Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-07T14:28:42.213Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

On the Grammaticality of Poetry: The Asyndetic Verb-Late Clause in Otfrid’s Evangelienbuch

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 November 2021

Katerina Somers
Katerina Somers*
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin-Madison
*
University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of German Nordic and Slavic, 1220 Linden Drive, Madison, Wisconsin 53706, USA [[[email protected]]]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article discusses asyndetic verb-late clauses in Otfrid’s Evangelienbuch, which has long been considered a problematic text within the Old High German corpus in part because of clauses like these. Clauses with a dependent clause’s verbal syntax and no complementizer have been characterized as ungrammatical and/or rare (Behaghel 1932, Schrodt 2004, Axel 2007) and thus have not been included in accounts of early German syntax. I argue that asyndetic verb-late clauses are grammatical and that they can function as main or dependent clauses. Crucially, they demonstrate that main verb fronting was not obligatory in 9th-century German. Although Otfrid marked the main-subordinate asymmetry by various grammatical means, including verbal syntax, I demonstrate that verbal prosody also influenced syntax: Heavy verbs are more frequent in clause-late or -initial position and light verbs in clause-second position, regardless of the main–dependent distinction. I suggest that prosodically-sensitive verbal syntax is characteristic of Otfrid’s exclusively oral vernacular. In contrast, Otfrid imports the concept of differentiating main and dependent clauses grammatically from Latin. The Evangelienbuch, then, represents an attempt to transform an oral vernacular into a written language by imposing, however imperfectly, the norm of grammatically distinct main and dependent clauses onto a prosodically-sensitive verbal syntax.*

Keywords

Old High Germansyntaxoralityprosodyobligatory verb frontingverb-final main clauses
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Germanic Linguistics , Volume 33 , Issue 4 , December 2021 , pp. 358 - 404
Check for updates
Copyright
© Society for Germanic Linguistics 2021

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

*

I am grateful to Rob Howell and Mark Louden for their feedback on various drafts of this article. I would also like to thank two anonymous reviewers for their generous engagement with this work.

References

Axel, Katrin. 2007. Studies on Old High German syntax: Left sentence periphery, verb placement and verb second (Linguistics Today 112). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Axel-Tober, Katrin. 2012. (Nicht-)kanonische Nebensätze im Deutschen. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bible Gateway, ESV Bible. Copyright © 2001 by Crossway Bibles, a division of Good News Publishers. http://www.biblegateway.com/.Google Scholar
Behaghel, Otto. 1932. Deutsche Syntax. Eine geschichtliche Darstellung. Band IV: Wortstellung. Periodenbau. Heidelberg: Carl Winters Universitätsbuchhandlung.Google Scholar
Bostock, J. Knight. 1976. A handbook on Old High German literature. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Braune, Wilhelm, & Reiffenstein, Ingo. 2004. Althochdeutsche Grammatik I. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butt, Miriam, & Lahiri, Aditi. 2013. Diachronic pertinacity of light verbs. Lingua 135. 7–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cichosz, Anna. 2010. The influence of text type on word order of Old Germanic languages: A corpus-based contrastive study of Old English and Old High German. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Collins, John F. 1985. A primer of Ecclesiastical Latin. Washington D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press.Google Scholar
Edwards, Cyril. 1994. German vernacular literature: A survey. Carolingian culture: Emulation and innovation, ed. by Rosamond McKitterick, 141–170. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Eyþórsson, Þórhallur. 1995. Verbal syntax in the Early Germanic languages. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University dissertation.Google Scholar
Eyþórsson, Þórhallur. 1996. Functional categories, cliticization and verb movement in the Early Germanic languages. Thráinsson et al. 109–139.Google Scholar
Eyþórsson, Þórhallur. 2001. The syntax of verbs in Early Runic. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 67. 1–55.Google Scholar
Gärtner, Hans-Martin. 2001. Are there V2 relative clauses in German? The Journal of Comparative Linguistics 3. 97–141.Google Scholar
Green, Dennis Howard. 1994. Medieval listening and reading: The primary reception of German literature 800–1300. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haider, Hubert. 2005. How to turn German into Icelandic—and derive the OV-VO contrasts. Journal of Comparative Linguistics 8. 1–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harbert, Wayne. 2007. The Germanic languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinterhölzl, Roland. 2004. Language change versus grammar change: What diachronic data reveal about the distinction between core grammar and periphery. Diachronic clues to synchronic grammar (Linguistics Today 72), ed. by Eric Fuß & Carola Trips. 131–160. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinterhölzl, Roland. 2009. The role of information structure in word order variation and word order change. Hinterhölzl & Petrova 2009, 45–66.Google Scholar
Hinterhölzl, Roland, & Petrova, Svetlana (eds.). 2009. Information structure and language change: New approaches to word order variation in Germanic (Trends in Linguistics 203), Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holler, Anke. 2008. German dependent clauses from a constraint-based perspective. ‘Subordination’ versus ‘coordination’ in sentence and text. A cross-linguistic perspective (Studies in Language Companion Series 98), ed. by Cathrine Fabricius-Hansen & Wiebke Ramm, 187–216. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopper, Paul. 1975. The syntax of the simple sentence in Proto-Germanic. The Hague: Mouton.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1942. A Modern English Grammar on historical principles, vol. VI: Morphology. Copenhagen: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 1995. Indo-European origins of Germanic syntax. Battye & Roberts 1995, 140–170.Google Scholar
Kiparsky, Paul. 1996. The shift to head-initial VP in Germanic. Thráinsson et al. 1996, 140–179.Google Scholar
Koopman, Willem. 1995. Verb-final main clauses in Old English prose. Studia Neophilologia 67. 129–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lenerz, Jürgen. 1984. Syntaktischer Wandel und Grammatiktheorie. Eine Untersuchung an Beispielen aus der Sprachgeschichte des Deutschen. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lenerz, Jürgen. 1985. Diachronic syntax: Verb position and COMP in German. Studies in German grammar, ed. by Jindřich Toman, 103–132. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lötscher, Andreas. 2009. Verb placement and information structure in the OHG Gospel Harmony by Otfrid von Weissenburg. Hinterhölzl & Petrova 2009, 281–321.Google Scholar
Magoun, Francis. 1943. Otfrid’s Ad Liutbertum. PMLA 58. 869–890.Google Scholar
Matzel, Klaus. 1970. Untersuchungen zur Verfasserschaft, Sprache und Herkunft der althochdeutschen Übersetzungen der Isidor-Sippe. Bonn: Ludwig Röhrscheid Verlag.Google Scholar
Miller, Jim, & Weinert, Regina. 1998. Spontaneous spoken language: Syntax and discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ong, Walter. 2012. Orality and literacy. The technologizing of the word. 30th anniversary edn. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Weißenburg, Otfrid. Evangelienbuch. TITUS edn. Available at http://titus.fkidg1.uni-frankfurt.de/texte/etcs/germ/ahd/otfrid/otfri.htm. Accessed on February 15, 2015.Google Scholar
Pintzuk, Susan. 1993. Verb seconding in Old English: Verb movement to Infl. The Linguistic Review 10. 5–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Piper, Paul (ed.). 1887. Otfrids Evangelienbuch. II. Teil: Glossar und Abriss der Grammatik. Freiburg: Akademische Verlagsbuchhandlung.Google Scholar
Robinson, Orrin. 1997. Clause subordination and verb placement in the Old High German Isidor translation. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag C. Winter.Google Scholar
Ruhfus, Wilhelm. 1897. Die Stellung des Verbums im althochdeutschen Tatian. Dortmund: Ruhfus.Google Scholar
Schlachter, Eva. 2012. Syntax und Informationsstruktur im Althochdeutschen. Untersuchungen am Beispiel der Isidor-Gruppe. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag C. Winter.Google Scholar
Schrodt, Richard. 2004. Althochdeutsche Grammatik II: Syntax. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Somers, Katerina. 2018. Verb-third in Otfrid’s Evangelienbuch. NOWELE 71. 56–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Somers, Katerina. 2021. Regularizing rhythms: Meter as prescription in ninth-century German. Monatshefte 113. 30–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Somers Wicka, Katerina. 2009. From phonology to syntax: Pronominal cliticization in Otfrid’s Evangelienbuch. Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sundquist, John. 2018. A diachronic analysis of light verb constructions in Old Swedish. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 30. 260–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thráinsson, Höskuldur, Epstein, Samuel, & Peter, Steve (eds.). 1996. Studies in comparative Germanic syntax. vol. II (Studies in Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 38). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Tomaselli, Alessandra. 1995. Cases of verb-third in Old High German. Battye & Roberts 1995, 345–369.Google Scholar
Vollmann-Profe, Gisela. (ed.). 1987. Otfrid von Weissenburg. Evangelienbuch. Althochdeutsch/Neuhochdeutsch. Stuttgart: Philipp Reclam jun. GmbH & Co.Google Scholar
Walkden, George. 2014. Syntactic reconstruction and Proto-Germanic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weerman, Fred. 1988. The V2 conspiracy: A synchronic and diachronic analysis of verbal positions in Germanic languages. Dordrecht: Foris.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wunder, Dieter. 1965. Der Nebensatz bei Otfrid. Untersuchungen zur Syntax des deutschen Nebensatzes. Heidelberg: Universitätsverlag C. Winter.Google Scholar