Morphology and Syntax

Nouns, peculiarities:

-only two cases (common and possessive);

-two numbers (singular and plural), a few -n plurals (shoes/shoon, housen, eyen) which soon disappeared but for ox and child. Isolated plural retained in “twelvemonth – a year”, “fortnight – 2 weeks”, “sennight- week” (without –es in pl).

As –es was interpreted as an indicator of the plural, Old French cerise existing as cherris was interpreted as plural and for the singular was dropped. The same with pese (peas) and rēdels (riddle). In other cases, on the contrary, -s plural was interpreted as a constituent of a word and so original form of the plural was used as sg:

bodice (корсет) ← bodies

truce (перемирие) ←trēowes (sg ←trēow, договор)

quince (айва) ← quines (sg quine)

- some unmarked genitives (mother tongue, lady slipper); -s of genitives was sometimes omitted when a word ended in a sibilant or the following word started with one (peace sake); misinterpretation of genitive ending -s as 'his' (e.g. John Browne his meaddow, Ann Harris her lot)

Adjectives: adjectives had lost all inflections (even –e – an indicator of weak declension and plurality) except comparative (-er) and superlative (-est) (synthetic) and more, most (analytic). These could be combined (e.g., most unkindest cut of all) for emphasis. Eventually, monosyllables started using synthetic forms and multisyllables - analytic.

Pronouns, peculiarities:

- the most heavily inflected word class

- development of separate possessive adjectives and pronouns (my/mine, etc); possessive of it: his →it →its sometimes spelled it's. It’s was spelled with an apostrophe until about 1800. Singular forms (thou, thy, thee) were used with familiars or when speaking to someone of a lower rank. Plural forms (ye, your, you) were used as marks of respect when addressing superiors. By the end of the 16th century, the singular forms disappeared (except among Quakers). Shakespeare’s works (17^th c) has both forms, the former – in conversation with relatives, friends and servants, to express anger and contempt.

Verbs: peculiarities:

- two-part verbs are very common (shorten up, wear out, cut off);

- transformation of strong verbs into weak: washen – to wash, steppen – to step, helpen – to help, though some verbs retain both forms: (shave – shaven, shaved, mow – mown – mowed). This process is not over yet; e.g. coll. knowed instead of knew, seed instead of saw.

cf. also a reverse phenomenon: OE hŷdan – hŷdde –hŷded

ME hīden – hidde –hidd

NE hide – hid – hidden

There appeared a special group of unchangeable verbs whose roots ended with –ed, -t:

cutten – cutte-cutt shutten – shutte- shutt sprēden – spredde – spred

- disappearing or losing separate forms for the past and past participle (cling/clung/clung): either past sg or past pl remained

-ing became universal present participle ending; -s and -th were the 3^rd person singular present indicative endings, eventually just -s;

- use of the gerund spread in the 16^th century. It appeared in the Middle English period, but full development of its features took place in the Early New English period. Shakespeare used both indefinite and perfect forms of infinitives. By the end of the 18^th – differentiation of the gerund and the verbal noun got fixed; 17^th – there appeared analytical forms of the gerund;

- the future tense is rendered by both will and shall irrespectively of the person and number (up to the 17^th c) (I will sooner have a beard grow in the palm of my hand, than he shall get one on his cheek); there appeared a complicated system of the Future-in-the-Past;

- by the 18^th – the Present Perfect and Continuous aspect got fixed in their modern structure and use;

- by the 16^th – the Past Perfect got fixed (though only in object clauses), by the 18^th – in its full use;

- since the 15^th – do acquired its auxiliary function and used as an auxiliary verb.

Syntax

- do with negatives and in questions was often missing (they knew him not);

- inverted word order was still acceptable (follow thou me, things eternal);

- double negatives were still acceptable;

- some continued use of impersonal constructions (it likes me not, this fears me, methinks) but the former impersonal verbs were more often used personally with a nominative subject;

- Subject-Object-Verb pattern was acceptable for pronoun objects and for emphasis (as the law should them direct, Richard that dead is); Object-Subject-Verb or Object-Verb-Subject patterns were used to emphasize an object;

- influence of Latin, "elegant English," long sentences featuring subordination, parallelism, balanced clauses; bus also native traditional use of coordinators (but, and, for);

- Shakespearean clichés (vanish into thin air, flesh and blood).

Date: 2015-12-11; view: 806