 3075) = 260.0851, p < 0.00001).

A vertical bar chart compares percentages for women and men across five categories. See long description.

Figure 24 Genitival modification for all the gendered nouns: Summary.

Figure 24Long description

The horizontal axis represents five categories. The vertical axis represents the percentages, ranging from 0% to 50% in increments of 5. The bar chart depicts the following data. For women, the largest category is “faith” (34%), followed by “family” (31%), “body” (21%), “other” (10%), and “power” (4%). For men, the largest category is “faith” (45%), followed by “power” (20%), “family” (16%), “other” (15%), and “body” (5%).

4 Collocations on the Level of the Verb Phrase

4.1 Subjects and Their Verbs (N + V)

4.1.1 General Terms

The next part of the analysis shows the most frequent verbs co-occurring with the analysed nouns in the syntactic role of subject. The verbs were divided into a few elementary semantic and/or syntactic categories (being, possession, activity, cognition, motion, saying, state, modal, passive), following the procedure described in Section 2, in order to show the main tendencies in the data and facilitate further analysis.

As can be seen in Table 26, in the case of general women terms, verbs of being are the most frequently represented category, which is not particularly consequential, since such verbs are generally frequent and associated with all types of subjects. Nonetheless, what does appear as rather striking is the relatively high frequency of passive structures associated with the basic women terms – that is, even though a woman is a syntactic subject, she is the patient and not the agent of the action, as in (63). In this context, it is also important to note the relatively high frequency of modal verbs, which in most cases, as illustrated by (64), refer to rules and obligations.

  1. (63)

    &þætwifwæsgehæledonþæretide.
    andthewomanwashealedonthistime
    ‘And at that time the woman was healed.’ (cowsgosp,Mt_[WSCp]:9.22.553)

  1. (64)

    Sehalgawerþacwæð,wifnescealnafaran
    theholymanthensaidwomannotshallnotgo
    towerafyrdwicum,acwunianætham
    tomen’scampbutstayathome
    ‘Then the holy man said: A woman should not go to men’s camp but stay at home.’ (coaelive,+ALS_[Martin]:1095.6683)

Table 26Verbal collocates of , and ‘woman’ as subjects (> 5) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationCategoryΣ
1wif+wesanto bebeing46
2wif+cweþanto saysaying12
3wif+beonto bebeing9
4wif+sculanshallmodal8
5wif+weorþanto becomebeing8
6fæmne+wesanto bebeing7
7wif+cennanto bear (a child)activity6
8wif+habbanto havepossession6
9wif+hatanto be calledpassive5
10wif+acennanto bear (a child)activity5
11wif+gelifanto believecognition5
12wif+secganto saysaying5
13wif+ceorlianto marryactivity5
other73
total recurrent200

Verbs of saying are well represented in the corpus, but this does not point to high agentivity of the analysed terms but should rather be seen as a by-product of narrative structure since numerous OE prose texts made frequent use of dialogues. However, what is important (though perhaps rather predictable at this point) is that the most frequent activity verbs collocating with wif are cennan ‘to bear (a child)’, acennan ‘to bear (a child)’ and ceorlian ‘to marry’, illustrated by (65), which points to a very narrow semantic range of the verbs where the woman is a true agent of the action. This is another example of limiting the Anglo-Saxon woman’s activity to the family realm, ascribing to her the role of a mother and wife.

  1. (65)

    Toþanþætwifcennewæpnedcild,haranhrifgedryged
    tothatthatwomanbearsmale childhare’swombdried
    &gesceafenoððegegnidenondrincdrincen
    andscrapedorrubbedondrinkdrink
    butu.
    both
    ‘For a woman to bear a male child, let both [man and woman] drink dried hare’s womb, scraped or rubbed into a drink.’ (coquadru,Med_1.1_[de_Vriend]:5.12.200)

By contrast, the verbal collocates of wer are much more diverse. One of the most easily discernible differences between the male and the female terms, as shown in Table 27, is the high frequency of habban ‘to have’, which clearly indicates that possession and ownership in Anglo-Saxon society should be associated with the male gender. What is more, the activity verbs co-occurring with wer are, unlike for the women terms, semantically broad: various examples include hatan ‘call/order’, don ‘to do’, locian ‘to look’, niman ‘to take’, etcetera, as in (66). Some of these verbs, like hatan, signal not only activity but also agency and power, which certainly resides with men.

  1. (66)

    acsehalgawersonahethiætstandan,
    buttheholymansoonorderedthemstand still

    ‘But the holy man soon ordered them to stand still.’ (coaelive,+ALS_[Martin]:1043.6646)

If we compare the proportions (see Figure 25), the differences between the female- and male-gendered nouns become well visible and rather substantial. In the case of wer, activity verbs are not only more varied but also more frequent (18 per cent vs. 14 per cent), and so are motion verbs (14 per cent vs. 8 per cent), which also indirectly relate to activity, as well as verbs of possession (7 per cent vs. 5 per cent). The verb types used more frequently with women terms are passive (9 per cent vs. 2 per cent); other verbs have comparable frequencies. All in all, this aspect of the linguistic image of Anglo-Saxons presents women as more passive, confined to family and motherhood, whereas men are characterised as more independent participants of varied spheres of life.

Table 27Verbal collocates of ‘man’ as subject (> 5) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationCategoryΣ
1wer+wesanto bebeing65
2wer+habbanto havepossession16
3wer+cweþanto saysaying12
4wer+geseonto seeperception10
5wer+cumanto comemotion8
6wer+wunianto staymotion7
7wer+beonto bebeing7
8wer+feranto gomotion6
9wer+andswarianto answersaying6
10wer+weorþanto becomebeing6
11wer+gehyranto hearperception6
12wer+secganto saysaying5
other118
total recurrent272
A vertical bar chart compares percentages for “wif, fæmne & wifmann” and “wer” across eleven categories. See long description.

Figure 25 Verbal collocates of wif, fæmne and wifmann ‘woman’ vs. wer ‘man’ as subjects in YCOE.

Figure 25Long description

The horizontal axis represents eight categories. The vertical axis represents the percentages, ranging from 0% to 40% in increments of 5. The bar chart depicts the following data. For “wif, fæmne & wifmann”, the largest category is “being” (36%), followed by “activity” (14%), “saying” (14%), “passive” (9%), “motion” (9%), “other” (9%), “modal” (6%), and “possession” (5%). For “wer”, the largest category is “being” (30%), followed by “activity” (19%), “motion” (14%), “saying” (12%), “other” (10%), “possession” (7%), “modal” (6%), and “passive” (2%).

4.1.2 Parent Terms

In the case of modor ‘mother’ (see Table 28), similarly to the previous group, the collocations are rarely activity verbs, and if they are, once again they are verbs related to the semantic field of childbearing, as in (67). Moreover, there is a verb related to emotions, as in (68), but these emotions are only negative (fear).

  1. (67)

    geþencþætþeþinmodornacodnegebær.
    thinkthatyouyourmothernakedbore
    ‘Consider that when your mother gave birth to you, you were naked.’
    (codicts,Prov_1_[Cox]:1.14.24)

  1. (68)

    Minmodorneondrædþuðe
    mymothernotfearyouREFL
    ‘Mother, do not be afraid.’ (cocathom2,+ACHom_II,_42:316.188.7149)

With fæder ‘father’, the most frequent verb of emotion is clearly positive: lufian ‘to love’ as in (69).

  1. (69)

    Sefæderlufaðþonesunu
    thefatherlovestheson
    ‘The father loves the son.’ (cocathom1,+ACHom_I,_16:308.47.2963)

Table 29 also lists a number of collocations pertaining to (transfer of) possession, as in (70), and many activity verbs which are not limited in the same way as the women terms, which shows that men can enjoy the privilege of ownership as well as the power of agency (cf. (71)).

  1. (70)

    ÞaþætmædenwæsXVgear,þawoldesefæder
    whenthemaidenwasfifteenyearsthenwouldthefather
    hisellansumumæþelonmentobryde.
    hergivesomenoblemantobride
    ‘When the maiden was fifteen years old, her father wanted to give her as a bride to a nobleman.’ (comart1,Mart_1_[Herzfeld-Kotzor]:De25,C.7.40)

  1. (71)

    andsehæþenecinghisfæderhithetut
    andtheheathenkinghisfatheritorderedout
    aweorpan
    throw

    ‘And his father, the heathen king, ordered to throw it out.’

    (comargaC,LS_14_[MargaretCCCC_303]:3.2.12)

Figure 26 summarises these tendencies, making it evident that the collocations of fæder show a higher proportion of (varied) activity verbs (30 per cent vs. 16 per cent) and possession (13 per cent vs. 4 per cent), while modor scores higher only for semantically light categories like verbs of being and saying. In this way, the results indicate similar differences in social status as those shown by the wif/wer category.

Table 28Recurrent verbal collocates of ‘mother’ as subject in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationCategoryΣ
1modor+wesanto bebeing18
2modor+cweþanto saysaying4
3modor+weorþanto becomebeing4
4modor+beonto bebeing3
5modor+donto doactivity2
6modor+secganto saysaying2
7modor+sittanto sit downmotion2
8modor+gewitanto understandcognition2
9modor+gewunianto staystate2
10modor+gebæranto bear (a child)activity2
11modor+onbryrdanto be inspiredpassive2
12modor+cumanto comemotion2
13modor+aganto ownpossession2
14modor+ondrædanto fearemotion2
total recurrent49
Table 29Verbal collocates of ‘father’ as subject (> 5) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationCategoryΣ
1fæder+wesanto bebeing102
2fæder+lufianto loveemotion16
3fæder+sellanto givepossession12
4fæder+forgyfanto givepossession11
5fæder+habbanto havepossession10
6fæder+hatanto call/orderactivity10
7fæder+sendanto sendactivity8
8fæder+asendanto sendactivity7
9fæder+witanto knowcognition6
10fæder+gescippanto make/createactivity6
11fæder+ne+wesanto not bebeing5
12fæder+donto doactivity5
13fæder+beonto bebeing5
other126
total recurrent329
A vertical bar chart compares percentages for “modor” and “fæder” across ten categories. See long description.

Figure 26 Verbal collocates of modor ‘mother’ vs. fæder ‘father’ as subjects in YCOE.

Figure 26Long description

The horizontal axis represents ten categories. The vertical axis represents the percentages, ranging from 0% to 60% in increments of 10. The bar chart depicts the following data. For “modor”, the largest category is “being” (51%), followed by “activity” (16%), “saying” (12%), “possession”, “motion”, “cognition”, “emotion”, and “state” (each 4%), and “modal” (0%). For “fæder”, the largest category is “being” (36%), followed by “activity” (30%), “possession” (13%), “emotion” (6%), “modal” (4%), “saying”, “cognition”, and “motion” (each 3%), and “state” (2%).

4.1.3 Terms Denoting Children and Young Adults

Table 30 goes to show that in the case of mægden ‘maiden’ and dohtor ‘daughter’, semantically light verbs are also dominant, and the single most frequent activity verb is, unsurprisingly at this point, geeacnian ‘to conceive’, illustrated by (72), the reference being to the Virgin Mary’s immaculate conception.

  1. (72)

    Efnescealmædengeeacnianonhyreinnoðe.
    indeedshallmaidenconceiveonherwomb
    &acennansunu.
    andbearson

    ‘Indeed, a maiden shall conceive in her womb and give birth to a son.’ (cocathom1,+ACHom_I,_13:282.25.2365)

Sunu ‘son’ and cnapa ‘boy’, on the other hand, show a high frequency of verbs of possession – that is, fon ‘to take’ and habban ‘to have’ shown in (73) – while the activity verbs listed in Table 31 are quite varied and include gemiltsian ‘to take pity’ and settan ‘to set’.

  1. (73)

    ondErconberhthissunufengtohisrice
    andEorcenberhthissontooktohispower
    ‘And his son Eorcenberht took the throne.’ (cobede,Bede_3:6.172.3.1684)

Interestingly, there are also some passive uses of sellan ‘to sell’, but a closer inspection reveals that all of the instances come from the biblical story of Judas, who betrayed Jesus.

  1. (74)

    WaÞammennþurhþoneþemannessunugeseald
    woethemanthroughwhomtheman’ssonsold
    bið
    is
    ‘Woe to the man by whom man’s son is sold.’ (cowsgosp,Mt_[WSCp]:26.24.1862)

Figure 27 summarises these tendencies, showing that the main difference between the female and the male terms is in the use of verbs of possession (5 per cent vs. 18 per cent) and activity (9 per cent vs. 21 per cent), with the former scoring higher only for verbs of being (48 per cent vs. 39 per cent) and verbs of saying (18 per cent vs. 3 per cent).

Table 30Verbal collocates of ‘maiden’ and ‘daughter’ as subjects (> 3) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationCategoryΣ
1dohtor+wesanto bebeing21
2mægden+wesanto bebeing14
3mægden+cweþanto saysaying9
4mægden+sculanshouldmodal5
5mægden+geeacnianto conceiveactivity4
6mægden+arisanto risemotion3
7mægden+andwyrdanto answersaying3
8dohtor+weorþanto becomebeing3
other26
total recurrent88
Table 31Verbal collocates of ‘son’ and ‘boy’ as subjects (> 5) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationPatternΣ
1sunu+wesanto bebeing97
2sunu+fonto takepossession44
3sunu+cumanto comemotion20
4sunu+beonto bebeing18
5sunu+lifianto livestate10
6sunu+gesellanto be soldpassive9
7sunu+cweþanto saysaying6
8sunu+habbanto havepossession6
9sunu+gemiltsianto pityactivity5
10sunu+sculanshallmodal5
11sunu+weorþanto becomebeing5
12sunu+settanto setactivity5
13sunu+hatanto callactivity5
14sunu+sittanto sit downmotion5
15sunu+donto doactivity5
other86
total recurrent331
A vertical bar chart compares percentages for “mægden & dohtor” and “sunu & cnapa” across eight categories. See long description.

Figure 27 Verbal collocates of mægden ‘maiden’ and dohtor ‘daughter’ vs. sunu ‘son’ and cnapa ‘boy’ as subjects in YCOE.

Figure 27Long description

The horizontal axis represents ten categories. The vertical axis represents the percentages, ranging from 0% to 60% in increments of 10. The bar chart depicts the following data. For “mægden & dohtor”, the largest category is “being” (48%), followed by “saying” (18%), “motion” (10%), “activity” (8%), “modal” (6%), “possession” (5%), passive (2%), and “state” (2%). For “sunu & cnapa”, the largest category is “being” (39%), followed by “activity” (21%), “possession” (18%), “motion” (8%), “state” (6%), and “modal”, “passive”, and “saying” (each 3%).

4.1.4 Sibling Terms

In the group representing siblings, sweostor ‘sister’ proves rather poorly represented, as shown in Table 32. The only instance of an activity verb is lætan ‘to cause, to allow’ exemplified by (75); this refers to one female causing another one to do something, so it seems that the agentivity of the female referent is quite limited in this respect. As could be predicted from other patterns of agency in Anglo-Saxon society, there are no examples showing that a woman is empowered to cause a man to do something.

  1. (75)

    &cwæþ,Drihten,nisþenancaruþætmin
    andsaidLordnot-isyounocarethatmy
    swusturletmeænlipieþenian
    sistercausedmealoneserve
    ‘And said: Lord, don’t you care that my sister made me serve on my own.’ (cowsgosp,Lk_[WSCp]:10.40.4533)

Table 33 shows how broþor ‘brother’ diverges from this picture, mostly by its frequent co-ocurrence with verbs of possession – that is, fon ‘to take’ and habban ‘to have’, illustrated in (76).

  1. (76)

    HuDomitianus,Titusesbroðor,fengtoRomano
    howDomitianTitus’brothertooktoRoman
    anwalde.
    power
    ‘How Domitian, the brother of Titus, took the Roman throne’ (coorosiu,OrHead:6.9.70)

The most frequent activity verb is the semantically broad but clearly agentive don ‘to do’, illustrated in (77).

  1. (77)

    Ealaðumanþusceawasthwætþinbroðer
    alasyoumanyoushowwhatyourbrother
    ðedyde.
    youdid
    ‘Alas, man, you have shown what your brother has done to you.’ (cocathom1,+ACHom_I,_3:204.169.605)

Figure 28 suggests an enourmous discrepancy between sweostor ‘sister’ and broþor ‘brother’, but this stems mostly from a quantity difference which translates directly into small diversity of the former. Consequently, this category does not yield very useful results.

Table 32Verbal collocates of ‘sister’ as subject in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationPatternΣ
1sweostor+wesanto bebeing9
2sweostor+lætanto cause/allowactivity3
3sweostor+ganto gomotion2
total recurrent14
Table 33Verbal collocates of ‘brother’ as subject (> 5) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationPatternΣ
1broþor+wesanto bebeing39
2broþor+fonto takepossession18
3broþor+beonto bebeing11
4broþor+cumanto comemotion10
5broþor+habbanto havepossession8
6broþor+donto doactivity7
7broþor+forþferanto diestate6
8broþor+faranto gomotion6
9broþor+cweþanto saysaying5
other62
total recurrent172
A vertical bar chart compares percentages for “sweostor” and “bropror” across several categories. See long description.

Figure 28 Verbal collocates of sweostor ‘sister’ vs. broþor ‘brother’ as subjects in YCOE.

Figure 28Long description

The horizontal axis represents ten categories. The vertical axis represents the percentages, ranging from 0% to 70% in increments of 10. The bar chart depicts the following data. For “sweostor”, the largest category is “being” (64%), followed by “activity” (21%), “motion” (14%), with no representation for “possession”, “modal”, “saying”, “state”, “cognition” and “perception”. For “bropror”, the largest category is “being” (31%), followed by “possession” (22%), “activity” (16%), “motion” (12%), “state”, “saying”, and “modal” (each 5%), “cognition” and “perception” (each 3%).

4.1.5 Terms Denoting Women and Men of High Social Status

Finally, in the category of higher social status, for the first time in this section, we see frequent recurrent uses of verbs of possession with women terms – that is, habban ‘to have’ and fon ‘to take’ (see Table 34) – though a closer inspection of examples such as (78) reveals that the objects owned or taken by the women were not necessarily tangible, unlike with men. However, example (79) is one of the rare occasions that describes a woman taking control over a kingdom, unusual as the story must have sounded to an Anglo-Saxon reader.

  1. (78)

    Seocwenhæfdegetacnungeþærehalgangelaðunge
    thequeenhadwarning signalstheholycongregation
    eallescristenesfolces
    allChristianfolk
    ‘The queen had some warning signs about the holy congregation of all Christians.’ (cocathom2,+ACHom_II,_45:340.172.7642)

  1. (79)

    &æfterhisdeaðeSameramishiscwenfengcægþer
    andafterhisdeathSemeramishisqueentookeither
    getoþæmgewinnegetoþæmrice.
    andtothewarandtothekigdom
    ‘And after his death, Semeramis replaced him as the head of the army and the ruler of the kingdom.’ (coorosiu,Or_1:2.22.8.437)

Moreover, even though faran ‘to go’, a verb signalling active movement, features as one of the most frequent collocations, it turns out that in all of the examples the women do not travel on their own, but rather accompanied by men as in (80).

  1. (80)

    HerForðherebisceopandFriþogyðcwenferdon
    hereForthherebishopandFrithogithqueenwent
    toRome.
    toRome
    ‘Then Bishop Forthhere and Queen Frithogith went to Rome.’ (cochronC,ChronC_[Rositzke]:737.1.326)

For the equivalent male terms, a great number and variation of collocations was identified in the corpus, as evidenced by Table 35. While the abundance of activity verbs such as hatan ‘to call, to order’ shown in (81) and verbs of possession patterns with our previous observations regarding male-gendered nouns, it should be noted that in this group there is also a high number of (change of) state verbs such as forþferan ‘to die’ shown in (82) and passive constructions, with numerous chronicle entries reporting the death of a king, such as (83).

  1. (81)

    Inþæreceastreeac swylceÆðelberhtcyninghehtcirican
    inthistownalsoAethelberhtkingorderedchurch
    getimbran&þagehalgianSancteAndreæþæm
    buildandthisconsecrateSt. Andrewthe
    apostoli.
    apostle
    ‘Moreover, in the same town King Aethelberht ordered a church to be built and consecrated to St. Andrew the apostle.’ (cobede,Bede_2:3.104.21.983)

  1. (82)

    HerCuþredWestseaxnacyningforðferde
    hereCuthredWest Saxonkingdied
    ‘Then Cuthred, the king of Wessex, died.’ (cochronD,ChronD_[Classen-Harm]:754.1.200)

  1. (83)

    HerAnnaciningwerðofslagen.
    hereAnnakingbecamekilled
    ‘Then King Anna was killed.’ (cochronE,ChronE_[Plummer]:653.1.365)

Figure 29 shows that despite the lower number of collocations attested for women terms, it is possible to observe that in this group of nouns, verbs of possession fail to drive the difference between the male and the female (both featuring c. 14 per cent of these verbs), and the main discrepancy lies in the complete lack of activity verbs with women terms (and 27 per cent of them for the men terms).

Table 34Verbal collocates of ‘queen’, ‘abbess’, ‘lady’ and ‘nun’ as subjects in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationPatternΣ
1cwen+wesanto bebeing4
2cwen+feranto travelmotion4
3cwen+weorþanto becomebeing3
4cwen+habbanto havepossession2
5cwen+fonto takepossession2
6cwen+arisanto risemotion2
7abbodesse+wesanto bebeing5
8nunne+wesanto bebeing2
9nunne+libbanto livestate2
10nunne+weorþanto becomebeing2
total recurrent28
Table 35Verbal collocates of ‘king’, ‘lord’, ‘abbot’ and ‘monk’ as subjects (> 10) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationPatternΣ
1cyning+wesanto bebeing129
2cyning+forþferanto diestate103
3cyning+ofsleanto be killedpassive61
4cyning+cumanto comemotion36
5cyning+habbanto havepossession32
6cyning+hatanto order/callactivity31
7cyning+sendanto sendactivity29
8cyning+gyfanto givepossession24
9cyning+faranto gomotion20
10cyning+gefeohtanto fightactivity20
11munuc+wesanto bebeing19
12hlaford+wesanto bebeing17
13cyning+sellanto givepossession16
14cyning+weorþanto becomebeing16
15cyning+onfonto takepossession16
16cyning+fonto takepossession15
17cyning+oferhergianto ravageactivity14
18abbod+forþferanto diestate14
19cyning+willanto wantmodal13
20cyning+lætanto letactivity12
21cyning+nimanto takepossession12
22cyning+cweþanto saysaying12
23cyning+beonto bebeing11
24cyning+gewendanto turnmotion10
25cyning+feranto gomotion10
26cyning+sculanshallmodal10
27cyning+ganto gomotion10
other489
total recurrent1,201
A vertical bar chart compares percentages for “cwen, hlæfdige, abbodesse, nunne” and “cyning, hlaford, abbod, munuc” across multiple categories. See long description.

Figure 29 Verbal collocates of cwen ‘queen’, abbodesse ‘abbess’, hlæfdige ‘lady’ and nunne ‘nun’ vs. verbal collocates of cyning ‘king’, hlaford ‘lord’, abbod ‘abbot’ and munuc ‘monk’ as subjects in YCOE.

Figure 29Long description

The horizontal axis represents twelve categories. The vertical axis represents the percentages, ranging from 0% to 60% in increments of 10. The bar chart depicts the following data. For “cwen, hlæfdige, abbodesse, nunne”, the largest category is “being” (57%), followed by “motion” (21%), “possession” (14%), and “state” (7%), with no representation for other categories. For “cyning, hlaford, abbod, munuc”, the largest category is “activity” (28%) followed by “being” (19%), “possession” (14%), “motion” (12%), “state” (11%), “passive” (5%), “modal”, (4%), “saying” (3%), “perception” (2%), cognition (1%), “emotion” (1%), and “commitment” (0%).

4.2 Objects and Their Verbs (V + N)

4.2.1 General Terms

The last collocation pattern involves the use of gendered nouns as objects. Table 36 shows quite evidently that in the case of the basic OE women terms, the predominant semantic category is possession, which clearly agrees with the masculinist perception of a woman as a material object that can be owned and transferred.

  1. (84)

    Moysesuswratgifhwæsbroðorbyðdead&wif
    Mosesuswroteifwhosebrotherisdeadandwoman
    hæbbe,&sebyðbutanbearnumþæthisbroðor
    hasandthisiswithoutchildrenthathisbrother
    nimehiswif&hysbroþorsædawecce.
    takehiswifeandhisbrother’sseedawake
    ‘Moses wrote: if someone’s brother is dead and he has a woman and no children, his brother should take his wife and awaken his brother’s seed.’ (cowsgosp,Mk_[WSCp]:12.19.3144)

As far as wer is concerned, the most interesting fact about the verb–object collocations is that they are hardly attested (see Table 37). The most common one is geceosan ‘to choose’ shown in (85).

  1. (85)

    ÞuhafastgecorenþonewerÞemewellicað.
    youhavechosenthemanthatmewelllikes
    ‘You have chosen a man whom I like.’ (coapollo,ApT:22.13.473)

Table 36Verbal collocates with , and ‘woman’ as subjects (> 3) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationCategoryΣ
1habban+wifto have a womanpossession46
2niman+wifto take a womanpossession21
3forlætan+wifto leave a womanmotion16
4geniman+wifto take a womanpossession16
5brucan+wifto use a womanactivity7
6sellan+wifto give a womanpossession7
7geniman+fæmneto take a womanpossession6
8befæstan+wifto secure a womanpossession5
9onfon+wifto take (to) wifepossession5
10geseon+wifto see a womanperception4
11gelædan+wifto lead a womanactivity4
12cweþan+wifto say to a womansaying4
13forgyfan+wifto give a wifepossession4
14lædan+wifto lead a womanactivity4
15feccan+wifto fetch a womanpossession3
16beweddian+wifto wed a womanactivity3
17gehælan+wifto heal a womanactivity3
other40
total recurrent198
Table 37Verbal collocates with ‘man’ as object (> 3) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationCategoryΣ
1geceosan+werto choose a manactivity10
2habban+werto have a manpossession7
3onfon+werto take a manpossession5
4brucan+werto defile a manactivity5
5gyldan+werto pay a manadvantage5
6ofslean+werto kill a manactivity5
7sellan+werto give to a manadvantage4
8forlætan+werto leave a manmotion3
9gehyran+werto hear a manperception3
10abidan+werto await a manactivity3
other16
total recurrent66

Another example, habban wer ‘to have a man’, shown in (86), is attested but much less frequent than habban wife ‘to have a woman’. Interestingly, among the most frequent collocates there is brucan weres ‘to enjoy a man’, which appears in a clearly sexual context, which is also as a reference to a biblical story (cf. (87)).

  1. (86)

    Andgifhwylcgeleaffulwifhæfðungeleaffulnewer,and
    andifsomefaithfulwomanhasunfaithfulmanand
    hewyllewunianmidhyre,neforlæteheohine;
    hewillstaywithhernotleaveshehim
    ‘And if a faithful wife has an unfaithful husband and he wants to stay with her, she should not leave him.’ (coaelhom,+AHom_20:97.2982)

  1. (87)

    ÐaandwyrdeMariaþamengle.Humægþisgewurðan:
    thenansweredMarytheangelhowmaythisbecome
    for ðan þeIcnebrucenanesweres?
    becauseInotenjoyednoman
    ‘Then Mary answered the angel: How can this be since I have not known any man?’ (cocathom1,+ACHom_I,_13:283.55.2402)

Figure 30 illustrates the difference between female and male gendered nouns in this respect. When we compare these results to the ones shown in the preceding section, it turns out that wer appears in recurrent collocations as subject in 15.7 per cent out of its 1,732 uses in YCOE and as object in only 3.8 per cent of its uses. The respective results for the most frequent woman term, wif, are 12.5 per cent as subject and 13.2 per cent as object, which is a huge discrepancy pointing to the conceptual and consequently linguistic objectification of wif (and women in general) in the OE prose records. The prototypical semantic role of a syntactic subject is agent: an animate and volitional doer of the action, while for a syntactic object it is patient: an entity (not necessarily animate) undergoing the action. Since the fact that male-gendered phrases are more likely to be syntactic subjects is generally treated as an example of gender bias in many languages, including English (e.g. Kotek et al. Reference Kotek, Dockum, Babinski and Geissler2020), it is plausible to assume that the discrepancy in the proportions of subjects and objects between wif and wer in OE may be a linguistic marker of the social objectification of women in Anglo-Saxon society.

A vertical bar chart compares percentages for “wif, fæmne & wifmann” and “wer” across seven categories. See long description.

Figure 30 Verbal collocates of wif, fæmne and wifmann ‘woman’ vs. verbal collocates of wer ‘man’ as objects in YCOE.

Figure 30Long description

The horizontal axis represents seven categories. The vertical axis represents the percentages, ranging from 0% to 70% in increments of 10. The bar chart depicts the following data. For “wif, fæmne & wifmann”, the largest category is “possession” (63%), followed by “activity” (20%), “motion” (9%), “saying” (4%), “perception” (3%), “emotion” (1%), with “advantage” at 0%. For “wer”, the largest category is “activity” (55%), followed by “possession” (18%), “advantage” (14%), “perception” (8%), “saying” (3%), “emotion” (3%), with “motion” at 0%.

4.2.2 Parent Terms

In the case of modor, because of its lower frequency, the collocations are not particularly varied (see Table 38). Example (88) illustrates one of the most frequent ones.

  1. (88)

    Eallþistacnodeþætseoclænefæmnecendesunu,
    allthismeantthatthecleanwomanboreson
    swahirenæfrewernegehran,acseðe
    ashernevermannottouchedbutthiswho
    hæfdefæderonheofnumbutanmederandhæfdeþa
    hadfatheronheavenswithoutmotherandhadthe
    moduroneorðanbutanfæder.
    motheronearthwithoutfather
    ‘All this meant that the immaculate woman gave birth to a son, even though no man had ever touched her, and he had a father in heaven without a mother, and a mother on earth without a father.’ (comart1,Mart_1_[Herzfeld-Kotzor]:De25,A.28.20)

Interestingly, the YCOE data suggest that one can actually choose a mother, though a closer analysis of the examples revealed that this activity was limited to Christ (cf. (89)).

  1. (89)

    UreHælendCristcydde,þæthelufodeþaclænnysse
    oursaviourChristsaidthathelovedthecleanliness
    onhisþeowumswutelice,þaþahemædenmann
    onhisservantsclearlythenwhenhemaiden
    himtomedergeceas.
    himtomotherchose
    ‘Our Saviour Christ clearly showed that he loved cleanliness in his servants when he chose a maiden for his mother.’ (colsigef,+ALet_5_[Sigefyrth]:13.7)

The collocations featuring fæder ‘father’ as an object are, in contrast, quite varied (see Table 39). Apart from the fact than one can simply ‘have’ a father, there are also two verbs of commitment here: swerian ‘to swear, to promise’ shown in (90) and behatan ‘to promise’, which can be interpreted as a sign of the higher authority of the father. Moreover, there is also arwurþian ‘to honour’ illustrated in (91), or gebletsian ‘to bless’; no verbs of this type appear for modor ‘mother’, which is rather surprising, especially because this category includes the mother of Jesus.

  1. (90)

    neheneforgythiswedd,onðamheswor
    norhenotforgothiswedonthatheswore
    eowrumfæderum.
    you.DATfathers.DAT
    ‘Nor did he forget his wed that he swore to your fathers,’ (cootest,Deut:4.30.4561)

  1. (91)

    Acicarwurðieminnefæder.
    butIhonourmyfather
    ‘But I honour my father’ (cocathom2,+ACHom_II,_13:128.21.2786)

Figure 31 suggests a very strong difference between modor ‘mother’ and fæder ‘father’ in their use as objects, but it is necessary to remember that the low frequency of collocations with the former term makes this graph rather difficult to interpret.

Table 38Recurrent verbal collocates with ‘mother’ as object in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationCategoryΣ
1habban+modorto have a motherpossession3
2betæcan+modorto entrust a motheractivity3
3gelædan+modorto lead a mothermotion2
4geceosan+modorto choose (for) a motheractivity2
total recurrent10
Table 39Verbal collocates with ‘father’ as object (> 5) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationCategoryΣ
1habban+fæderto have a fatherpossession14
2swerian+fæderto promise a fathercommitment12
3gehyran+fæderto hear a fatherperception10
4arwurþian+fæderto honour a fatheractivity7
5lufian+fæderto love a fatheremotion7
6biddan+fæderto ask a fathersaying7
7bebyrgan+fæderto bury a fatheractivity6
8forlætan+fæderto leave a fathermotion5
9secgan+fæderto tell a fathersaying5
10gebletsian+fæderto bless a fatheractivity5
11behatan+fæderto promise a fathercommitment5
12weorþian+fæderto honour a fatheractivity5
other81
total recurrent169
A vertical bar chart compares percentages for “modor” and “fæder” across eight categories. See long description.

Figure 31 Verbal collocates of modor ‘mother’ vs. fæder ‘father’ as objects in YCOE.

Figure 31Long description

The horizontal axis represents eight categories. The vertical axis represents the percentages, ranging from 0% to 60% in increments of 10. The bar chart depicts the following data. For “modor”, the largest category is “activity” (50%), followed by “possession” (30%), and “motion” (20%), with no representation for other categories. For “fæder”, the largest category is “activity” (39%), followed by “possession” (18%), “saying” (17%), “commitment” (10%), “perception” (8%), “emotion” (4%), “motion” (3%), and “cognition” (1%).

4.2.3 Terms Denoting Children and Young Adults

In the category of children and young adults (see Table 40), mægden ‘maiden’ and dohtor’ daughter’ seem dominated by verbs of possession such as habban ‘to have’, sellan ‘to give, to sell’, as shown in (92) and onfon ‘take’, illustrated by (93).

  1. (92)

    Labanhæfdetwadohtra;
    Labanhadtwodaughters
    ‘Laban had two daughters.’ (cootest,Gen:29.16.1196)

  1. (93)

    Arueswendeþæthehisricegemicliansceolde
    Aruesthoughtthathehiskingdomenlargeshould
    þahehisdohtorPhilippusesealde.
    whenhehisdaughterPhillippus.DATgave
    ‘Arues thought that it would enlarge his kingdom if he gave his daughter to Philippus.’ (coorosiu,Or_3:7.62.2.1186)

Interestingly, Table 41 shows that verbs of possession are also quite frequent for sunu ‘son’ and cnapa ‘boy’ – that is, habban ‘to have’ shown in (94) and sellan ‘to give, to sell’ in (95) – but there is also a number of activity verbs, mostly from the semantic field of conception and childbearing such as gestrynan ‘to beget’ shown in (96), acennan ‘to bear’ and cennan ‘to bear’.

  1. (94)

    Abraham,ðeheahfæder,hæfdetwægensunu,
    Abrahamthehigh-fatherhadtwosons
    Ismael&Isaac,
    IsmealandIsaac
    ‘Abraham the patriarch has two sons, Ismael and Isaac.’ (colsigewB,+ALet_4_[SigeweardB]:247.57)

  1. (95)

    DrihtenmesealdeðisnesunuforAbel,ðeCain
    LordmegavethissonforAbelwhomCain
    ofsloh.
    killed
    ‘Lord gave me this son for Abel, who was killed by Cain.’ (cootest,Gen:4.25.219)

  1. (96)

    EftAdamgestryndesunuðonehenemdeSeth,
    againAdambegotsonwhomhenamedSeth
    ‘Again Adam begot a son, whom he named Seth.’ (cootest,Gen:4.25.217)

Nevertheless, when proportions are counted (cf. Figure 32), verbs of possession turn out to be much more frequent for the female terms (67 per cent vs. 27 per cent). A noticeable frequency of those verbs in the male part of this category can be certainly explained by the lower status of younger males in comparison with adult Anglo-Saxon men represented by the male-gendered general term wer.

Table 40Verbal collocates with ‘maiden’ and daughter’ as object in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationCategoryΣ
1habban+dohtorto have a daughterpossession15
2sellan+dohtorto give a daughterpossession4
3onfon+mægdento take a maidenpossession3
4geseon+mægdento see a maidenperception3
5aræran+mægdento raise a maidenactivity2
6gehelan+mægdento heal a maidenactivity2
7underfon+dohtorto take a daughterpossession2
8biddan+dohtorto ask a daughtersaying2
9onfon+dohtorto take a daughterpossession2
10lætan+dohtorto let a daughteractivity2
11forgyfan+dohtorto give a daughterpossession2
12gestrynan+dohtorto beget a daughteractivity2
13befæstan+dohtorto secure a daughteractivity2
14gyfan+dohtorto give a daughterpossession2
total recurrent45
Table 41Verbal collocates with ‘son’ and ‘boy’ as object (> 4) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationPatternΣ
1habban+sunuto have a sonpossession33
2gestrynan+sunuto beget a sonactivity29
3acennan+sunuto bear a sonactivity20
4cennan+sunuto bear a sonactivity8
5sellan+sunuto give a sonpossession7
6geseon+sunuto see a sonperception7
7underfon+cnapato take a boypossession7
8asendan+sunuto send a sonactivity6
9gehealan+cnapato heal a boyactivity5
10ofslean+sunuto kill a sonactivity4
11brengan+sunuto bring a sonactivity4
12sendan+sunuto send a sonactivity4
13lufian+sunuto love a sonactivity4
14aræran+sunuto raise a sonactivity4
15forlætan+sunuto leave a sonmotion4
other49
total recurrent195
A vertical bar chart compares percentages for “mæġden & dohtor” and “sunu & cnapa” across five categories. See long description.

Figure 32 Verbal collocates of mægden ‘maiden’ and dohtor’ daughter’ vs. sunu ‘son’ and cnapa ‘boy’ as objects in YCOE.

Figure 32Long description

The horizontal axis represents five categories. The vertical axis represents the percentages, ranging from 0% to 70% in increments of 10. The bar chart depicts the following data. For “mæġden & dohtor”, the largest category is “possession” (67%), followed by “activity” (22%), “perception” (7%), “saying” (4%), with “motion” at 0%. For “sunu & cnapa”, the largest category is “activity” (66%), followed by “possession” (27%), “perception” (4%), “saying” (2%), and “motion” (2%).

4.2.4 Sibling Terms

In the next group of nouns, collocations with the female term sweostor ‘sister’ prove quite infrequent (see Table 42), though the recurrent ones follow the already identified patterns: possession, as in (97) and activity centred around marriage, as in (98).

  1. (97)

    AndhegeafhissweostoroferEaldseaxna
    andhegavehissisteroverseaOld Saxon
    cyngessuna.
    king’sson
    ‘And he gave his sister away over the see to the king of the Old Saxons.’ (cochronD,ChronD_[Classen-Harm]:924.5.1052)

  1. (98)

    &seIouiswearðswaswyðegalþætheon
    andtheJovisbecamesoverywickedthatheon
    hisagenreswystergewifode,seowæsgenamod
    hisownsistermarriedwhowasnamed
    Iuno,
    Juno
    ‘And Jovis became so wicked that he married his own sister, whose name was Juno.’ (cowulf,WHom_12:47.1182)

For broþor ‘brother’ the activity verbs listed in Table 43 are much more varied, with ofslean ‘to kill’ in (99) as the most frequent one.

  1. (99)

    andwiþBachidemfeaht,þehisbroþorofsloh,
    andwithBachidfoughtwhohisbrotherkilled
    ‘And he fought against Bachid, who killed his brother.’ (coaelive,+ALS_[Maccabees]:715.5301)

There is also a verb of emotion lufian ‘to love’ shown in (100), but all examples are about the situation when you actually do not love your brother (and what happens next).

  1. (100)

    Seðenelufaðhisbroðerþoneþehegesihð:
    thiswhonotloveshisbrotherwhomthathesees
    humæghelufianGod.þoneðehenegesihð
    howmayheloveGodwhomthathenotsees
    lichamlice.
    physically
    ‘If someone does not love his brother, whom he can see, how can he love God, whom he cannot see physically?’ (cocathom1,+ACHom_I,_16:309.64.2977)

Figure 33 confirms the patten established in the previous groups: verbs of possession are much more strongly associated with the female terms (60 per cent vs. 27 per cent), though one needs to be cautious when interpreting the graph because of the low number of collocations with sweostor ‘sister’.

Table 42Verbal collocates with ‘sister’ as object in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationPatternΣ
1habban+sweostorto have a sisterpossession4
2anforlætan+sweostorto leave a sistermotion2
3gewifian+on+sweostorto marry a sisteractivity2
4gyfan+sweostorto give a sisterpossession2
total recurrent10
Table 43Verbal collocates with ‘brother’ as object in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationPatternΣ
1secgan+broþorto tell a brothersaying11
2ofslean+broþorto kill a brotheractivity8
3habban+broþorto have a brotherpossession8
4cyþan+broþorto tell a brothersaying5
5sendan+broþorto send a brotheractivity5
6sellan+broþorto give a brotherpossession4
7biddan+broþorto ask a brothersaying4
8gecigan+broþorto call a brotheractivity4
9niman+broþorto take a brotherpossession4
10healdan+broþorto hold a brotherpossession3
11adrifan+broþorto drive away a brothermotion3
12reccan+broþorto give a brotherpossession3
13acwellan+broþorto kill a brotheractivity3
14lufian+broþorto love a brotheremotion3
15asendan+broþorto send a brotheractivity3
other30
total recurrent101
A vertical bar chart compares percentages for “sweostor” and “broþor” across five categories. See long description.

Figure 33 Verbal collocates of sweostor ‘sister’ vs. broþor ‘brother’ as objects in YCOE.

Figure 33Long description

The horizontal axis represents five categories. The vertical axis represents the percentages, ranging from 0% to 70% in increments of 10. The bar chart depicts the following data. For “sweostor”, the largest category is “possession” (60%), followed by “motion” and “activity” (both 20%), with no representation for “emotion” and “saying”. For “broþor”, the largest category is “activity” (39%), followed by “possession” (26%), “saying” (24%), “motion” (9%), and “emotion” (3%).

4.2.5 Terms Denoting Women and Men of High Social Status

In the final group, it is impossible to come up with a graph at all since the only recurrent collocation of a woman of higher social status used as a syntactic object is (to) nunnan gehalgian ‘consecrate a nun’, found five times in YCOE and shown in (101).

  1. (101)

    Þaberadmannþætwifþæthehæfdeærgenumen
    thenseizedmanthewomanthathehadbeforetaken
    butanþæscingesleafeandoferþarabisceopa
    withouttheking’spermissionandoverthebishops’
    gebodu,forðonheowæsærtonunnangehalgod.
    commandbecauseshewasbeforetonunconsecrated
    ‘Then they seized the woman who had been taken without the king’s permission and against the will of the bishops, because she had been a consecrated nun.’ (cochronC,ChronC_[Rositzke]:901.13.1020)

The pattern is also in use for other official positions one may be ordained to, for example, a bishop or a king as in (102).

  1. (102)

    andhewæsonþamylcangearetocingegehalgod.
    andhewasonthesameyeartokingconsecreated
    ‘And the same year he was consecrated king.’ (cochronC,ChronC_[Rositzke]:978.1.1174)

Because of higher frequencies, the male-gendered nouns for men of higher social standing are better attested, though not particularly frequent (which shows that the higher your position, the less likely you are to appear as a syntactic object, which is only logical). Table 44 lists the attested patterns. It turns out that the most frequent collocation is cyning ofslean ‘to kill a king’ shown in (103).

  1. (103)

    &þonecyningofslogan
    andthekingkilled
    ‘And (they) killed the king.’ (coorosiu,Or_5:4.118.17.2486)

Unlike in the previous categories, the terms denoting women of higher social status are extremely rarely used as grammatical objects. On the one hand, this indicates their more limited involvement in social activities, but, on the other, it might also suggest that such women were not objectified as often as women of lower social status.

Table 44Verbal collocates of ‘king’, ‘lord’, ‘abbot’ and ‘monk’ as objects (> 6) in YCOE
NumberLemmaTranslationPatternΣ
1ofslean+cyningto kill a kingactivity39
2gehalgian+to+cyningto consecrate (as) kingactivity18
3habban+cyningto have a kingpossession15
4gecyþan+cyningto inform a kingsaying11
5geceosan+cyningto choose a kingactivity10
6secgan+cyningto tell a kingsaying9
7secgan+hlafordto tell a lordsaying8
8slean+cyningto kill a kingactivity7
9onfon+cyningto take a kingpossession7
10gesecan+cyningto seek a kingactivity7
11foresprecan+cyningto promise to a kingcommitment7
12sendan+cyningto send a kingactivity6
13brengan+cyningto bring to a kingpossession6
14underfon+cyningto take a kingpossession6
15habban+hlafordto have a lordpossession6
16þeowian+hlafordto serve a lordactivity6
other162
total recurrent330

4.3 Quantitative Summary

The analysis of verbs collocating with gendered nouns in the role of syntactic subjects was based on 379 phraseological units with female terms and 2,299 units with equivalent male terms. Figure 34 shows the main areas of discrepancy. As can be seen, collocates of male-gendered nouns are much more varied and less dominated by verbs of being (43 per cent for women and (only) 27 per cent for men) and saying (13 per cent vs. 4 per cent respectively), both of which are semantically neutral and not signifying any involvement in social life. The most important difference is visible in the use of activity verbs, which are not only less frequent in the case of female-gendered subjects (12 per cent vs. 25 per cent), but also much less diverse and centred around marriage and childbearing, as shown in Section 4.1. Another important difference concerns verbs of possession, which co-occur with female subjects in only 5 per cent of the dataset, with the equvalent result for males at 14 per cent. The differences are statistically significant (X2 (4, N = 2678) = 128.4473, p < 0.00001).Footnote 14 The results confirm a much less diverse array of activities available for women in the early Middle Ages and the primary role of women as mothers and housewives.

A vertical bar chart compares percentages for women and men across eleven categories. See long description.

Figure 34 Verbal collocates of all the gendered nouns as subjects: Summary.

Figure 34Long description

The horizontal axis represents eleven categories. The vertical axis represents the percentages, ranging from 0% to 50% in increments of 5. The bar chart depicts the following data. For women, the largest category is “being” (43%), followed by “saying” (13%), “activity” (12%), “motion” and “passive” (both 6%), “possession” (5%), “modal” (4%), “cognition” (3%), “state” (2%), “emotion” and “perception” (both 1%). For men, the largest categories are “being” (27%) and “activity” (25%), followed by “possession” (14%), “state” (8%), “saying” and “modal” (both 4%), “motion” and “passive” (both 3%), “perception” (2%), with “cognition” and “emotion” at 1% each.

As far as collocations with gendered nouns as objects are concerned, the analysis takes into account 264 units with female terms and 840 units with male terms. Figure 35 presents the data for all of the analysed nouns combined, and it is quite clear that verbs of possession are the main point of divergence here, with as much as 62 per cent of the dataset for female-gendered nouns covered by this category and with only 23 per cent of the male-gendered nouns as the equivalent result (most of which are collocations of sunu ‘son’, relating to a younger and therefore less socially prestigious male). A less conspicuous but equally interesting difference which only comes to light when all of the collocations are inspected together is visible for verbs of saying: as can be seen, men are relatively often the indirect objects of reporting structures (13 per cent), while women are passive interlocutors much less often (4 per cent).

A vertical bar chart compares percentages for women and men across seven categories. See long description.

Figure 35 Verbal collocates of all the gendered nouns as objects: Summary.

Figure 35Long description

The horizontal axis represents seven categories. The vertical axis represents the percentages, ranging from 0% to 70% in increments of 10. The bar chart depicts the following data. For women, the largest category is “possession” (62%), followed by “activity” (22%), “motion” (8%), “saying” (4%), “perception” (3%), “emotion” (1%), with “commitment” at 0%. For men, the largest category is “activity” (54%), followed by “possession” (23%), “saying” (13%), “perception” (4%), “commitment” (3%), with “motion” and “emotion” at 2% each.

Obviously, activity verbs are again a huge area of difference, with 54 per cent of the male dataset classified as such (let us recall that a big part of these examples are verbs of killing), and only 22 per cent of female-gendered nouns appearing in this category. Statistics confirms the significance of this difference (X2 (3, N = 1104) = 158.5192, p < 0.00001).Footnote 15 The results provide a clear linguistic confirmation of the dominance of men in Anglo-Saxon society and the secondary position of women who were ‘owned’ by their fathers and husbands.

Conclusions

The linguistic data analysed in this study clearly indicate a disparity between the representations of women and men in late Old English society. They are invariably disproportionate in favour of the male gender: texts forming the corpus describe men as superior owners, engaged in productive activities in the public domain, while women are portrayed mostly in terms of property and as passive vessels. Given the interconnection between language and the reality it depicts, such a polarisation must be seen as a reflection of the actual divide between the female and the male in late Anglo-Saxon England. Although this state of play is not particularly surprising, as it corresponds to the data documented in historical sources, it incontrovertibly demonstrates that gender-based favouritism was plainly visible on the level of Old English public discourse.

The results presented in Sections 3 and 4 repeatedly and consistently substantiate that the ways in which women and men are seen through the language of Old English prose are drastically different. In the analysed collocations, Anglo-Saxon women are commonly depicted in the context of their physicality: inasmuch as their bodies are often directly mentioned, they are perceived through such factors as age, sexual attractiveness and ability to bear children. They are not shown as important agents of social life: the women terms rarely collocate with activity verbs, and even if they do, it is usually in connection with marriage and childbearing. Their relation to men is clearly subordinate: the woman is usually presented not as the owner of property, but as property itself, and she may be owned and transferred between men (usually from a father to a husband). The unprivileged position of the female gender is also implied through the discursive position of women and men: although the representatives of both genders are described as speaking equally often, women are rarely spoken to, as if they did not deserve the same interlocutor status as men.

The linguistic image of Anglo-Saxon men, in contrast, is that of agents involved in social life: they perform a wide range of various activities, which are notably not related to household and family. Men are not perceived in terms of their physicality; instead, the male terms often collocate with words signifying the position of power (in all groups with the exception of male children, which only reinforces the proposition that once a man achieves maturity, he attains a dominant social status). Unlike women, men in Anglo-Saxon England are linguistically depicted as property owners, and they are as a rule not objectified. They are much more frequently described with positive terms, often relating to the religious sphere.

The juxtaposition of members of different genders also confirms male domination in Anglo-Saxon society. Whenever a female term is conjoined with a noun referring to a male, the latter always comes first, which emphasises the superiority of men: a man is prioritised over a woman, a father over a mother, a son over a daughter. While the corpus abounds in examples of pairs of two male terms, it does not noticeably feature pairs of two women, which suggests that the image of all-female social units was not particularly promoted by Old English texts. Additionally, the very frequency of some collocations is meaningful: the fact that some word groups are so disproportionately represented (e.g. the paucity of data concerning collocations featuring female equivalents of ‘brother’ or ‘son’) clearly indicates the privileged position of the male gender. Finally, it is interesting that the female terms from the category comprising women of higher social status can form collocations similar to the patterns displayed in all male term categories. This demonstrates that in late Anglo-Saxon society it was necessary for a woman to maintain a position of a queen, an aristocrat or an abbess to enjoy a linguistic image of a standing which corresponded to that of a man.

Certainly, an important caveat of this Element is that the texts gathered in the corpus analysed are all highly biased. The literate Anglo-Saxon elite responsible for the production of Old English written records consisted solely of middle-aged, well-educated males, mostly members of the clergy. Thus the linguistic image of women in Old English texts is filtered through the minds of a small (though highly influential) portion of Anglo-Saxon society. Because of this textual limitation, we have no access to the way in which all speakers of Old English used collocations based on gendered nouns and we can only draw conclusions from the material at our disposal. It is also crucial to remember that the linguistic representations created by the texts from the corpus are not only the images of Anglo-Saxon women (and men) that the authors themselves experienced, but also the images that they would like to experience. Language is not only a tool for describing reality, but also an instrument of power, and, consequently, we must consider the linguistic representations of women (and men) established in this study as not only descriptive, but also prescriptive.

Furthermore, neither the sources of the linguistic representation of women in Anglo-Saxon society nor its long-term effects can be properly assessed without considering the context of the Christian religion. As we have mentioned before, the majority of texts analysed in this study are of ecclesiastical origins, being mostly sermons and lives of saints. Such texts were significant elements of male power discourse designed and maintained by the church: a clear objective of both these genres was to provide society with moral parameters and patterns of desirable behaviour. In this context it becomes of crucial importance that the textual evidence provided by our analysis agrees with Hollis’s (Reference Hollis1992) hypothesis about the downgrading influence of Roman Christianity on the position of women in Anglo-Saxon society. For instance, frequent references to women in terms of their corporality align with Hollis’s claim that ‘the distinctively “other” identity the church postulated for women … chiefly consisted in the carnal frailty they inherited from Eve’ (Hollis, Reference Hollis1992: 11). Such a masculinist or even misogynistic outlook has already been noted by the feminist critique of the Christian religious and ideological doctrine: for instance, Kristeva (Reference Kristeva1986) sees the roots of female deprecation and discrimination in the biblical story of Eve and the serpent: the myth establishes the woman as a source of corruption (often equated with the body), and the resultant socio-political system requires that women ‘are excluded from knowledge and power’ (Kristeva, Reference Kristeva1986: 143). As Irigaray (Reference Irigaray1993) emphatically puts it: ‘The positive connotation of the masculine … derives from the time of the establishment of patriarchal and phallocratic power, notably by men’s appropriation of the divine. … [M]an becomes God by giving himself an invisible father, a father language. Man becomes God as the Word, then as the Word made flesh’ (Irigaray, Reference Irigaray1993: 86).

The dichotomy between the linguistic representation of men and women determined in this Element clearly privileges one side over the other – active over passive, subject over object, culture over nature, spirit over body – following a Platonic Christian pattern. If we assume that language indeed determines, or at least strongly affects, one’s thinking and perception, then we must acknowledge that male-oriented language used in England between the ninth century and the eleventh century was one of the factors responsible for later alienation and discrimination of women, shaping the perception of gender roles in England in the following centuries. If we agree with Cameron that ‘representations of language and gender are part of the social apparatus which legitimizes and so helps to maintain gender distinctions and hierarchies’ (Cameron, Reference Cameron, Ehrlich, Meyerhoff and Holmes2014: 285), then we should claim that late Anglo-Saxon gender representations served their purpose really effectively.

Acknowledgments

This book was developed as part of the project entitled The linguistic image of woman in Old English Prose (IDUB B2311313000191.07) financed by the University of Lodz.

Language, Gender and Sexuality

  • Helen Sauntson

  • York St John University

  • Helen Sauntson is Professor of English Language and Linguistics at York St John University, UK. Her research areas are language in education and language, gender and sexuality. She is co-editor of The Palgrave Studies in Language, Gender and Sexuality book series, and she sits on the editorial boards of the journals Gender and Language and the Journal of Language and Sexuality. Within her institution, Helen is Director of the Centre for Language and Social Justice Research.

Editorial Board

  • Lilian Lem Atanga, The University of Bamenda

  • Eva Nossem, Saarland University

  • Joshua M. Paiz, The George Washington University

  • M. Agnes Kang, University of Hong Kong

About the Series

  • Cambridge Elements in Language, Gender and Sexuality highlights the role of language in understanding issues, identities and relationships in relation to multiple genders and sexualities. The series provides a comprehensive home for key topics in the field which readers can consult for up-to-date coverage and the latest developments.

Language, Gender and Sexuality

Footnotes

1 Wormald (Reference Wormald1977: 113) describes the early medieval situation of the Anglo-Saxon community as ‘a clerical monopoly’, with few literate lay (male) individuals, and by the end of the Middle English period the picture had not changed substantially, since ‘in 1500 an aggregate of perhaps 5 per cent of adult males and 1 per cent of adult females could sign their names in England’ (Fox, Reference Fox2000: 18).

2 Cameron distinguishes between two general explanations of linguistic sexism: for some feminists, sexist language is a ‘symptom’, an unintentional manifestation of the unfavourable perception of women by culture; for others, it is a ‘cause’, a calculated element of masculinist ideology (Cameron, Reference Cameron1992: 101–104).

3 Linguistic sexism is a phenomenon which has been observed and described not only in English, but also for a wide variety of languages (cf. Blakar Reference Blakar1977 and Uri Reference Uri2018 for Norwegian, Irigaray Reference Irigaray1985 and Reference Irigaray1993 as well as Yaguello Reference Yaguello1978 for French, Guentherodt et al. Reference Guentherodt, Hellinger, Pusch and Troemel-Ploetz1980 for German, García Meseguer Reference García Meseguer1977 for Spanish, Karwatowska & Szpyra-Kozłowska Reference Karwatowska and Szpyra-Kozłowska2005 for Polish, etc.).

4 It is important to note that we have decided not to take the word man ‘man, human’ into account since in OE it had two basic senses and it was very often used as the gender-neutral term for a human being.

5 For example, the phrase eallmihtig God ‘almighty God’ appears in the following morphological and spelling variants in YCOE: ælmihtiga God, ælmihtigan Godes, ælmihtigne God, ælmeahtegum Gode, ælmihtigan Gode, ælmihtega God, ælmehteges Godes, ælmihtegum Gode, ælmihti God, ealmihtigne Godd, ælmihtig God, aelmaehtgan Godes, almihtigæ God, ælmigtiga God, hælmihtiga God, ælmihtgan Gode, ealmihtiga God, ælmyhtyga God, ælmyhtegan God, almihtig God, ealmihtigne God, ælmihtigon Gode.

6 As in the case of fon to rice ‘take to power’ (i.e. ‘become a ruler’), illustrated by (i)–(iv), which show four variants from the same text, i.e. Bede’s Historia Ecclesiastica, extracted by VARIOE.

  1. (i)

    &æfterhisfædertoricefeng
    andafterhisfathertopowertook
    ‘And (he) took the throne after his father’ (cobede,Bede_1:8.42.17.355)

  1. (ii)

    fengtoriceHonoriuscasere
    tooktopowerHonoriusemperor
    ‘Honorius became emperor’ (cobede,Bede_1:9.42.24.361)

  1. (iii)

    Eadbaldhissunufengtoðamrice
    Eadbaldhissonetooktothepower
    ‘His sone Eadbald succeeded to the throne’ (cobede,Bede_2:5.110.22.1042)

  1. (iv)

    &hissunuCænwalhfengtohisrice
    andhissonCanwalhtooktohispower
    ‘And his son Canwalh succeeded to the throne’ (cobede,Bede_3:5.168.15.1633)

7 For example, the search for the use of the noun cyning ‘king’ as an object returns the pattern sprecan + cyning ‘to speak + king’, which after a closer inspection is a false hit since cyning is here a genitival modifier of another noun. Since some OE verbs take genitive objects, the underlying VARIOE query returns such examples, which need to be eliminated manually.

8 Since wifmann is a lower-frequency noun, its collocations are also relatively infrequent and none of them reaches the frequency threshold of five, which means that all of them belong to the category ‘other’. The same situation may be observed in Table 9 (with cnapa ‘boy’), Table 16 (wifmann ‘woman’), Table 21 (cnapa ‘boy’), Table 25 (munuc ‘monk’ and hlaford ‘lord’), Table 26 (wifmann ‘woman’), Table 31 (cnapa ‘boy’), Table 34 (hlæfdige ‘lady’), Table 36 (wifmann ‘woman’) and Table 44 (abbod ‘abbot’ and munuc ‘monk’).

9 As explained in Section 2, VARIOE returns results in the form of lemmas (normalised basic word forms with singular nominative forms for nouns and their modifiers, infinitives for verbs and the dominant spelling forms for uninflected parts of speech).

10 As explained in Section 2, many of the recurrent collocations discussed in Sections 3 and 4 have a frequency below five, so they are usually not included in the tables, but all of them are taken into account in the figures. In this case, blind + wif ‘blind woman’ has a frequency of four, so it does not appear in Table 4.

11 As a lower-frequency item, cnapa ‘boy’ fails to show any recurrent collocations with a frequency above five so all the patterns built around this noun are counted in the ‘other’ category in the table, but its collocates are included in Figure 6.

12 The correlative conjunction ‘gege … ’ works in a way similar to the Modern English ‘bothand … ’

13 The collocations of modor as a subject are so infrequent in the study corpus that the table shows a complete list.

14 In the statistical analysis we have only taken into account verbs of being, possession, activity and saying as separate categories, collapsing all the remaining data into ‘other’, since most of the available online chi-square calculators allow for the analysis of the maximum of five categories. Thus, only the most frequent ones could be selected.

15 In the statistical analysis we have only taken into account verbs of possession, activity and saying as separate categories, collapsing all the remaining data into ‘other’ because of their equally low frequency.

References

Bennett, H. T. (1994). Exile and the Semiosis of Gender in Old English Elegies. In Harwood, B. J. and Overing, G. R., eds., Class and Gender in Early English Literature. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, pp. 4358.Google Scholar
Bennett, H. T., Lees, C. A. & Overing, G. R. (1990). Anglo Saxon Studies: Gender and Power. Feminism in Old English Studies. Medieval Feminist Newsletter, 10, 1524.Google Scholar
Bennett, J. M. (1988). Public Power and Authority in the Medieval English Countryside. In Erler, M. and Kowaleski, M., eds., Women and Power in the Middle Ages. Athens: University of Georgia Press, pp. 1836.Google Scholar
Blakar, R. M. (1977). Språk er makt [Language Is Power]. Oslo: Pax.Google Scholar
Bucholtz, M. (2014). The Feminist Foundations of Language, Gender, and Sexuality Research. In Ehrlich, S., Meyerhoff, M. and Holmes, J., eds., The Handbook of Language, Gender, and Sexuality, 2nd ed. London: Wiley Blackwell, pp. 2347.Google Scholar
Cameron, D. (1992). Feminism and Linguistic Theory, 2nd ed. Basingstoke: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cameron, D. (2014). Gender and Language Ideologies. In Ehrlich, S., Meyerhoff, M. and Holmes, J., eds., The Handbook of Language, Gender, and Sexuality, 2nd ed. London: Wiley Blackwell, pp. 281296.Google Scholar
Chance, J. (1986). Woman as Hero in Old English Literature. Syracuse, NY: Syracuse University Press.Google Scholar
Chance, J. (2007). The Literary Subversions of Medieval Women. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cichosz, A., Pęzik, P., Grabski, M. Adamczyk, M., Rybińska, P. & Ostrowska, A. (2021). The VARIOE online morphological dictionary for YCOE. University of Lodz. varioe.pelcra.pl/morph.Google Scholar
Cixous, H. (1976). The Laugh of the Medusa, trans. K. Cohen and P. Cohen. Signs, 1(4), 875893.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Damico, H. (1984). Beowulf’s Wealhtheow and the Valkyrie Tradition. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Damico, H. (2015). Beowulf and the Grendel-kin: Politics & Poetry in Eleventh-Century England. Morgantown: West Virginia University Press.Google Scholar
Desmond, M. (1990). The Voice of Exile: Feminist Literary History and the Anonymous Anglo-Saxon Elegy. Critical Inquiry, 16(4), 572590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Etymonline. woman n. www.etymonline.com.Google Scholar
Fee, C. (1996). Beag & Beaghroden: Women, Treasure and the Language of Social Structure in Beowulf. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen, 97(3), 285294.Google Scholar
Fell, C. (1986). Women in Anglo-Saxon England, 2nd ed. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Fishman, P. (1983). Interaction: The Work Women Do. In Thorne, B., Kramarae, C. and Henley, N., eds., Language, Gender, and Society. Rowley, MA: Newbury House, pp. 89102.Google Scholar
Fox, A. (2000). Oral and Literate Culture in England, 1500–1700. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
García Meseguer, Á. (1977). Lenguaje y discriminacion sexual [Language and Sex Discrimination]. Madrid: Editorial Cuadernos para el Dialogo, S. A. Edicusa.Google Scholar
Goldberg, A. E. & Lee, C. (2021). Accessibility and Historical Change: An Emergent Cluster Led Uncles and Aunts to Become Aunts and Uncles. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 119.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Greenfield, S. B. (1965). A Critical History of Old English Literature, New York University Press, 1965.Google Scholar
Guentherodt, I., Hellinger, M., Pusch, L. & Troemel-Ploetz, S. (1980). Richtlinien zuer Vermeidung sexistischen Sprachgebrauchs [Guidelines for the Elimination of Sexist Language Use]. Linguistische Berichte, 69, 1521.Google Scholar
Harris, R. (2014). The Women of Beowulf: Power and Duty in Anglo-Saxon Society. The Paper Shell Review. https://english.umd.edu/research-innovation/journals/paper-shell-review/paper-shell-review-spring-2014/women-beowulf-power.Google Scholar
Hendricks, C. & Oliver, K. (1999). Introduction: How to Do (Feminist) Things with Words. In Oliver, K. and Hendricks, C., eds., Language and Liberation: Feminism, Philosophy, and Language. Albany: State University of New York Press, pp. 139.Google Scholar
Hogg, R. (2006). Old English Dialectology. In van Kemenade, A. and Los, B., eds., The Handbook of the History of English. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 395416.Google Scholar
Hollis, S. (1992). Anglo-Saxon Women and the Church: Sharing a Common Fate. Rochester, NY: Boydell Press.Google Scholar
Irigaray, L. (1985). This Sex Which Is Not One, trans. C. Porter and C. Burke. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Irigaray, L. (1993). Je, Tu, Nous: Toward a Culture of Difference, trans. A. Martin. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Karwatowska, M. & Szpyra-Kozłowska, J. (2005). Lingwistyka płci: ona i on w języku polskim [The Linguistics of Gender: She and He in Polish]. Wydawnictwo UMCS: Lublin.Google Scholar
Key, M. R. (1975). Male/Female Language. Metuchen, NJ: Scarecrow Press.Google Scholar
Klinck, A. L. (1982). Anglo-Saxon Women and the Law. Journal of Medieval History, 8(2), 107121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kotek, H., Dockum, R., Babinski, S. & Geissler, C. (2020). Gender Bias and Stereotypes in Linguistic Example Sentences. Language, 97(4), 653677.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kristeva, J. (1986). The Kristeva Reader, ed. T. Moi, trans. L. S. Roudiez and S. Hand. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Lacan, J. (2006). Écrits, trans. B. Fink. New York: W. W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
Lakoff, R. (1975). Language and Woman’s Place. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Lee, C. (2023). Embroidered Narratives. In Norris, R., Stephenson, R. and Trilling, R. R., eds., Feminist Approaches to Early Medieval English Studies. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, pp. 5382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lees, C. A. (1997). At a Crossroads: Old English and Feminist Criticism. In O-Keeffe, K. O’Brien, ed., Reading Old English Texts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 146169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leyser, H. (1995). Medieval Women: A Social History of Women in England, 450–1500, New York: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
Marco, M. J. L. (1997). Linguistic Choices for the Representation of Women in Discourse. Bells: Barcelona English Language and Literature Studies, 8, 247259.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, T. & Raumolin-Brunberg, H. (2003). Historical Sociolinguistics: Language Change in Tudor and Stuart England, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Norris, R., Stephenson, R. & Trilling, R. R. (2023). Introduction. In Norris, R., Stephenson, R. and Trilling, R. R., eds., Feminist Approaches to Early Medieval English Studies. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, pp. 925.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Overing, G. R. (1990). Language, Sign, and Gender in Beowulf, Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Oxford English Dictionary. ‘man, n.1 (and int.)’. Oxford University Press. www.oed.com.Google Scholar
Pauwels, A. (2005). Linguistic Sexism and Feminist Linguistic Activism. In Holmes, J. and Meyerhoff, M., eds., The Handbook of Language and Gender. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 550570.Google Scholar
Pęzik, P. & Cichosz, A. (2021). The VARIOE Online Dictionary of Old English Collocations. University of Lodz. varioe.pelcra.pl/collocations.Google Scholar
Phillips, B. S. (1990). Nicknames and Sex Role Stereotypes. Sex Roles, 23, 281289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pintzuk, Susan & Plug, L. (2001). The York–Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Old English Poetry. Department of Linguistics, University of York. Oxford Text Archive. www-users.york.ac.uk/~lang18/pcorpus.html.Google Scholar
Roberts, J. & Kay, C. with Grundy, L.. (2000). A Thesaurus of Old English, 2nd ed. King’s College London Medieval Studies XI. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Schulz, M. (1975). The Semantic Derogation of Woman. New York: Thorne and Henley.Google Scholar
Spender, D. (1980). Man Made Language. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Stenton, D. (1957). The English Woman in History London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Taylor, A., Warner, A., Pintzuk, S. & Beths, F. (2003). The York–Toronto–Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Old English Prose (YCOE). Department of Linguistics, University of York. Oxford Text Archive (www-users.york.ac.uk/~lang22/YcoeHome1.htm).Google Scholar
Uri, H. (2018). Hvem sa hva? [Who Said What?]. Oslo: Gyldendal.Google Scholar
Weatherall, A. (2002). Gender, Language and Discourse. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wormald, C. P. (1977). The Uses of Literacy in Anglo-Saxon England and Its Neighbours. Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 27, 95114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yaguello, M. (1978). Les mots et les femmes [Words and Women]. Paris: Payot.Google Scholar
Figure 0

a Table 1a long description.

Figure 1

b Table 1b long description.

Figure 2

a Table 2a long description.

Figure 3

b Table 2b long description.

Figure 4

Table 3 The final dataset taken into account in the study

Figure 5

Table 4 Most frequent adjectival collocates of wif, fæmne and wifmann8 ‘woman’ (> 5) in YCOE

Figure 6

Figure 1 Semantic categories of recurrent adjectival collocates of wif, fæmne and wifmann ‘woman’ in YCOE.

Figure 7

Table 5 Most frequent adjectival collocates of wer ‘man’ (> 5) in YCOE

Figure 8

Figure 2 Semantic categories of recurrent adjectival collocates of wer ‘man’ in YCOE.

Figure 9

Table 6 Recurrent adjectival collocates of modor ‘mother’ in YCOE

Figure 10

Figure 3 Semantic categories of recurrent adjectival collocates of modor ‘mother’ in YCOE.

Figure 11

Table 7 Most frequent adjectival collocates of fæder ‘father’ (> 5) in YCOE

Figure 12

Figure 4 Semantic categories of recurrent adjectival collocates of fæder ‘father’ in YCOE.

Figure 13

Table 8 Most frequent adjectival collocates of mægden ‘maiden’ and dohtor ‘daughter’ (> 5) in YCOE

Figure 14

Figure 5 Semantic categories of recurrent adjectival collocates of mægden ‘maiden’ and dohtor ‘daughter’ in YCOE.

Figure 15

Table 9 Most frequent adjectival collocates of sunu ‘son’ and cnapa ‘boy’ (> 5) in YCOE11

Figure 16

Figure 6 Semantic categories of recurrent adjectival collocates of sunu ‘son’ and cnapa ‘boy’ in YCOE.

Figure 17

Table 10 Recurrent adjectival collocates of sweostor ‘sister’ in YCOE

Figure 18

Table 11 Most frequent adjectival collocates of broþor ‘brother’ (> 5) in YCOE

Figure 19

Figure 7 Semantic categories of recurrent adjectival collocates of broþor ‘brother’ in YCOE.

Figure 20

Table 12 Recurrent adjectival collocates of cwen ‘queen’, abbodesse ‘abbess’, hlæfdige ‘lady’ and nunne ‘nun’ in YCOE

Figure 21

Figure 8 Semantic categories of recurrent adjectival collocates of cwen ‘queen’, abbodesse ‘abbess’, hlæfdige ‘lady’ and nunne ‘nun’ in YCOE.

Figure 22

Table 13 Most frequent adjectival collocates of cyning ‘king’, hlaford ‘lord’, abbod ‘abbot’ and munuc ‘monk’ (> 10) in YCOE

Figure 23

Figure 9 Semantic categories of recurrent adjectival collocates of cyning ‘king’, hlaford ‘lord’, abbod ‘abbot’ and munuc ‘monk’ in YCOE.

Figure 24

Table 14 The most frequent binominals with women terms (> 5) in YCOE

Figure 25

Figure 10 Recurrent binominals with female nouns in YCOE.Figure 10 long description.

Figure 26

Table 15 The most frequent binominals with men terms (> 10) in YCOE

Figure 27

Figure 11 Recurrent binominals with male nouns in YCOE.Figure 11 long description.

Figure 28

Table 16 Genitival modification of and with wif, fæmne and wifmann ‘woman’ (> 5) in YCOE

Figure 29

Figure 12 Genitival modification of and with wif, fæmne and wifmann ‘woman’ in YCOE.

Figure 30

Table 17 Genitival modification of and with wer ‘man’ (> 5) in YCOE

Figure 31

Figure 13 Genitival modification of and with wer ‘man’ in YCOE.

Figure 32

Table 18 Genitival modification of and with modor ‘mother’ (> 3) in YCOE

Figure 33

Figure 14 Genitival modification of and with modor ‘mother’ in YCOE.

Figure 34

Table 19 Genitival modification of and with fæder ‘father’ (> 5) in YCOE

Figure 35

Figure 15 Genitival modification of and with fæder ‘father’ in YCOE.

Figure 36

Table 20 Genitival modification of and with mægden ‘maiden’ and dohtor ‘daughter’ (> 3) in YCOE

Figure 37

Figure 16 Genitival modification of and with mægden ‘maiden’ and dohtor ‘daughter’ in YCOE.

Figure 38

Figure 17 Genitival modification of and with sunu ‘son’ and cnapa ‘boy’ in YCOE.

Figure 39

Table 21 Genitival modification of and with sunu ‘son’ and cnapa ‘boy’ (> 5) in YCOE

Figure 40

Table 22 Genitival modification of and with sweostor ‘sister’ in YCOE

Figure 41

Figure 18 Genitival modification of and with sweostor ‘sister’ in YCOE.

Figure 42

Table 23 Genitival modification of and with broþor ‘brother’ (> 4) in YCOE

Figure 43

Figure 19 Genitival modification of and with broþor ‘brother’ in YCOE.

Figure 44

Table 24 Genitival modification of and with cwen ‘queen’, abbodesse ‘abbess’, hlæfdige ‘lady’ and nunne ‘nun’ in YCOE

Figure 45

Figure 20 Genitival modification of and with cwen ‘queen’, abbodesse ‘abbess’, hlæfdige ‘lady’ and nunne ‘nun’ in YCOE.

Figure 46

Figure 21 Genitival modification of and with cyning ‘king’, hlaford ‘lord’, abbod ‘abbot’ and munuc ‘monk’ in YCOE.

Figure 47

Table 25 Genitival modification of and with cyning ‘king’, hlaford ‘lord’, abbod ‘abbot’ and munuc ‘monk’ (> 10) in YCOE

Figure 48

Figure 22 Adjectival modifiers of all the gendered nouns: Summary.Figure 22 long description.

Figure 49

Figure 23 Binominals with all the gendered nouns: Summary.Figure 23 long description.

Figure 50

Figure 24 Genitival modification for all the gendered nouns: Summary.Figure 24 long description.

Figure 51

Table 26 Verbal collocates of wif, fæmne and wifmann ‘woman’ as subjects (> 5) in YCOE

Figure 52

Table 27 Verbal collocates of wer ‘man’ as subject (> 5) in YCOE

Figure 53

Figure 25 Verbal collocates of wif, fæmne and wifmann ‘woman’ vs. wer ‘man’ as subjects in YCOE.Figure 25 long description.

Figure 54

Table 28 Recurrent verbal collocates of modor ‘mother’ as subject in YCOE13

Figure 55

Table 29 Verbal collocates of fæder ‘father’ as subject (> 5) in YCOE

Figure 56

Figure 26 Verbal collocates of modor ‘mother’ vs. fæder ‘father’ as subjects in YCOE.Figure 26 long description.

Figure 57

Table 30 Verbal collocates of mægden ‘maiden’ and dohtor ‘daughter’ as subjects (> 3) in YCOE

Figure 58

Table 31 Verbal collocates of sunu ‘son’ and cnapa ‘boy’ as subjects (> 5) in YCOE

Figure 59

Figure 27 Verbal collocates of mægden ‘maiden’ and dohtor ‘daughter’ vs. sunu ‘son’ and cnapa ‘boy’ as subjects in YCOE.Figure 27 long description.

Figure 60

Table 32 Verbal collocates of sweostor ‘sister’ as subject in YCOE

Figure 61

Table 33 Verbal collocates of broþor ‘brother’ as subject (> 5) in YCOE

Figure 62

Figure 28 Verbal collocates of sweostor ‘sister’ vs. broþor ‘brother’ as subjects in YCOE.Figure 28 long description.

Figure 63

Table 34 Verbal collocates of cwen ‘queen’, abbodesse ‘abbess’, hlæfdige ‘lady’ and nunne ‘nun’ as subjects in YCOE

Figure 64

Table 35 Verbal collocates of cyning ‘king’, hlaford ‘lord’, abbod ‘abbot’ and munuc ‘monk’ as subjects (> 10) in YCOE

Figure 65

Figure 29 Verbal collocates of cwen ‘queen’, abbodesse ‘abbess’, hlæfdige ‘lady’ and nunne ‘nun’ vs. verbal collocates of cyning ‘king’, hlaford ‘lord’, abbod ‘abbot’ and munuc ‘monk’ as subjects in YCOE.Figure 29 long description.

Figure 66

Table 36 Verbal collocates with wif, fæmne and wifmann ‘woman’ as subjects (> 3) in YCOE

Figure 67

Table 37 Verbal collocates with wer ‘man’ as object (> 3) in YCOE

Figure 68

Figure 30 Verbal collocates of wif, fæmne and wifmann ‘woman’ vs. verbal collocates of wer ‘man’ as objects in YCOE.Figure 30 long description.

Figure 69

Table 38 Recurrent verbal collocates with modor ‘mother’ as object in YCOE

Figure 70

Table 39 Verbal collocates with fæder ‘father’ as object (> 5) in YCOE

Figure 71

Figure 31 Verbal collocates of modor ‘mother’ vs. fæder ‘father’ as objects in YCOE.Figure 31 long description.

Figure 72

Table 40 Verbal collocates with mægden ‘maiden’ and dohtor’ daughter’ as object in YCOE

Figure 73

Table 41 Verbal collocates with sunu ‘son’ and cnapa ‘boy’ as object (> 4) in YCOE

Figure 74

Figure 32 Verbal collocates of mægden ‘maiden’ and dohtor’ daughter’ vs. sunu ‘son’ and cnapa ‘boy’ as objects in YCOE.Figure 32 long description.

Figure 75

Table 42 Verbal collocates with sweostor ‘sister’ as object in YCOE

Figure 76

Table 43 Verbal collocates with broþor ‘brother’ as object in YCOE

Figure 77

Figure 33 Verbal collocates of sweostor ‘sister’ vs. broþor ‘brother’ as objects in YCOE.Figure 33 long description.

Figure 78

Table 44 Verbal collocates of cyning ‘king’, hlaford ‘lord’, abbod ‘abbot’ and munuc ‘monk’ as objects (> 6) in YCOE

Figure 79

Figure 34 Verbal collocates of all the gendered nouns as subjects: Summary.Figure 34 long description.

Figure 80

Figure 35 Verbal collocates of all the gendered nouns as objects: Summary.Figure 35 long description.

Accessibility standard: WCAG 2.1 AA

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

The HTML of this Element complies with version 2.1 of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG), covering newer accessibility requirements and improved user experiences and achieves the intermediate (AA) level of WCAG compliance, covering a wider range of accessibility requirements.

Content Navigation

Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.

Reading Order & Textual Equivalents

Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
Short alternative textual descriptions
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.

Visual Accessibility

Use of colour is not sole means of conveying information
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.

Structural and Technical Features

ARIA roles provided
You gain clarity from ARIA (Accessible Rich Internet Applications) roles and attributes, as they help assistive technologies interpret how each part of the content functions.

Save element to Kindle

To save this element to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Linguistic Representations of Women in Old English Prose
Available formats
×

Save element to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Linguistic Representations of Women in Old English Prose
Available formats
×

Save element to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Linguistic Representations of Women in Old English Prose
Available formats
×