Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T06:16:43.176Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Lexical borrowing in the Middle English period: a multi-domain analysis of semantic outcomes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 June 2021

LOUISE SYLVESTER ,
MEGAN TIDDEMAN  and
RICHARD INGHAM
LOUISE SYLVESTER
Affiliation:
University of Westminster 309 Regent Street London W1B 2HW UK [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
MEGAN TIDDEMAN
Affiliation:
University of Westminster 309 Regent Street London W1B 2HW UK [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
RICHARD INGHAM
Affiliation:
University of Westminster 309 Regent Street London W1B 2HW UK [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The Middle English period is well known as one of widespread lexical borrowing from French and Latin, and scholarly accounts traditionally assume that this influx of loanwords caused many native terms to shift in sense or to drop out of use entirely. The study analyses an extensive dataset, tracking patterns in lexical retention, replacement and semantic change, and comparing long-term outcomes for both native and non-native words. Our results challenge the conventional view of competition between existing terms and foreign incomers. They show that there were far fewer instances of relexification, and far more of synonymy, during the Middle English period than might have been expected. When retention rates for words first attested between 1100 and 1500 are compared, it is loanwords, not native terms, which are more likely to become obsolete at any point up to the nineteenth century. Furthermore, proportions of outcomes involving narrowing and broadening (often considered common outcomes following the arrival of a co-hyponym in a semantic space) were low in the Middle English period, regardless of language of origin.

Keywords

lexical borrowinglexical replacementsemantic shiftco-hyponyms
Type
Research Article
Information
English Language & Linguistics , Volume 26 , Issue 2 , June 2022 , pp. 237 - 261
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2021. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

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

References

Bilingual Thesaurus of Everyday Life in Medieval England: https://thesaurus.ac.uk/bth/ (accessed 7 April 2021).Google Scholar
Diensberg, Bernard. 1985. The lexical fields boy/girl-servant-child in Middle English. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 86, 328–36.Google Scholar
Diller, Hans-Jürgen. 1994. Emotions in the English lexicon: A historical study of a lexical field. In Fernández, Francisco, Márquez, Miguel Fuster & Calvo, Juan Jose (eds.), English Historical Linguistics 1992: Papers from the 7th International Conference on English Historical Linguistics, Valencia, 22–26 September 1992, 219–34. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diller, Hans-Jürgen. 2005. Chaucer's emotion lexicon: Passioun and affeccioun. In Ritt & Schendl (eds.), 110–24.Google Scholar
Diller, Hans-Jürgen. 2012. anger and tēne in Middle English. In Markus, Manfred, Iyeiri, Yoko, Heuberger, Reinhard & Chamson, Emil (eds.), Middle and Modern English corpus linguistics, 109–24. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durkin, Philip. 2014. Borrowed words. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehrensperger, E. C. 1931. Dream words in Old and Middle English. Papers of the Modern Language Association 46, 80–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Andreas. 1996. Dream theory and dream lexis in the Middle Ages. In Klein, Jürgen & Vanderbeke, Dirk (eds.), Anglistentag 1995 Greifswald: Proceedings of the Conference of the German Association of University Teachers of English 17, 245–57. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
The Historical Thesaurus of English, 2nd edn., version 5.0. 2020. University of Glasgow. https://ht.ac.uk/ (accessed 7 April 2021).Google Scholar
Käsmann, Hans. 1961. Studien zum kirchlichen Wortschatz des Mittelenglischen 1100–1350. Tübingen: Niemeyer Max Verlag.Google Scholar
Kay, Christian & Allan, Kathryn. 2015. English historical semantics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koskela, Anu. 2011. Metonymy, category broadening and narrowing, and vertical polysemy. In Benczes, Réka (ed.), Defining metonymy in cognitive linguistics: Towards a consensus view, 125–46. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Łozowski, Przemysław. 2005. Polysemy in context: Meten and dremen in Chaucer. In Ritt & Schendl (eds.), 125–43.Google Scholar
Middle English Dictionary. Ed. Lewis, Robert E. et al. 1952–2001. Online edition in Middle English Compendium. EdFrances McSparran, . et al. 2000–18. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. quod.lib.umich.edu/m/med/ (accessed 7 April 2021).Google Scholar
Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd/3rd edn. www.oed.com (accessed 7 April 2021).Google Scholar
Ritt, Nikolaus & Schendl, Herbert (eds.). 2005. Rethinking Middle English: Linguistic and literary approaches. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Rynell, Alarik. 1948. The rivalry of Scandinavian and native synonyms in Middle English especially taken and nimen. Lund: C. W. K. Gleerup.Google Scholar
Samuels, Michael. 1972. Linguistic evolution, with special reference to English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schendl, Herbert. 2000. Linguistic aspects of code-switching in medieval English texts. In Trotter, David (ed.), Multilingualism in later medieval Britain, 77–92. Cambridge: D. S. Brewer.Google Scholar
Smith, Jeremy J. 1996. An historical study of English: Form, function, change. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sylvester, Louise. 2020. The role of multilingualism in the emergence of a technical register in the Middle English period. In Wright, Laura (ed.), The multilingual origins of Standard English, 365–80. Berlin: De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sylvester, Louise, Tiddeman, Megan & Ingham, Richard. Forthcoming. Lexical replacement, retention and borrowing in Middle English: A case study. In Mazzon, Gabriella (ed.), Language contact and the history of English: Processes and effects on specific text-types. Oxford: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Timofeeva, Olga. 2018. Survival and loss of Old English religious vocabulary between 1150 and 1350. English Language and Linguistics 22, 225–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trotter, David. 2012. Middle English in contact: Middle English creolization. In Bergs, Alexander & Brinton, Laurel J. (eds.), English historical linguistics, vol. 2: 1781–93. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Vejdemo, Susanne & Hörberg, Thomas. 2016. Semantic factors predict the rate of lexical replacement of content words. PLOS ONE 11, 1–15.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed