Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T10:02:46.706Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Voicing of Initial Interdental Fricatives in Early Middle English Function Words

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 February 2011

Beverly A. Thurber
Beverly A. Thurber*
Affiliation:
Shimer College
*
Shimer College, 3424 S. State St., Chicago IL 60616, USA, [[email protected]]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In Modern English, function words such as this, that, and the are pronounced with a voiced onset, while content words have the original voiceless onset. A statistical analysis of the distribution of <ð> and <þ> in Vices and Virtues, a text preserved in London, British Library, Stowe MS 34 (circa 1200), reveals a distribution, whose most plausible interpretation is that these two letters were used to encode stress-conditioned differences in voicing. This sets the voicing of function words, normally dated to the fourteenth century, back to circa 1200 or earlier.*

Type
ARTICLES
Information
Journal of Germanic Linguistics , Volume 23 , Issue 1 , March 2011 , pp. 65 - 81
Copyright
Copyright © Society for Germanic Linguistics 2011

Access options

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

References

REFERENCES

Appel, Magda Freiin von. 1936–1937. Zur Schreibung der interdentalen Spirans im Mittelenglischen. Englische Studien 71. 14–26.Google Scholar
Bennett, William H. 1955. The southern English development of Germanic initial [f s þ]. Language 31. 367–371. Reprinted in Lass 1969:349–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benson, Larry D. (ed.). 1987. The Riverside Chaucer. 3rd edn.Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.Google Scholar
Blake, Norma. (ed.). 1992. The Cambridge history of the English language, vol. 2, 1066–1476. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bornemann, EduardRisch, Ernst. 1978. Griechische Grammatik. 2nd edn.Frankfurt am Main: Verlag Moritz Diesterweg.Google Scholar
Braune, WilhelmEbbinghaus, Ernst A.. 1981. Gotische Grammatik. 19th edn.Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.Google Scholar
Brink, Daniel. 1992. Variation between <þ-> and <t-> in the Ormulum. On Germanic linguistics: Issues and methods, ed. by Rauch, Irmengard, Carr, Gerald F.Kyes, Robert L., 21–35. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Alistair. 1959. Old English grammar. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Dobson, Eric John. 1954. The Hymn to the Virgin. Transactions of the Honourable Society of Cymmrodorian, 70–124.Google Scholar
Fulk, Robert D. 1992. A history of Old English meter. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Godden, Malcolm R. 1992. Literary language. Hogg 1992a:490–535.Google Scholar
Hackauf, Emil. 1902. Die älteste mittelenglische Version der Assumptio Mariae (Englische Textbibliothek 8). Heidelberg: Carl Winter's Universitäts-buchhandlung.Google Scholar
Heuser, Wilhelm. 1904. Der älteste mittelenglische Version der Assumptio Mariae: A Review. Englische Studien 33. 255–257.Google Scholar
Hockett, Charles F. 1959. The stressed syllabics of Old English. Language 35. 575–597. Reprinted in Lass 1969:108–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hogg, Richard M. (ed.). 1992a. The Cambridge history of the English language, vol. 1, The beginnings to 1066. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hogg, Richard M. 1992b. Phonology and morphology. Hogg 1992a:67–167.Google Scholar
Holthausen, Ferdinan. (ed.). 1888. Vices and virtues, being a soul's confession of its sins, with reason's description of the virtues: A Middle-English dialogue of about 1200 AD, vol. 1. London: Early English Text Society.Google Scholar
Jespersen, Otto. 1909. A Modern English grammar on historical principles, vol. 1. Heidelberg: C. Winter.Google Scholar
Jordan, Richard. 1974. Handbook of Middle English grammar: Phonology. Translated and revised by Eugene Joseph Crook. The Hague: Mouton & Co.Google Scholar
Kurath, Hans. 1956. The loss of long consonants and the rise of voiced fricatives in Middle English. Language 32. 435–445. Reprinted in Lass 1969:142–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laing, MargaretLass, Roger (eds.). 2007. A linguistic atlas of Early Middle English, 1150–1325. Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh. Available at http://www.lel.ed.ac.uk/ihd/laere1/laere1.html.Google Scholar
Lass, Roge. (ed.). 1969. Approaches to English historical linguistics: An anthology. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, Inc.Google Scholar
Lass, Roger. 1992. Phonology and morphology. Blake 1992:23–155.Google Scholar
Luick, Karl. 1964. Historische Grammatik der englischen Sprache. Stuttgart: Bernhard Tauchnitz.Google Scholar
Lutz, Mark. 2006. Programming Python. 3rd edn.Sebastopol, CA: O'Reilly Media, Inc.Google Scholar
Minkova, Donka. 1996. Nonprimary stress in early Middle English accentual-syllabic verse. English historical metrics, ed. by !McCully, C. B. & Anderson, J. J., 95–119. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mitchell, BruceRobinson, Fred C.. 1992. A guide to Old English. 5th edn.Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Morsbach, Lorenz. 1896. Mittelenglische Grammatik. Halle: Max Niemeyer Verlag.Google Scholar
Pinsker, Hans Ernst. 1963. Historische englische Grammatik: Elemente der Laut-, Formen- und Wortbildungslehre. 2nd edn.Minchen: Max Hueber Verlag.Google Scholar
Schmidt, Gustav. 1899. Über die Sprache und Heimat der “Vices and Virtues”: Ein Beitrag zur mittelenglischen Dialektkunde. Leipzig: Oswald Schmidt.Google Scholar
Scragg, Donald G. 1974. A history of English spelling (Mount Follack Series 3). Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar
Sievers, Eduard. 1893. Altgermanische Metrik. Halle: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Sievers, Eduard. 1918. Metrische Studien, vol. 4. Leipzig: B. G. Teubner.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sievers, Eduard. 1924. Ziele und Wege der Schallanalyse. Stand und Aufgaben der Sprachwissenschaft: Festschrift für Wilhelm Streitberg, ed. by Friedrich, Johannes, Baptista Hofmann, JohannesHorn, Wilhelm, 65–111. Heidelberg: C. Winter.Google Scholar
Sievers, Eduard. 1925. Zu Cynewulf. Neusprachliche Studien: Festgabe Karl Luick zu seinem sechzigsten Geburtstage, ed. by Wild, Friedrich, 60–81. Marburg an der Lahn: G. Braun.Google Scholar
Sievers, Eduard. 1929. Cædmon und Genesis. Britannica: Festschrift für Max Förster, 6–84. Leipzig: Bernhard Tauchnitz.Google Scholar
Sonderegger, Stefan. 1987. Althochdeutsche Sprache und Literatur. 2nd edn.Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Stockwell, Robert P.Westbrook Barritt, C.. 1961. Scribal practice: Some assumptions. Language 37. 75–82. Reprinted in Lass 1969:133–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tolkien, J. R. R. 1929. Ancrene wisse and hali meiÐhad. Essays and Studies 14. 104–126.Google Scholar
Wright, JosephWright, Elizabeth Mary. 1923. An elementary Middle English grammar. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar