Yoko Iyieri PhD Thesis - Research@StAndrews:FullText - University ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Hade he no fere bot his fole bi frythez and dounez, Ne no gome bot God hi gate wyth to karp (GGK 695-6) He sent vs neuer no schame ne schenchipe in erthe (AMA 4299). The table below shows the proportion of multiple negation of this type to the whole sample of multiple negation in the texts investigated in the present study: Clauses in which never, no, etc. repeatedly occur or they are followed by not Ithe number oft Relevant I Others I Totals I I negatives I 1PM (Lamb)(two negatives! 0 I 31 (100.0%)j 31 I Imore than two! 3 (25.0%)! 9 (75.0%)! 12 1PM (Trin)(two ne g atives! 0 45 (100.0%)! 45 I Imore than two! 7 (25.9%)! 20 (74.1%)) 27 PM (I)gb) (two negatives/ 0 1 43 (lOO.OZ)( 43 f I (more than two! 7 (31.8%)! 15 (68.2%)! 22 (Qi (two negatives( 0 124 (1O0.O%') 124 1 I Imore than twol 8 (34.8%)t 15 (65.2%)j 2L1 IKH (two negatives! 0 I 67 (100.0%) 67 I I _________ jmore than two] 5 (83.3%)[ 1 (16.7%) 6 I Iflavelok two ne g atives! 0 I 94 (100.0%) 94 I _________]nlore than twoj 2 (5.1%)[ 37 (94.9%) 39 I ISEL (two neg atives! 1 (0.1%)11039 (99.9%)! 1040 I I _________ more than two 61 (54.5%)! 51 (45.5%)f 112 I IEMH Itwo negatives( 0 ( 22 (1O0.O%) 22 I _________]more than two] 1 (20.O%)I 4 (80.0%) 5 I IG&E (two negatives( 3 (3.8%)( 75 (96.2%)! 78 I I ________ Jrnore than two] 2 (22.2%)I 7 (77.8%)I 9 I ( p.S (two negativesI 3 (1.4%)( 219 (98.6%)! 222 I I __________ more than two] 16 (36.4%) I 28 (63.6%) I 44 I (CM two negativesi 17 (12.2%)! 122 (87.8%)I 139 I I jmore than two] 19 (52.8%)! 17 (47.2%)I 36 I !Ferumbras two negativesl 13 (4.9%)I 252 (95.1%)! 265 I __________ more than twol 27 (61.4%)! 17 (38.6%) I 44 I (CA Itwo negativesl 16 (21.6%)! 58 (78.4%)( 74 I I ________ more than twol 11 (57.9%)I 8 (42.1%)I 19 I IHS two ne g atives! 41 (17.2%)! 198 (82.8%)! 239 I ________ more than two] 42 (60.0%) 28 (40.0%)1 70 I (KA two negatives! 8 (3.6%) 216 (96.4%)( 224 I I _________ more than two] 24 (31.6%) 52 (68.4%)1 76 I IGGK two negativesl 7 (30.4%)( 16 (69.6%)! 23 I I _________ more than two! 10 (83.3%) 2 (16.7%)[ 12 (AMA two negatives! 10 (25.0%) 30 (75.0%)! 40 I Jmore than two( 14 (66.7%) 7 (33.3%) 21 IMP two ne g ativesl 0 55 (100.0%) 55 I _________ more than two] 12 (50.0%) 12 (50.0%) 24 IPI two ne g atives! 19 (15.3%)! 105 (84.7%)! 124 (more than two! 33 (54.1%)I 28 (45.9%)! 61 ISMA (two negatives! 9 (12.7%)! 62 (87.3%)! 71 I mor e than two! 5 (41.7%)! 7 (58.3%)! 12 The proportion of this type (see the column of 'Relevant' in the 272
above table) is by no means large as the table above shows, and this is more or less consistent throughout the ME period. Although multiple negation of this type belongs to a weak minority throughout the ME period, the existence of this type is, however, certainly of importance in that it undergoes a different procedure before it finally comes to be uprooted. Linguistically, the development of non-assertive forms such as ever and y in place of redundant never, no, etc. causes the decline of multiple negation of this type as discussed in existing studies (Labov 1972; Jack 1978c: 70; Burnley 1983: 60; Blake 1988: 106; Fischer 1992: 283-4). Sociolinguistically, this process may be accelerated by a concept of grammar once the use of non-assertive forms such as ever and in negatiie clauses is reasonably established and the redundancy of negative elements comes to be recognized by English speakers. This grammatical concept can occur when a large number of examples of multiple negation with the adverb ne plus another negative element undergoes the decline of ne, resulting in a massive amount of newly produced single negation. As often pointed out in previous studies, the influence of Latin grammar can also be an important factor to instigate this (Sweet 1892-8, I: 1520; Curme 1931: 139-40; Jespersen 1909-49, V: 451; Kisbye 1971-2, I: 240; Leith 1983: 111). 273 However, as the discussion above shows (see 5.2.), ME texts as ifiustrated by the corpus of the present study still reveal the stage at which multiple negation is by no means an uncommon phenomenon. The development of non-assertive forms is attested in the sample, especially in later ME texts or in texts with later ME features, but never to a great extent. The sample provides 48 examples of non-assertive forms in negative clauses, '10 of which as many as 39 are identified in the texts of Group 3, that is, texts with advanced features. The instances are found in: CM (5x), (lOx), HS (18x), and DT (6x). Some illustrative examples follow:
Page 1 and 2:
NEGATIVE CONSTRUCTIONS IN SELECTED
Page 3:
ABS TRACT The objective of the pres
Page 7 and 8:
etween the U.K. and Japan. I am als
Page 9 and 10:
3.2. Negative elements and syn tact
Page 11 and 12:
ABBREVIATIONS 1. Titles of the text
Page 13 and 14:
CHAPTER I Introd uction 1.1. The na
Page 15 and 16:
show various combinations of the ad
Page 17 and 18:
confined to the use by some German
Page 19 and 20:
constructions and the syntactic con
Page 21 and 22:
30-5). His later work is, in genera
Page 23 and 24:
favour the use of ne alone, rather
Page 25 and 26:
and 1978c), all of which should hav
Page 27 and 28:
and 401-2), Roscow (1981: 16-19), K
Page 29 and 30:
Common to be mentioned in these stu
Page 31 and 32:
actuality the intention can hardly
Page 33 and 34:
(c) PM (Dgb) = Poema Morale (Oxford
Page 35 and 36:
(3) KH = King Horn (Cambridge, Camb
Page 37 and 38:
text of EMH, on the other hand, can
Page 39 and 40:
(10) Ferumbras = Sir Ferumbras (Oxf
Page 41 and 42:
GGK is extant in the single manuscr
Page 43 and 44:
therefore, be always repeated in th
Page 45 and 46:
cases, therefore, the distinction b
Page 47 and 48:
HISTORICAL DEVELOPMENT OF NEGATIVE
Page 49 and 50:
concerned, never, no, etc. are almo
Page 51 and 52:
Some examples ifiustrating the abov
Page 53 and 54:
IO&N I ne ne. . . not I not I - I T
Page 55 and 56:
Ne kneu heo no3t his fissing, Ne ho
Page 57 and 58:
extent up to a later period than ha
Page 59 and 60:
constructions in this text still se
Page 61 and 62:
For Godd no mai we nangat der (50/1
Page 63 and 64:
(7) The Middle English Genesis and
Page 65 and 66:
alternatives to the form ne. Alongs
Page 67 and 68:
Who hys hit at neuer yjou3t Of pomp
Page 69 and 70:
the beginning of the fourteenth cen
Page 71 and 72:
Teche we now wat men we ben, For we
Page 73 and 74:
fourteenth century. The usage of ne
Page 75 and 76:
progressive nature of the text may
Page 77 and 78:
Negative constructions in KA are, h
Page 79 and 80:
And he nikked hym naye, he nolde hi
Page 81 and 82:
(b) Not He ne schownttes for no sch
Page 83 and 84:
(c) Not For we ne li3the noht our l
Page 85 and 86:
century, while the original text wa
Page 87 and 88:
For sorow he my3te not nyght hym ne
Page 89 and 90:
(early fourteenth century) also pre
Page 91 and 92:
On the other hand, texts from south
Page 93 and 94:
According to the stage of the devel
Page 95 and 96:
use of the adverb not is unequivoca
Page 97 and 98:
no, etc. in DT also reveal the most
Page 99 and 100:
when not occurs after the verb, it
Page 101 and 102:
'Flert sun for-gettes Jat ne ei sei
Page 103 and 104:
Ride myght respectively). The adver
Page 105 and 106:
Lo now, my Sone, avise the, That th
Page 107 and 108:
Pa3 we ne mowe nau3t ise (WS 7/169)
Page 109 and 110:
examples, not occurs after the verb
Page 111 and 112:
the other cases mentioned above. Ex
Page 113 and 114:
adverb ne alone is common with form
Page 115 and 116:
and A&D as far as the texts of Grou
Page 117 and 118:
Contracted forms and negative const
Page 119 and 120:
longer occurs or occurs only occasi
Page 121 and 122:
forms of will have an understandabl
Page 123 and 124:
The nature of the finite verb and t
Page 125 and 126:
The nature of the finite verb and t
Page 127 and 128:
have moved to the construction whic
Page 129 and 130:
subjunctive forms, which is a disti
Page 131 and 132:
never, no, etc. are involved. The d
Page 133 and 134:
extensive in the sample of the pres
Page 135 and 136:
favoured in the text. Not only the
Page 137 and 138:
alone is quite sufficient here part
Page 139 and 140:
avoided in this syntactic condition
Page 141 and 142:
Of his bodi ne hauede he eyr Bute a
Page 143 and 144:
Alle Je lujer Deneis Jat ne luuede
Page 145 and 146:
(3) Relative clauses me/not I ne me
Page 147 and 148:
Some illustrative examples are give
Page 149 and 150:
Pat-clauses not dependent upon a ne
Page 151 and 152:
present study provide only about 40
Page 153 and 154:
(2) Those not dependent upon a nega
Page 155 and 156:
Conditional clauses with the invert
Page 157 and 158:
Pere the grekes hade grymly ben gir
Page 159 and 160:
Since the three examples in CM all
Page 161 and 162:
displayed below for the purpose of
Page 163 and 164:
occasionally provide non-assertive
Page 165 and 166:
does not differ much from the overa
Page 167 and 168:
Some further examples are: pg was n
Page 169 and 170:
Some illustrative examples are: ffo
Page 171 and 172:
Optative clauses ne/not I ne me. .
Page 173 and 174:
I)eclarative clauses with the inver
Page 175 and 176:
(3) Declarative clauses with the in
Page 177 and 178:
Clauses in which the finite verb di
Page 179 and 180:
or of never, no, etc. alone has not
Page 181 and 182:
Figurative negation me/not I ne me.
Page 183 and 184:
3.2.15. Existential clauses Existen
Page 185 and 186:
period of ME and especially outstan
Page 187 and 188:
that matters at least as far as the
Page 189 and 190:
C H A P T E R IV Negative Contracti
Page 191 and 192:
contracted forms were stifl used as
Page 193 and 194:
(1) Poema Morale (PM) As the follow
Page 195 and 196:
ac, se Jet naueô hier naht ibet, m
Page 197 and 198:
as the following table displays: __
Page 199 and 200:
I Contracted Uncontracted I Totals
Page 201 and 202:
I IContracted Incontracted I Totals
Page 203 and 204:
to this particular syntactic condit
Page 205 and 206:
in SEL in general, forms not record
Page 207 and 208:
Uncontracted forms are also illustr
Page 209 and 210:
I Ine+art IContracted Uncontracted
Page 211 and 212:
eginning of the period 1350-1450. T
Page 213 and 214:
I Ine+am ne + is/ys I ne + was/wace
Page 215 and 216:
present tense varies between contra
Page 217 and 218:
And for this cause I axe that, Who
Page 219 and 220:
And Jou ne wylt a nyghtes gest (102
Page 221 and 222:
Nyst noman his doleful cas Bot Besa
Page 223 and 224:
j Contracted UncontracteL Totals I
Page 225 and 226:
manuscript, Newstead (1967: 44-5) p
Page 227 and 228:
I Contracted Uncontracted I Totals
Page 229 and 230:
Uncontracted forms are also illustr
Page 231 and 232:
an almost regular attestation of co
Page 233 and 234: (7) Preterite-tense forms of will 2
Page 235 and 236: existence of an unexpressed element
Page 237 and 238: and uncontracted ones (2x) with for
Page 239 and 240: encountered in them. KA and Ferumbr
Page 241 and 242: phrase is in use in a fossilized fo
Page 243 and 244: ather more likely to be connected w
Page 245 and 246: And if he wil assenty jar-to, non h
Page 247 and 248: in a text where negative contractio
Page 249 and 250: 5.1. Preliminary remarks CHAPTER V
Page 251 and 252: and This ultimately contributes to
Page 253 and 254: the adverb ne is by no means a domi
Page 255 and 256: consideration. Since double negatio
Page 257 and 258: Single v.s. multiple negation in Gr
Page 259 and 260: the whole rather conservative. Mult
Page 261 and 262: As the above table shows, the occur
Page 263 and 264: He ne myght proue it neuer more (SM
Page 265 and 266: The reduction of the adverb ne is a
Page 267 and 268: Ne/nor in multiple negation Ithe nu
Page 269 and 270: According to their convention, the
Page 271 and 272: For no j)yng Thu cryst more quemyj
Page 273 and 274: 2.85 and 1.15 respectively, both of
Page 275 and 276: interrogative clause all through th
Page 277 and 278: By contrast, the case in which ne/n
Page 279 and 280: each. That a shared preposition is
Page 281 and 282: The nynje comaundement yn oure tell
Page 283: concerned. It provides only around
Page 287 and 288: For hi ne ssolde horn temie no3t jj
Page 289 and 290: iai in negative clauses in later ME
Page 291 and 292: SEMANTIC ASPECTS OF NEGATION
Page 293 and 294: Quen he was ded ne dout he nan Jat
Page 295 and 296: (8) forberen 'to withhold', 'to pre
Page 297 and 298: IF thou the vices lest to knowe, Mi
Page 299 and 300: P fader me for-bed al-so : Pat for
Page 301 and 302: Bot this thin g mai noght be foryet
Page 303 and 304: Here the antecedent it refers to th
Page 305 and 306: (SEL 381/229_30).15 Accordin g to S
Page 307 and 308: y 'before', 'until', etc. Labov (19
Page 309 and 310: negative connotation such as douten
Page 311 and 312: I)o nau3t so, ac mercy crye, Pat e
Page 313 and 314: They knew hyrn and he hem nought (S
Page 315 and 316: later ME texts except in I)T, where
Page 317 and 318: is accompanied by another negative
Page 319 and 320: negative contraction at all. Neithe
Page 321 and 322: examples of multiple negation indee
Page 323 and 324: of an action occasionally present e
Page 325 and 326: Baker, C. L. 1970. 'Double Negative
Page 327 and 328: Regulation of its Use in En glish.
Page 329 and 330: 39-57. . 1989c. 'Figurative Negatio
Page 331 and 332: English Grammar'. Language 48: 773-
Page 333 and 334: Moss, F. 1952. A Handbook of Middle
Page 335 and 336:
Plowman', ed. J. A. Alford, pp. 201
Page 337:
Methuen and Co. Wrenn, C. L. 1939.
show all

Yoko Iyieri PhD Thesis - Research@StAndrews:FullText - University ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?