12.07.2015 Views

The Syntax of Early English - Cryptm.org

The Syntax of Early English - Cryptm.org

The Syntax of Early English - Cryptm.org

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

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

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

An outline <strong>of</strong> Middle <strong>English</strong> syntax 101(91) And on hir bare knees adoun they falle/ And wolde have kistand on their bare knees down they fell and would have kissedhis feet . . .his feet‘<strong>The</strong>y fell down on their bare knees and wanted to kiss his feet . . .’(Chaucer Knight 1758)Here the action expressed in the infinitive is simultaneous with that <strong>of</strong> thematrix verb, and present-day <strong>English</strong> would employ a present infinitive. <strong>The</strong>perfect infinitive is used in Middle <strong>English</strong> examples <strong>of</strong> this type in order toindicate that the action <strong>of</strong> ‘kissing’ did in the end not take place, as the furthercontext <strong>of</strong> (91) indeed makes clear.3.5.3 Adverbial clausesIn this section, we will highlight some new developments taking placein the area <strong>of</strong> adverbial clauses. A fuller description <strong>of</strong> the types <strong>of</strong> adverbialclauses, the various subordinators used, the order <strong>of</strong> the clauses and the moodtypical for each type <strong>of</strong> subordinate clause can be found in Fischer (1992a:343–64).As noted above, the distinction between subordinate and main clauses wasnot always as clear in Old and Middle <strong>English</strong> as it is in the present-day language.One reason for this is the fact that the written language was still closerto the spoken language. Subordination or hypotaxis is not a prominentcharacteristic <strong>of</strong> spoken language, which is more heavily paratactic. This wasstill visible in Old <strong>English</strong>. A good number <strong>of</strong> the subordinating conjunctionswere <strong>of</strong> the same form as adverbs (so that the clause introduced by themresembled a main clause). Thus we have the typical correlative constructionsa ...a, nu ...nu, where the distinction between main and subordinate clauseonly became clear (and this not always) by differences in word order. <strong>The</strong> onlyclearly demarcated subordinate clause types in Old <strong>English</strong> were relativeclauses introduced by e, and conditional clauses introduced by gif. Mostother subordinate clauses in Old <strong>English</strong> can actually be analysed as being atype <strong>of</strong> relative clause, since they are introduced by phrases such as for æme, æfter æm e, etc., which consist <strong>of</strong> a preposition, a demonstrativepronoun and the relative particle.In Middle <strong>English</strong>, the language began to develop more specific markers foreach type <strong>of</strong> subordinate clause, and separate lexical items for subordinate andmain clauses. Three general developments may be observed:(i)<strong>The</strong> Old <strong>English</strong> correlative pairs disappear; the conjunctions are distinguishedfrom the adverbs. Thus, a . . . a becomes when . . . then,

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!