V. Numeral in oe. (see Ilyish, p.83-84)

VI. Middle and Modern English

Though the grammatical structure of a language changes very slowly, there is a considerable difference between the grammatical systems of OE and ME. One of the leading tendencies in the history of English in general, and the ME period particularly, was the gradual loss of synthetic ways of expressing the relations between words and the development of analytical means.

There were some causes for this. One was the mixing of OE with ON. Frequently, the English and Scansinavian words were sufficiently similar, but had different sets of inflexions. In those circumstances speakers in bilingual situation would tend to rely mostly on the roots, omitting suffixes and endings. Another cause was phonological. The loss of synthetic forms was especially manifest in the gradual reduction, leveling and loss of endings, a process closely connected with the fixation of the word stress on the first or root syllable. The results of that process were already felt in OE, when many originally different case-forms coincided, as, for example, the Nominative and the Accusative of most declensions. In the 11^th century the leveling of endings grew much more intensive and many formely different forms of the same word merged: OE final –a, -u, -e → all became ME –e. The endings –as and –es both became –es.

Moreover, the final –e which was left, disappeared itself during the MiddleE period (in the North it was no longer pronounced by the middle of the 13^th century, in the South it had disappeared by about the 14^th c.). These changes had disastrous effect on the inflectional system, since many endings became identical.

Noun in ME. The OE system of Noun declension was undergoing a constant process of simplification and unification during Middle English period. This process was much more intensive, as already been mentioned, in the North than in the South. By the end of MidE gender distinctions were lost nearly everywhere.

Two main declensions were generalized. One (former strong) was the declension which in OE had its Nominative plural in –as (stānas) and its Genetive singular in –es (stānes). Both these endings became –es, so that in MisE Nominative plural and Genetive singular were stōnes. The other (former weak) declension was the one which in OE had its Nominative plural and Genetive singular in –an, which in MidE became –en. Thus, OE ēae (ModE eye)

………

Adjective in further periods.

In ME the declension of the adjective developed towards simplification and unification. Syntactically, the inflection of the adjective was determined by that of the noun in gender, number, and case. As soon as the noun lost its grammatical gender and most of its inflections, in ME analogical development occurred with the adjective too.

The tendency was towards the usage of 2 main forms: the base form (fair) and the form with the ending –e (faire), which was used both for plural and as a weak form. This stage has been reached in Chaucer, who wrote “she hadde a fair forheed”, but “faire wifes” and “this faire lady” (plural and the weak form after the demonstr. pronoun accordingly).

When the final –e was lost towards the end of ME, these 2 forms became the same and the adjectives became indeclinable, as they are today.

An innovation was the introduction of the analytical ways of building up the degrees of comparison with the help of more and most. Some adjectives preserved synthetic means (suffixes -er, -est, suppletive forms gōd-bettre-best, glad-gladder-gladdest, gradation of the vowel in the root umlaut).

Numeral (see Ilyish)

Adjective in further periods.

In ME the declension of the adjective developed towards simplification and unification. Syntactically, the inflection of the adjective was determined by that of the noun in gender, number, and case. As soon as the noun lost its grammatical gender and most of its inflections, in ME analogical development occurred with the adjective too.

The tendency was towards the usage of 2 main forms: the base form (fair) and the form with the ending –e (faire), which was used both for plural and as a weak form. This stage has been reached in Chaucer, who wrote “she hadde a fair forheed”, but “faire wifes” and “this faire lady” (plural and the weak form after the demonstr. pronoun accordingly).

When the final –e was lost towards the end of ME, these 2 forms became the same and the adjectives became indeclinable, as they are today.

An innovation was the introduction of the analytical ways of building up the degrees of comparison with the help of more and most. Some adjectives preserved synthetic means (suffixes -er, -est, suppletive forms gōd-bettre-best, glad-gladder-gladdest, gradation of the vowel in the root umlaut).

Numeral (see Ilyish)