Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-p9bg8 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T17:48:10.702Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Analogy, reanalysis and exaptation in Early Middle English: the emergence of a new inflectional system

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 May 2019

RAFFAELA BAECHLER*
Affiliation:
Linguistics and English Language, University of Edinburgh, Dugald Stewart Building, 3 Charles Street, EdinburghEH8 9AD, [email protected]

Abstract

From Old English to Middle English inflection is gradually lost. It is assumed that this is mainly due to phonological and syntactic changes. This article, however, argues that the loss of inflection is not a linear process but new systems can emerge, and that morphological changes play an important role. The nominal inflection of the Lambeth Homilies – an Early Middle English manuscript from the southwest Midlands and dated around 1200 – is investigated in detail. It will be shown that analogical changes within and across inflection classes do not simply lead towards a reduction of inflection. The increase in syncretism and decrease in allomorphy result in a new inflectional system. This new system distinguishes singular from plural, feminine from non-feminine (in the singular and plural), and possessive from non-possessive (in the singular and plural). Additionally, the original inflection classes related to different stems are almost lost, except the weak inflection classes. The inflection classes are instead related to gender; that is, gender is the information that best predicts how a noun is inflected.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019

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.)

Footnotes

The findings of this article are part of the project ‘Exaptation in the nominal inflection of Early Middle English dialects’, funded by the DFG (Forschungsstipendium, BA 6096/1-1). I would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their comments, as well as Nathan Tyson for proofreading the article.

References

References

Ackerman, Farrell & Stump, Gregory. 2004. Paradigms and periphrastic expression: A study in realization-based lexicalism. In Louisa Sadler & Andrew Spencer (eds.), Projecting morphology, 111157. Stanford: CSLI Publications.Google Scholar
Allen, Cynthia L. 2006. Case syncretism and word order change. In Ans van Kemenade & Bettelou Los (eds.), The handbook of the history of English, 201223. Malden, MA, and Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Allen, Cynthia L. 2013. Genitives in early English: Typology and evidence. Reprint. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Baechler, Raffaela. Forthcoming. The distribution of the definite article in Early Middle English: Explaining the variation. In Toupin, Fabienne & Lowrey, Brian (eds.), [Title TBA]. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Baechler, Raffaela & Pröll, Simon. 2018. Loss and preservation of case in Germanic non-standard varieties. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 3(1), 113, 1–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Alistair. 1959. Old English grammar. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Fertig, David. 2015. Analogy and morphological change. In Patrick Honeybone & Joseph Salmons (eds.), The Oxford handbook of historical phonology, 205218. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, Paul. 1909. Das grammatische Genus im Lazamons Brut. Halle: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Jones, Charles. 1967. The grammatical category of gender in early Middle English. English Studies 48(1–6), 289305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, Charles. 1988. Grammatical gender in English: 950 to 1250. London, New York and Sydney: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Lass, Roger. 1990. How to do things with junk: Exaptation in language evolution. Journal of Linguistics 26(1), 79102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lass, Roger. 1998. Old English: A historical linguistic companion. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Millett, Bella. 2007. The pastoral context of the Trinity and Lambeth Homilies. In Wendy Scase (ed.), Essays in manuscripts of the English West Midlands from the Conquest to the sixteenth century, 4364. Turnhout: Brepols.Google Scholar
Morris, Richard. 1868. Old English homilies and homiletic treatises (Sawles Warde, and þe Wohunge of Ure Lauerd: Ureisuns of Ure Louerd and of Ure Lefdi, &c.) of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. London: Early English Text Society, Trübner.Google Scholar
Ringe, Donald A. 2017. From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Germanic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sisam, Celia. 1951. The scribal tradition of the Lambeth Homilies. Review of English Studies 2(6), 105113.Google Scholar
Stadlmann, Wilhelm. 1921. Die Sprache der mittelenglischen Predigtsammlung in der Handschrift Lambeth 487. Vienna and Leipzig: Braunmüller.Google Scholar
Van de Velde, Freek & Norde, Muriel. 2016. Exaptation: Taking stock of a controversial notion in linguistics. In Freek Van de Velde & Muriel Norde (eds.), Exaptation and language change, 135. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Online dictionaries

Dictionary of Old English: A to H online, ed. Angus Cameron, Ashley Crandell Amos, Antonette diPaolo Healey et al. (Toronto: Dictionary of Old English Project, 2016). https://tapor-library-utoronto-ca.ezproxy.is.ed.ac.uk/doe/ (accessed 1–28 February 2018).Google Scholar
Bosworth, Joseph. An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary Online, ed. Thomas Northcote Toller et al. Comp. Sean Christ & Ondřej Tichý. Faculty of Arts, Charles University in Prague, 26 Dec. 2010. http://bosworth.ff.cuni.cz/ (accessed 1–28 February 2018).Google Scholar
LAEME: A Linguistic Atlas of Early Middle English, 1150–1325, compiled by Margaret Laing. Edinburgh: Version 3.2, 2013, University of Edinburgh. www.lel.ed.ac.uk/ihd/laeme2/laeme2.html (accessed 1–28 February 2018).Google Scholar