The history of Old English and its development (стр. 2 из 4)

Examples: masc. - guma (a man), wita (a wizard), steorra (a star), móna (the Moon), déma (a judge); fem. - eorþe (Earth), heorte (a heart), sunne (Sun); neut. - éare (an ear).

And now the last one which is interesting due to its special Germanic structure. I am speaking about the root-stems which according to Germanic laws of Ablaut, change the root vowel during the declension. In Modern English such words still exist, and we all know them: goose - geese, tooth - teeth, foot - feet, mouse - mice etc. At school they were a nightmare for me, now they are an Old English grammar. Besides, in Old English time they were far more numerous in the language.

Masc. Fem.
Sg.
N mann fót (foot) tóþ (tooth) | hnutu (nut) bóc (book) gós (goose) mús (mouse) burg (burg)
G mannes fótes tóþes | hnute bóce góse múse burge
D menn fét téþ | hnyte béc gés mýs byrig
A mann fót tóþ | hnutu bók gós mús burg
Pl.
N menn fét téþ | hnyte béc gés mýs byrig
G manna fóta tóþa | hnuta bóca gósa músa burga
D mannum fótum tóþum | hnutum bócum gósum músum burgum
A menn fét téþ | hnyte béc gés mýs byrig

The general rule is the so-called i-mutation, which changes the vowel. The conversion table looks as follows and never fails - it is universally right both for verbs and nouns. The table of i-mutation changes remains above.

Examples: fem. - wífman (a woman), ác (an oak), gát (a goat), bróc (breeches), wlóh (seam), dung (a dungeon), furh (a furrow), sulh (a plough), grut (gruel), lús (a louse), þrul (a basket), éa (water), niht (a night), mæ'gþ (a girl), scrúd (clothes).

There are still some other types of declension, but not too important fro understanding the general image. For example, r-stems denoted the family relatives (dohtor 'a daughter', módor 'a mother' and several others), es-stems usually meant children and cubs (cild 'a child', cealf 'a calf'). The most intriguing question that arises from the picture of the Old English declension is "How to define which words is which kind of stems?". I am sure you are always thinking of this question, the same as I thought myself when first studying Old English. The answer is "I don't know"; because of the loss of many endings all genders, all stems and therefore all nouns mixed in the language, and one has just to learn how to decline this or that word. This mixture was the decisive step of the following transfer of English to the analytic language - when endings are not used, people forget genders and cases. In any solid dictionary you will be given a noun with its gender and kind of stem. But in general, the declension is similar for all stems. One of the most stable differences of masculine and feminine is the -es (masc.) or -e in genitive singular of the Strong declension.

Now I am giving another table, the general declension system of Old English nouns. Here '-' means a zero ending.

Strong declension (a, ja, wa, у, jу, wу, i -stems).

	Masculine		Neutral		Feminine
	Singular	Plural	Singular	Plural	Singular	Plural
Nominative	-	-as	-	-u (-)	-	-a
Genitive	-es	-a	-es	-a	-e	-a
Dative	-e	-um	-e	-um	-e	-um
Accustive	-	-as	-	-u (-)	-e	-a

	Weak declension		u-stems
	Singular	Plural	Singular	Plural
Nominative	-	-an	-	-a
Genitive	-an	-ena	-a	-a
Dative	-an	-um	-a	-um
Accustive	-an	-an	-	-a

The Old English Adjective.

In all historical Indo-European languages adjectives possess practically the same morphological features as the nouns, the the sequence of these two parts of speech is an ordinary thing in Indo-European. However, the Nostratic theory (the one which unites Altaic, Uralic, Semitic, Dravidian and Indo-European language families into one Nostratic super-family, once speaking a common Proto-Nostratic language) represented by Illych-Svitych and many other famous linguists, states that adjectives in this Proto-Nostratic tongue were morphologically closer to the verbs than to the nouns.

This theory is quite interesting, because even in Proto-Indo-European, a language which was spoken much later than Proto-Nostratic, there are some proofs of the former predicative function of the adjectives. In other families of the super-family this function is even more clear. In Altaic languages, and also in Korean and Japanese, which are originally Altaic, the adjective plays the part of the predicate, and in Korean, for example, the majority of adjectives are predicative. It means that though they always denote the quality of the noun, they act the same way as verbs which denote action. Adjective "red" is actually translated from Japanese as "to be red", and the sentence Bara-wa utsukusii will mean "the rose is beautiful", while bara is "a rose", -wa is the nominative marker, and utsukusii is "to be beautiful". So no verb here, and the adjective is a predicate. This structure is typical for many Altaic languages, and probably was normal for Proto-Nostratic as well.

The Proto-Indo-European language gives us some stems which are hard to denote whether they used to mean an adjective or a verb. Some later branches reflect such stems as verbs, but other made them adjectives. So it was the Proto-Indo-European epoch where adjectives as the part of speech began to transform from a verbal one to a nominal one. And all Indo-European branches already show the close similarity of the structure of adjectives and nouns in the language. So does the Old English language, where adjective is one of the nominal parts of speech.

As well as the noun, the adjective can be declined in case, gender and number. Moreover, the instrumental case which was discussed before was preserved in adjectives much stronger than in nouns. Adjectives must follow sequence with nouns which they define - thet is why the same adjective can be masculine, neuter and feminine and therefore be declined in two different types: one for masculine and neuter, the other for feminine nouns. The declension is more or less simple, it looks much like the nominal system of declension, though there are several important differences. Interesting to know that one-syllable adjectives ("monosyllabic") have different declension than two-syllable ones ("disyllabic"). See for yourselves:

Strong Declension
a, ó-stems
Monosyllabic
Sg.
Masc. Neut. Fem.
N blæc (black) blæc blacu
G blaces blaces blæcre
D blacum blacum blæcre
A blæcne blæc blace
I blace blace -
Pl.
N blace blacu blaca
G blacra blacra blacra
D blacum blacum blacum
A blace blacu blaca

Here "I" means that very instrumental case, answering the question (by what? with whom? with the help of what?).

Disyllabic
Masc. Neut. Fem.
Sg.
N éadig (happy) éadig éadigu
G éadiges éadiges éadigre
D éadigum éadigum éadigre
A éadigne éadig éadige
I éadige éadige
Pl.
N éadige éadigu éadiga
G éadigra éadigra éadigra
D éadigum éadigum éadigum
A éadige éadigu éadigu

So not many new endings: for accusative singular we have -ne, and for genitive plural -ra, which cannot be met in the declension of nouns. The difference between monosyllabic and disyllabic is the accusative plural feminine ending -a / -u. That's all.

ja, jó-stems (swéte - sweet)
Sg. Pl.
Masc. Neut. Fem. Masc. Neut. Fem.
N swéte swéte swétu swéte swétu swéta
G swétes swétes swétre swétra swétra swétra
D swétum swétum swétre swétum swétum swétum
A swétne swéte swéte swéte swétu swéta
I swéte swéte -

wa, wó-stems
Sg.
Masc. Neut. Fem.
N nearu (narrow) nearu nearu
G nearwes nearwes nearore
D nearwum nearwum nearore
A nearone nearu nearwe
I nearwe nearwe
Pl.
N nearwe nearu nearwa
G nearora nearora nearora
D nearwum nearwum nearwum
A nearwe nearu nearwa

Actually, some can just omit all those examples - the adjectival declension is the same as a whole for all stems, as concerns the strong type. In general, the endings look the following way, with very few varieties (note that "-" means the null ending):

As for weak adjectives, they also exist in the language. The thing is that one need not learn by heart which adjective is which type - strong or weak, as you should do with the nouns. If you have a weak noun as a subject, its attributive adjective will be weak as well. So - a strong adjective for a strong noun, a weak adjective for a weak noun, the rule is as simple as that.

Thus if you say "a black tree" that will be blæc tréow (strong), and "a black eye" will sound blace éage. Here is the weak declension example (blaca - black):

Sg. Pl.
Masc. Neut. Fem.
N blaca blace blace blacan
G blacan blacan blacan blæcra
D blacan blacan blacan blacum
A blacan blace blacan blacan

Weak declension has a single plural for all genders, which is pleasant for those who don't want to remeber too many forms. In general, the weak declension is much easier.

The last thing to be said about the adjectives is the degrees of comparison. Again, the traditional Indo-European structure is preserved here: three degrees (absolutive, comparative, superlative) - though some languages also had the so-called "equalitative" grade; the special suffices for forming comparatives and absolutives; suppletive stems for several certain adjectives.

The suffices we are used to see in Modern English, those -er and -est in weak, weaker, the weakest, are the direct descendants of the Old English ones. At that time they sounded as -ra and -est. See the examples:

earm (poor) - earmra - earmost
blæc (black) - blæcra - blacost

Many adjectives changed the root vowel - another example of the Germanic ablaut:

eald (old) - ieldra - ieldest
strong - strengra - strengest
long - lengra - lengest
geong (young) - gingra - gingest

The most widespread and widely used adjectives always had their degrees formed from another stem, which is called "suppletive" in linguistics. Many of them are still seen in today's English:

gód (good) - betera - betst (or sélra - sélest)
yfel (bad) - wiersa - wierest
micel (much) - mára - máést
lýtel (little) - læ'ssa - læ'st
fear (far) - fierra - fierrest, fyrrest
néah (near) - néarra - níehst, nýhst
æ'r (early) - æ'rra - æ'rest
fore (before) - furþra - fyrest (first)

Now you see what the word "first" means - just the superlative degree from the adjective "before, forward". The same is with níehst from néah (near) which is now "next".

Old English affixation for adjectives:

1. -ede (group "adjective stem + substantive stem") - micelhéafdede (large-headed)
2. -ihte (from substantives with mutation) - þirnihte (thorny)
3. -ig (from substantives with mutation) - hálig (holy), mistig (misty)
4. -en, -in (with mutation) - gylden (golden), wyllen (wóllen)
5. -isc (nationality) - Englisc, Welisc, mennisc (human)
6. -sum (from stems of verbs, adjectives, substantives) - sibbsum (peaceful), híersum (obedient)
7. -feald (from stems of numerals, adjectives) - þríefeald (threefold)
8. -full (from abstract substantive stems) - sorgfull (sorrowful)
9. -léás (from verbal and nominal stems) - slæpléás (sleepless)
10. -líc (from substantive and adjective stems) - eorþlíc (earthly)
11. -weard (from adjective, substantive, adverb stems) - inneweard (internal), hámweard (homeward)

The Old English Pronoun.

Pronouns were the only part of speech in Old English which preserved the dual number in declension, but only this makes them more archaic than the rest parts of speech. Most of pronouns are declined in numnber, case and gender, in plural the majority have only one form for all genders.

We will touch each group of Old English pronouns and comment on them.

1.Personal pronouns

Through the last 1500 years mín became mine, gé turned into you (ye as a colloquial variant). But changes are still significant: the 2nd person singular pronouns disappeared from the language, remaining only in poetic speech and in some dialects in the north of England. This is really a strange feature - I can hardly recall any other Indo-European language which lacks the special pronoun for the 2nd person singular (French tu, German du, Russian ty etc.). The polite form replaced the colloquial one, maybe due to the English traditional "ladies and gentlemen" customs. Another extreme exists in Irish Gaelic, which has no polite form of personal pronoun, and you turn to your close friend the same way as you spoke with a prime minister - the familiar word, translated into French as tu. It can sound normal for English, but really funny for Slavic, Baltic, German people who make a thorough distinction between speaking to a friend and to a stranger