Interrogative, Indefinite, Relative Pronouns

OE interrogative Pronoun hwa was reduced to 2 forms – who (nom) and whom (Obj. case). In ME these forms were distinguished, but in NE they are confused: Who is there? Between who?

It is quite common today.

The Gen. case – hwæs developed into a separate interrogative Pronoun – whose. OE hwi – Inst. Case is used as a separate Pronoun why. OE hwelc yielded ME which. OE hwæþer – ME whether was used as a Pronoun “which of the two” but later became a conjunction.

OE indef. Pronouns – ælc > each, æg-hwelc > each, swelc such, nan-þing nothing were simplified. New types of compound indef. Pronouns came into use – with the component –thing, -body, -one: anybody, somebody etc.

Relative Pronouns developed from OE demon. and interrog. Pronouns – who, what, which, where, whose, how, why. They connect the subordinate clauses in complex sentences.

Lecture 15. Evolution of the ME Verbal Morphology.

Contents:

1. Simplifying changes in the verb conjugation.

2. Changes in the morphological classes of the verb.

3. Verbals: the Infinitive, the Participle.

Lecture 16. Evolution of the ME Verbal Morphology.

Contents:

1. Development of new grammatical forms and categories of the verb. The gerund.

2. Perfect forms. The Continuous.

3. The Future.

4. Passive voice.

5. The Subjunctive.

Rise of the Gerund

The OE verbal substantive in –ing, -ung gave rise to the Gerund. It made part of the verbal system and preserved some substantival features.

Verbal substantives could be determined by a pronoun, adjective, noun in gen. case and followed by a preposition:

ælc blēstung each blessing

Ælc blēstung is of Gode, and wyrigung of dēofle

In ME verbal substantives became verbalized: gerund like a verb could be determined by modifiers and could govern a direct object. Gerund is not determined by articles or adjectives.

ENE: He proposed our immediately drinking a bottle together

In ME and ENE gerund and verbal substantives are not properly differentiated. In Shakespeare the 4 variant forms in –ing are possible: losing of the day, the losing of the day, losing the day, the losing the day.

The forms are clearly differentiated only in the end of the 18^th c. Later on the gerund becoming more and more verbal, developed tense distinctions and the passive form.

Gerund Verbal Noun

1. may not be modified by articles, 1. may be preceded by articles

an adjective. 2. may be qualified by an adj.,

2. may be followed by a direct object. dem. pronoun, numeral

3. may be modified by an adverb 3. cannot be followed by a direct

4. cannot be used in the pl object, but requires preposition of

4. may be used in the pl

5. can form compounds

The Problem of Aspect

The prefix ge-, which was sometimes used in OE to express completion of an action, became y- in ME. Its use grows more and more irregular and then it disappears, so it is only the context that shows whether the action was completed or not. The same – with the continuous forms.

The Perfect Tenses.

Perfect forms which arose in OE are widely used in ME. They are formed by means of the verb habban followed by the past participle of the verb. In OE the participle was not an intrinsic part of the tense but was regarded as an adjective in apposition to the object governed by the verb have: the participle agreed in case (accusative) with the object: I have written my letter meant I nave my letter written.

These forms were at first used with transitive verbs; the corresponding forms of intransitive verbs were generally formed with the verb be(n). In such constructions the participle always agreed with the subject. He is come meant He is in the state of being come. But when the origin of the have-forms were forgotten they were gradually extended to intransitive verbs as well: He has come. They have gone.

In MnE be is still used in some cases to imply a state or result rather than an action:

He is gone. He is only lately come.

The meaning of Perfect seems to be antecedence. We may therefore suppose that they express a verbal category which Prof. A.I. Smirnitsky proposed to call Category of temporal relation.

The Continuous Form

In ME appeared first instances of a continuos aspect, consisting of the verb be(n) and the 1^st participle. They were very rare. The development of these forms was slow and uneven. In Chaucer’s works only 6 examples are found. The origin of these formations is not clear. There are 2 possible sources:

1. OE phrases consisting of the verb beon, the preposition on, and a verbal substantive in –ing, like hē is on huntinge he is in hunting, he is hunting.

2. OE phrases consisting of the verb beon and the 1^st participle in –ende

The development could be the following: the original phrase is on huntinge could become is a hunting, the preposition being weakened and turned into a prefix, then the prefix was dropped, and the verbal substantive became a participle, is huntinge.

As to the second variant, the development was connected with the disappearence of the OE participle in –ende and its substitution by a new participle in –inge, which could arise in such phrases.

Perfect continuous forms are quite rare in ME.

The Future Tense

In OE there was no separate form for the future tense, it was generally expressed by the present tense. This usage still survives in such sentences as: We return tomorrow. Shall and will – a preterit-present and an irregular verb gradually crept into use as tense-auxiliaries. In ME shall and will + infinitive are used as pure futures, shall being at first much more frequent than will. Later on will came into more general use, till at last in many dialects (e.g. Scotch) it has completely replaced shall. In American English there is also a strong tendency to use will for all persons. In southern English, on the other hand, the fluctuation between shall and will has gradually developed into a fixed system of complicated rules.

The Passive

The Passive voice was widely developed in ME. The auxiliary weorþan disappeared, and the only auxiliary was the verb bēn.

The phrase ben + 2^nd participle could express a state and an action

Use of the Subjunctive

The Subjunctive Mood preserved in ME many features it had in OE. It was often used in temporal and concessional clauses: and slepen wollen til the sonne shyne and will sleep till the sun shines. In conditional clauses the present subjunctive is used to denote a possible action: if thou wene I be thus syk for drede if you think I am ill for fear.

An unreal condition referring to the present is expressed by the past subjunctive and the phrase wolde + infinitive. If the action refers to the past, the pgrase wolde + perfect infinitive is used.

Analytical Formations in OE and ME

Analytical formations arose from syntactical phrases which had their original meaning.

1. OE habban + 2^nd participle > ME have + 2^nd participle (trans. verbs),

wesan, beon + 2^nd participle (intrans. v)

original meaning: the subject owned a thing having a certain feature as a result of an action > the result of an action

2. wesan / beon + 2^nd participle,

weo

Lecture 17. Evolution of the ME Syntax.

Contents:

1. Development of the syntactic system in ME

2. Phrase

3. Simple Sentence

4. Word-order

5. Negation

6. Compound and Complex Sentences

Development of the syntactic system in ME

The evolution of English Syntax is connected with deep changes in morphology: the decline of the inflectional system is reflected in the growth of syntactic means of word connection. The most obvious difference between OE and MnE is that word order became more strict and the use of prepositions more extensive.

The structure of the sentence and the word phrase became more complicated, but standardized.

Phrase

In ME the structure of Phrases was altered. Agreement in noun patterns disappeared because of the loss of the endings. The last traces of agreement in As were lost in the 15^th century when the inflection –e (pl) was lost. The relationship of A and the N were shown by A’s position: before the N; between the N and its determiners.

In the age of Renaissance, the N patterns became fixed syntactic frames: every position had a specific significance. Every word occupying the pre-position was an attribute.

In ME noun patterns began to include syntactic complexes: predicative constructions with the Gerund and the Infinitive.

Adjective patterns changed:

1. As were modified by Adv:

a verray parfit knight.

2. In OE an A could take an Object in Dat/Gen. case, in ME – Common case with the preposition:

so harde of his hate.

3. As freely combined with the Infinitive:

redy for to ryde