n-declension by choosing a noun current today:
Masculine
Singular
Plural
Nominative
sta¯n
sta¯nas
Accusative
sta¯n
sta¯nas
Genitive
sta¯nes
sta¯na
Dative
sta¯ne
sta¯num
Feminine
Singular
Plural
Nom.
talu
tala
Acc.
tale
tala
Gen.
tale
tala
Dat.
tale
talum
THE FUTURE
131
02 pages 001-166 29/1/03 16:09 Page 131
N-
Singular
Plural
Nom.
nama
naman
Acc.
naman
naman
Gen.
naman
namena
Dat.
naman
namum
Let us now see what happens if we assume that every unstressed vowel
becomes reduced to something like schwa. You may also recall that in
Chapter 9 I suggested that the dative plural ending had already started
to develop as -an rather than -um. Taking these two points together, it is
quite easy to see that both the feminine declension and the n-declension
suffer disproportionately badly. The former will no longer have any
distinctive inflexions, not even in terms of number, except in the
dative plural. But there, of course, every declension will have the same
inflection because of the spread of -an. The n-declension will retain
a distinction between nominative singular and nominative plural, but
every other distinction except the marginal genitive plural will have
gone. On the other hand, the masculine declension remains relatively
intact, since the final -s is preserved, both in the genitive singular and the
nominative-accusative plural.
The consequences of this are highly significant. Since this means that
the feminines and the n-nouns no longer have any helpful inflectional
markers, there is quickly a shift in most, but not all, areas of the country
to a single major declension, based on the historical masculine declen-
sion. Furthermore, there are other phonological developments which
cause the loss of final -n, a process already well underway in North-
umbria in the Old English period itself and which is partly, although
somewhat obscured, reflected in the form foldu in the Northumbrian text
at the end of Chapter 9; it comes from an earlier form foldun. At a later
stage still, although still in the early part of the Middle English period,
there is a process by which short stressed vowels are lengthened when
followed by a single consonant.
We can take as an example the following changes in the nominative
singular and plural of the Old English noun nama:
nama
n
→
nam
ə
n
→
nam
ə
→
na
m
ə
→
na
m
naman
→
nam
ə
n
→
nam
ə
→
na
m
ə
→
na
m
That exemplification is a dramatic demonstration of why such
nouns become associated with the masculine declension and why that
declension is now the only regular declension in English. That, in other
words, is why we now have the plural names. Obviously present-day
English has a number of exceptions, such as the retention of the
132
AN INTRODUCTION TO OLD ENGLISH
02 pages 001-166 29/1/03 16:09 Page 132
n-declension in oxen, and there may be even more examples in various
dialects, for example shoon ‘shoes’ in Scots. There are other unusual
developments too, such as the shift to Ø-plurals of some animal names,
for example sheep, which is an innovation but based on a transfer to the
general neuter declension.
To think that the above discussion, however interesting, is all there is
to say here would be a mistake. The repercussions, or interactions, go
well beyond the matter of noun declensions. The most important place
to look in order to gauge the extent of the overall changes in English is
to be found in the changes which are about to take place in word order.
Let us, therefore, turn to this subject and the interaction between those
changes and the declensional changes.
The essential point about word order in Old English which we have to
take into account is that during the period there was a general rise in the
proportion of clauses with verb-second word order. There is consider-
able argument about how this might have occurred. There is perhaps
some agreement that several different factors were at work. These
may have included the preference for light elements to appear at the
beginning of clauses and, correspondingly, for heavy elements to appear
towards the end; allied to this is an increasing preference for relative
clauses to appear to the right of the whole clause containing the
antecedent; and a further point may be the increasing preference to
place the object after the whole verb structure rather than after the first
verb in the group.
These issues were raised in Chapter 7, but it is noteworthy that
in a text of the mid-twelfth century, namely The Peterborough Chronicle,
the dominance of verb-second structure is considerable and clearly the
move to the strict SVO order of present-day English is beginning to be
possible. To what extent is the shift due, not to the points raised in the
previous paragraph, but rather to the loss of inflections in nouns (and
perhaps also, but there is no space to argue this here, in verbs)? Clearly,
the loss of distinctive noun inflections, in particular the loss of nomin-
ative ~ accusative ~ dative distinctions so that only number and genitive
inflections remain, as in present-day English, is significant.
So at first sight we could argue that the loss of inflections is para-
mount. It is certainly true that the loss of inflections makes it more diffi-
cult to distinguish between subjects and objects and, indeed, indirect
objects. In the latter case it is noticeable that at the end of Old English
period there is a greater use of prepositions, a further indication of the
ongoing structural changes in the language. In the former case, however,
it should be noted that pronouns retain the distinctive nominative ~
accusative forms. There can be no doubt that the loss of inflections is part
THE FUTURE
133
02 pages 001-166 29/1/03 16:09 Page 133
of the overall picture, but it would still be rather rash to assume that this
was the defining cause of the word order changes.
Firstly, it has to be noted that several of the changes, as described
above, were already under way before the loss of declensional structure
caused the loss of unstressed vowels. Secondly, the placement of light
and heavy elements was undoubtedly entirely independent of the situ-
ation in unstressed syllables. Thirdly, it is noticeable that in closely
related languages where, for example, case marking also becomes ves-
tigial, as happens, albeit at a much later stage, in Dutch, word order
changes, although clearly observable, do not result in the strict SVO
order found in present-day English. Even in a somewhat more remote,
in structural terms, language such as French, note how object pronouns
precede their verb, even although noun objects follow their verb. This
neatly leads us to the next point.
An alternative view, which I explored earlier in this chapter, namely
that the changes are due to the Viking and Norman invasions, is all the
more unlikely in light of the further discussion. Everything we have seen
points to the various changes having germinated in English before
the influence of either invading group had made itself felt. It would be
foolish to deny such influences, but they have to be seen for what they
produced.
Viking influence was to be in many ways more influential in core areas
of the language than French, and may therefore have promoted the
changes we have been discussing. Thus we owe to the Scandinavian
languages not only the verb form are, already mentioned, but also key
items in the pronoun system, such as they, which replaces the Old
English pronoun hı¯. The Old English prepositional system too was
significantly modified with some pronouns, such as æt ‘at’ and wi
´
‘with’ receiving additional meaning and more prominence.
Such cases, however, are probably merely symptomatic, for it is
the overall situation which is crucial. Throughout the north and the east,
the area of the Danelaw, there must have been many Anglo-Viking com-
munities comprised of both English and Danish or Norwegian speakers.
In such a situation, where the languages were so similar, there must have
been considerable language contact, perhaps resulting in something of
a creole situation. This would result in, amongst other things, a simpli-
fication of grammatical structures. Such simplification would interact
with the changing structures of English and emphasise them.
This is rather confirmed by the effects of Norman French. Although
we often think that French, of whatever variety, caused most of the
major changes in English, in fact the influence of French was much more
restricted. The greatest impact of French was undoubtedly, and remains,
134
AN INTRODUCTION TO OLD ENGLISH
02 pages 001-166 29/1/03 16:09 Page 134
on vocabulary. To some extent this may have occurred because the Old
English methods of word-formation were being lost in any case. How-
ever, it also caused the creation of new vocabulary alongside the old, and
to some extent this is still reflected today; compare, for example, kingly
from OE cyninglic
Dostları ilə paylaş: |