Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-7pwfn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T02:46:12.042Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A core morphology for Old English verbs

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 September 2008

John Anderson
John Anderson
Affiliation:
University of Edinburgh
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

A characterization of the morphology of ‘regular’ Old English verbs is offered on the basis of a ‘word-and-paradigm’ approach to morphological structure. Thus rules of expression are formulated providing for the phonological realization(s) of (combinations of) morphosyntactic categories of tense, mood, person, number etc. However, it is argued that the organization of categories (in terms of compatibility and presupposition) differs with respect to the syntax–morphology interface and the morphology–phonology interface (the rules of expression). There is therefore proposed a set of rules of category realignment which relate the function-oriented system of categories to the expression-oriented system, which (among other things) minimize syncretism in the elements introduced by the rules of expression. Analysis of the preterite-present and weak-present verbs provides further support for this distinction in systems of category organization. The expression rules themselves do not introduce or realize ‘zeros’ and ‘mutations’ are interpreted as correspondences between base and derived/inflected form. An appendix offers a description of Present-day English verb inflexions for comparison.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
English Language & Linguistics , Volume 2 , Issue 2 , November 1998, pp. 199 - 222
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1998

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Anderson, J. M. (1980). Towards dependency morphology: the structure of the Basque verb. In Anderson, J. M. & Ewen, C. J. (eds.), Studies in dependency phonology. Ludwigsburg (Ludwigsburg Studies in Language and Linguistics, 4). 227–71.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. M. (1988). Old English ablaut again: the essentially concrete character of dependency phonology. In Duncan-Rose, C. & Vennemann, T. (eds.), On language: Rhetorica Phonologica Syntactica. A festschrift for Robert P. Stockwell from his friends and colleagues. London & New York: Routledge. 161–82.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. M. (1991). Should. In Kastovsky, D. (ed.), Historical English syntax. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter1. 11–30.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. M. (1992). Linguistic representation: structural analogy and stratification. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, J. M. (1993). Parameters of syntactic change: a notional view. In Jones, C. (ed.), Historical linguistics: problems and perspectives. London: Longman. 1–42.Google Scholar
Anderson, J. M. (1996). The representation of vowel reduction: non-specification and reduction in Old English and Bulgarian. Studia Linguistica 50: 91–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, J. M. (1997). A notional theory of syntactic categories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, S. R. (1985). Inflectional morphology. In Shopen, T. (ed.), Language typology and syntactic description, Vol.3: Grammatical categories and the lexicon. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 150–201.Google Scholar
Anderson, S. R. (1992). A-morphous morphology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brunner, K. (1965). Altenglische Grammatik (nach der angelsächsischen Grammatik von Eduard Sievers neubearbeitet). 3rd edn.Tübingen: Max Niemeyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, A. (1959). Old English grammar. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Colman, F. (1985). On some morphological formatives in Old English. Folia Linguistica Historica 6: 267–83.Google Scholar
Colman, F. (1992). A touch of sub-class? Old English ‘preterite-present’ verbs. In Risssanen, M., Ihalainen, O., Nevalainen, T. & Taavitsainen, I. (eds.), History of Englishes. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 241–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Colman, F. (1996). Transitional morphology: Old and Middle English – derivational and inflectional. In Fisiak, J. (ed.), Middle English miscellany: from vocabulary to linguistic variation. Poznań: Motivex. 3–38.Google Scholar
CP = Sweet, H. (ed.) (1871). King Alfred's West-Saxon version of Gregory's Pastoral Care. EETS 45, 50. Reprinted 1958.Google Scholar
Dalton-Puffer, C. (1992). A view on Middle English derivation: verbs. Views 1: 3–15.Google Scholar
Dalton-Puffer, C. (1993). How distinct are inflection and derivation? Reply to Lass and Ritt. Views 2: 40–4.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. (1985). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Hogg, R. M. (1992). Phonology and morphology. In Hogg, R. M. (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language, Vol.1: The beginnings to 1066. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 67–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kastovsky, D. (1996)a. Categorial restructuring of the weak verbs in Late Old English and Middle English. In Fisiak, J. (ed.), Middle English miscellany: From vocabulary to linguistic variation. Poznań: Motivex. 29–45.Google Scholar
Kastovsky, D. (1996)b. Verbal derivation in English: A historical survey or Much Ado about Nothing. In Britton, D. (ed.), English historical linguistics 1994. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 93–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lass, R. (1993)a. Old English -ian: Inflectional or derivational? Views 2: 26–34.Google Scholar
Lass, R. (1993)b. Old English class II: More views. Views 2: 104–10.Google Scholar
Lass, R. & Anderson, J. M. (1975). Old English phonology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Matthews, P. H. (1972). Inflexional morphology: a theoretical study based on aspects of Latin verb conjugation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mitchell, B. (1985). Old English syntax, 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Or = Bately, J. (ed.) (1980). The Old English Orosius. EETS SS 6.Google Scholar
Ritt, N. (1993). What exactly is it that makes OE -ian derivational? Reply to Lass. Views 2: 35–9.Google Scholar
Stark, D. (1982). The Old English weak verbs: a synchronic and diachronic analysis. Tübingen: Niemeyer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sweet = Whitelock, D. (ed.) (1967). Sweet's Anglo-Saxon Reader. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Wagner, K. H. (1969). Generative grammatical studies in the Old English language. Heidelberg: Julius Groos Verlag.Google Scholar
Warner, A. R. (1993). English auxiliaries: structure and history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warner, A. R. (1995). Predicting the progressive passive: Parametric change within a lexicalist framework. Language 71: 533–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Warner, A. R. (1997). Extending the paradigm: an interpretation of the historical development of auxiliary sequences in English. English Studies 78: 162–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar