Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T23:59:41.148Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The southern English development of Germanic initial [f s þ]

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 April 2026

William H. Bennett
William H. Bennett*
Affiliation:
University of Notre Dame
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In historical English grammar it is regularly assumed that Gmc. initial [f s þ] became voiced before voiced sounds in southern England at some time in the Old or early Middle English period. For the present purpose, Wright's description of the change is sufficiently representative: ‘The initial voiceless spirants f, s, þ became the voiced spirants v, z, ð in late OE. or early ME. in Kentish and the southern, especially the south-western dialects, as vader, vat, vlesch, vrend; zaule zǫule, zinne zenne zünne “sin”, ðat ðet, ðing. The modern dialects show that this voicing of the initial voiceless spirants must have taken place at an early period, because it is almost exclusively confined to native words, hence the change must have taken place before the great influx of Anglo-Norman words into these dialects. The use of the initial voiced for the voiceless spirants is now obsolete in Ken., Sur., Sus., and obsolescent in s. Pem., Hamp., and the I.W., but it is still in general use in east Hrf., parts of Glo., west Brks., Wil., Som., and Dev.‘

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language , Volume 31 , Issue 3-Part1: July-September , September 1955, pp. 367 - 371
Copyright
Copyright © 1955 by the Linguistic Society of America

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

1 J. and M. E. Wright, EME gr. 2 §236. Cf. also R. Jordan, Hb. d. me. Gr. 2 (rev. Ch. Matthes) §§203-8, §215; H. C. Wyld, A short hist. of English §153.4; M. M. Roseborough, An outline of ME gr. §33.1; J. Wright, The English dialect gr. §278, §310, §320; and esp. E. Sievers, Ae. Gr. (2d ed. rev. by K. Brunner) §171 Anm. 3, §192 Anm. 1, §200 Anm., §203 Anm. The [f/v] isophone, one of the Moore-Meech-Whitehall dialect criteria, is shown in S. Moore, Hist. outlines of English sounds and inflections (rev. A. H. Marckwardt) 112, and F. Mossé, Manuel de l'anglais du moyen âge 2.56.

2 See M. Förster, Sitzungsber. d. bayer. Akad. phil.-hist. Abt. 1941, 1.790 (Munich, 1941).

3 Förster (Anglia 66.40 f.) would explain the f of fers as representing an Irish pronunciation.

4 J. Franck, Mittelniederl. Gr. 2 §9: ‘Das Nl. unterscheidet in der Aussprache noch heute zwei d, die verschiedenen Ursprungs sind, eins = germ. d, das zweite = germ. th (resp. dh, einem tönenden dentalen Reibelaute). ... Da der Unterschied heute noch dauert, muss er auch im Mnl. bestanden haben.‘ On the basis of Modern Dutch pronunciation, Franck suggests that MLFr. initial v, which fluctuates with f in spelling as in Kentish and Southern Middle English, may have had a voiceless onset.

5 In one passage the OE Bede uses the forms Gēata, Gēatum to refer to the Jutes, but this need not be taken to show that the Jutes and the Geats were one and the same people. See K. Malone, MLR 20.1 ff., 23.336 ff., Acta philologica scand. 4.84 and reff.; F. Klaeber, Beowulf and the Fight at Finnsburg 3 xlvi ff. and reff.; Prokosch, Comp. Gc. gr. §5b.

6 The name occurs in the gen. as Ēotena (1072, 1088, 1141) and in the dat. as Ēotenum (1145), apparently an analogic form based on the gen. and found also in 902. As Klaeber notes (JEGP 14.545), attempting to explain this form as representing eotenas ‘giants’ and then interpreting ‘giants’ to mean ‘enemies’, hence ‘Frisians’, seems far-fetched.

7 E. T. Leeds, in The archaeology of the Anglo-Saxon settlements (Oxford 1913), connects the culture of the Jutish settlements in Kent, Hampshire, and the Isle of Wight with that of lower Rhenish Franks.

8 J. Hoops, Waldbäume und Kulturpflanzen im germ. Altertum 585; Th. Siebs, PG 2 1.1158, 2a.524; Jordan, Verhandlungen der 49. Versammlung deutscher Philologen und Schulmänner 138 ff. (1908); E. Björkman, Studien über die Eigennamen im Beowulf, StEPh. 63.21 ff., 60 f.; Klaeber, Beowulf 3 232 f. and reff.

9 The possibility that the common voicing may have arisen from later cross-Channel relations between southern England and the lower Rhenish area seems extremely remote. Even with the facilities of present-day travel and communication, the Channel and the Strait of Dover are still effective barriers against the ingress of linguistic influences. Furthermore, there is no reason for supposing that only the southern part of England was involved in relations with the lower Rhenish district; yet the English voicing of initial [f s þ] is confined to the southern and southwestern counties.

10 For a much broader treatment of the voicing process without specific reference to the problem under consideration here, see W. Steinhauser, Eintritt d. Stimmhaftigkeit bei d. westg. Reibelauten f þ s x, Festschrift Max H. Jellinek 139 ff. and reff. (Vienna and Leipzig, 1928).