simplification of article paradigms in eME

page menu

The current page deals with changes to the following in eME:

• definite article
• indefinite article
• demonstratives
• pronouns
• interrogative pronouns
• relative pronouns

core vs optional grammar

The changes to article, demonstrative and pronoun paradigms which were complete by 1150 are shared by the core grammar and the optional grammar of eME. Changes which were underway in early Middle English are found in the core grammar but not in the optional grammar. For a detailed discussion, see Normalisation 3: grammar.

The core grammar, which has fewer anomalies and exceptions, is aimed at the beginner. This is the grammar that appears in Audrey and the attercop, book 1 of Englisc buten taeres (the first 800 words). The optional grammar, which inherits more of OE's anomalies and exceptions, appears in normalised versions of OE and ME texts, and in the weblog of this site.

definite article

There were ten different forms of the definite article in OE:

By the end of the OE period, a single form³ had emerged in the East Midlands:

In the core grammar of eME, t`e is the invariable form of the definite article. However, in Orm and PC2, it was not alone in that role.

Sweet wrote in his description of the grammar of Ormulum: "The def. art. is t`e and t`att, and is undeclined"². In the same primer he translated t`att lat`e flocc as 'the hateful multitude' and t`att ot`err bucc as 'the other he-goat'. Note 'the' for t`att in both cases. Was Sweet asserting that OE neuter nouns are still recognised as such in eME and require a matching definite article - t`att? Apparently not. Elsewhere in the same primer he wrote: "The substantives have lost nearly all traces of grammatical gender". And bear in mind that both flocc and bucca were masculine nouns in OE. We also find in Orm reflexes of OE neuter nouns used with both t`e and t`at, e.g. t`e child, t`att child and t`e land, t`at land. Rather, it seems Sweet was of the opinion that t`e and t`at are both definite articles in Orm, two variants with the same meaning and function, either of which can be freely exchanged for the other. That said, elsewhere in the same primer, Sweet gives only 'that' as the translation of Orm t`att.

In PC2 we find occasional uses of t`at where ModE would normally have 'the': d`aet ot`er dei (the second day), and aet Fauresfeld, t`aet minster hi makeden (at Fauresfeld, the monastery they founded). Generally however, the usage of t`e and t`at/d`aet in PC2 aligns with ModE.

In the core grammar of eME, t`at is a demonstrative, used in much the same way as its ModE reflex, while t`e is the sole definite article. In the optional grammar, t`at can also be used as a definite article, but this usage should be rare.

In both Orm and PC2, t`e becomes te after /t/ or /d/, e.g. ðæt te king, and te biscop, æt te Lammasse, mid te king, he lȅt te posstless sen himm. A similar transformation takes place in Orm with t`att and t`a which become tatt and ta after /t/ or /d/, e.g. and ta wass sett tatt, and tatt he shollde, t`att tatt unnfaele herode king, t`a folly%he y%itt tatt narrwe stih.

Given that this t`e/te dichotomy is absent in both OE and ModE, as well as southern, albeit later, East Midland texts such as Sir Orfeo, The Cloud of Unknowing and The Canterbury Tales i.a., the feature is optional. It is not found in the core eME grammar.

Remnants of OE t`ae_m m/nt dat and t`y_ m/nt instr survive in a pair of fixed expressions in eME - for t`en a__nes<sup>4</sup> (for the time being) and for t`i__ (for this reason, therefore).

back to top

indefinite article

In OE a_n was numeral, adjective and pronoun with separate masculine, neuter and feminie forms. Generally it didn't act as an indefinite article, the way a/an does in ModE. Occasionally sum was used in that role. More often, the noun stood alone. The following table lists the OE paradigm for the number (one) which corresponds to the singular forms of the strong adjective (only, alone):

In the early East Midland dialect, a__n assumes the role of indefinite article similar to that of ModE a/an. There may no longer be a marker for the dative (or instrumental) case. More importantly, a__n is no longer marked for gender. In a further development, a variant a has appeared. The two are used interchangeably:

accusative

The accusative form is observed inconsistently in the indefinite article in Orm, which has both an and aenne for the accusative. PC2 displays only the form an (or nan) for the indefinite article in the accusative case. PC2 does have an instance of onne, but this is a numeral (or pronoun) rather than an article.

Orm

• Y%e shulenn findenn aenne child (nt acc)
• He badd himm brinngenn aenne cnif (m acc), An appell (m acc) forr to shraedenn.
• An preost wass onn Herodess day%y% & haffde an duhhtiy% wif (nt acc).
• Illc mann an peninng (m acc) y%aefe
• All to t`urrhsekenn illc an ferrs (m/nt acc)
• T`att he sahh upp inn heffne an boc (m acc)
• He sette a steorrne (m acc) upp o t`e lifft.

PC2

• d`at waeron rachenteges d`at twa ot`er thre men hadden onoh to baeron onne (acc num; 1137)
• hi nan helpe (f/m acc) ne haefden (1140)
• ac hi nan treuthe (f acc) ne heolden (1137)

genitive

The indefinite article is marked for the genitive case in Orm, but not in PC2:

Orm

• Inn aness weress m gen hewe
• Ne naness kinness nt gen shaffte

PC2

• d`at wel t`u myhtes faren al a daeis (m gen) fare

dative

The indefinite article is not marked for the dative case in PC2, and the same may be true for Orm¹:

Orm

• itt iss inn a cribbe (f dat) ley%y%d
• Forr an godnesse (f dat?) uss hafeþþ don t`e Laferrd Crist onn ert`e, t`urrh t`att he comm to wurrt`enn mann
• Iss lang uppo þatt an (num/pron dat)

PC2

• te king iaf d`aet abbodrice an prior (m dat) of Sancti Neod (1132)
• in an caeste (f dat) t`at was scort & nareu & undep
• faestned to an beom (m dat)
• coman ridend to an tun (m dat)
• te emperice fleh into an minstre (nt dat/acc - more often dat in OE)

Lmn, on the other hand, has indefinite articles marked for the dative case: are (< anre) and ane/aene. Owl too has several examples of ore (< anre) and one. Both PC1 and AW have ane, the indefinite article marked for the dative case.

The upshot is that in the core grammar of eME, there are no separate accusative, genitive or dative forms for a__n. However, aenne acc, a__nes gen and a__ne dat feature in the optional grammar.

back to top

demonstratives

distal

The distal demonstrative is t`at, with plural form t`a__. These are used in the same way as ModE that and those.

Examples from PC2 are d`aet mynstre, d`aet abbodrice, t`at ilc gaer, t`at ilce daei, al d`at iren, t`a ricemen, t`a men. Note also Orm t`att, Lmn t`at and Owl t`at.

OE did not have a separate distal demonstrative, distinct from the definite article. The two functions were performed in OE by se_o t`a_ t`aet (see definite article above). eME t`at is a development of the OE neuter nom/acc sg form of the definite article - t`aet. In eME t`at is applied to all singular nouns.

proximal

The proximal demonstrative is t`is, with plural form t`ise. These are used in the same way as ModE this and these.

From the OE paradigm, only the neuter singular nom/acc form survives to eME - t`is:

The singular form t`is appears in a range of eME sources - PC2, Orm, AW, SO and Ch. The plural form t`ise appears to be based on the eME singular. It appears in both Orm and Ch.

Examples from PC2 are d`is gear, to t`is land, on t`is gaere, on t`is gaer, on t`is kinges time, on al t`is yuele time, t`is and te othre foruuardes (assurances).

Examples from Orm are D`att all t`iss weorelld wrohhte, I t`iss iudisskenn birde, sone anan se t`iss wass sey%y%d, O t`iss goddspelless lare, T`iss werrc, t`iss boc, t`iss firrste bisne, t`iss god, t`iss lif, t`iss trowwt`e, t`iss godnesse, t`iss sefennfald godley%y%c, t`att tiss ennglissh, t`iss bede sg; and itt... fillet`t` t`ise mahhtess, nan off t`ise cullfress (doves); pl.

back to top

pronouns

The changes to the pronoun paradigms from OE to eME, are not as dramatic as the changes to the article and demonstrative paradigms (see above).

The key differences are highlighted below in yellow:

By the end of the OE period, the acc and dat pronoun forms had merged throughout the paradigm in the eastern part of the Mercian dialect area. This had already happened in the early West Saxon dialect for 1st and 2nd person pronouns. Early Mercian on the other hand, had distinct acc forms ending in <c> for 1st and 2nd person pronouns (see footnotes 5, 7 & 8 below). With one exception, the merged 3rd person pronoun forms adopted the dat form. The exception was the neuter singular which assumed the acc form.

Hence Orm y%ho ras hire upp, iwhillc mann t`att herrde itt, PC2 and te Lundenisce folc him underfeng, and sythen byrieden him.

sce__, ancestor of ModE she, qualifies as an additional eME form via PC2 scae with the support of similar forms in SO sche and Ch she. It is probably a development of OE hi_e, variant of he_o, via a shift from falling to rising diphthong ¹⁵. The stages may have been: /hi:e/ > */hje:/ > */C``e:/ > /S``e:/. Orm used y%ho which has only indirect support in Lmn/Owl heo. It probably represents /C``o:/ in a similar staged development to sce__ (above), but from OE he_o.

t`ey%, ancestor of ModE they, qualifies as an additional eME form via Orm t`ey%y% with the support of similar forms in SO t`ai and Ch they. It may have been borrowed from Old Norse t`eir, plural of the demonstrative sa__, or may have developed from the related OE plural demonstrative t`a_, with influence from t`eir. Note that PC2 uses only hi, also found in Lmn and Owl, from OE hi_/hy_, variants of hi_e.

The dual forms are found in Orm but not in PC2, nor in later East Midland texts. For that reason, dual forms are not presented in the core grammar.

back to top

interrogative pronouns

The key differences between OE and eME are highlighted below in yellow:

As for pronouns (above), the acc and dat forms have merged. Note that the vowel in both hwa__m and hwa__s has assimilated to the vowel of hwa__ in eME. Orm's whamm indicates a short vowel. However, given alt OE hwa_m and Ch whom, we can be reasonably confident the vowel in Lmn/SO wham and AW/Owl hwam is long. The long vowel is clearer in Orm whas, AW hwas and Ch whoos.

In ModE, the reflexes of these interrogative pronouns are used not in only in questions but also as linking particles, aka relative pronouns, e.g.:

• Who is that man in the tartan cap?
• I noticed a man who was wearing a tartan cap.

In OE, interrogative pronouns fulfilled the first function only. In eME we see interrogatives taking on the linking role as well. The next section explores that development.

back to top

relative pronouns

According to Johannesson ¹⁸: "In early Middle English relative clauses were introduced by the particles t`e (chiefly with personal antecedents, with plural antecedents, functioning as subject) and t`at. By the early thirteenth century t`e had disappeared from eastern dialects, about a century later from western dialects; t`at, by contrast, still remains as that in Modern English. Forms corresponding to the interrogative pronouns started appearing in the late twelfth century [as relative pronouns - ANH]: first WHOM and WHOSE, somewhat later WHICH. The nominative WHO does not appear until the fifteenth century."

relative clauses in OE

The relative could be expressed in any of the following ways in OE ¹⁹:

1. By the indeclinable relative particle t`e, used for all genders, numbers, and cases: se_ was cyning ofer eall Angel-cynn butan t`ae_m dae_le t`e under Dena onwealde waes (he was king over all the English people except for that portion which was under the control of the Danes).
2. By the demonstrative se_, se_o, t`aet: ic e_ow bodie micelne gefe_an, se_ bid` eallum folce (I announce to you a great joy, which shall be to all people); he_r fe_ng to ri_ce Osric, t`one Paulinus ae_r gefullode (in this year came to the throne Osric, whom Paulinus had baptized).
3. By the demonstrative plus the relative particle t`e: Ure ieldran, d`a_ d`e d`a_s sto_wa ae_r he_oldon, hi_e lufodon wisdo_m (Our ancestors, who held these places formerly, loved wisdom); "Hwae_r is Iu_deiscra le_oda cyning, se_ d`e acenned is?" ("Where is the king of the Jewish people, who is born?")
4. By the particle t`e plus the personal pronoun (which may be separated from t`e): bu_tan he_ haebbe d`aes biscopes gewitnesse, d`e he_ on his scriftscire si_e (unless he has the testimony of the bishop, in whose diocese he is); t`aet he_ him miltsian sceolde, t`e t`a_ra o_t`erra manna na_n him a_rian ne wolde (that he should have mercy on him, on whom none of the other men would take pity).
5. By the omission of any relative: on t`ys geare gefo_r Aelfred, waes aet Bad`um gere_fa (in this year died Alfred, who was sheriff at Bath).

relative particles t`e and t`at in PC2

In PC2, relative clauses are introduced by the particles t`e and t`at. t`e is used chiefly, but not exclusively, with personal antecedents functioning as subject. The following examples are provided by Johannesson ²⁰:

1. the relative particle t`e:
   • & t`urh Godes milce & t`urh t`e biscop of Seresbyri & te biscop of Lincol & te ot`re rice men t`e t`er waeron, t`a wiste t`e king d`at he feorde mid suicdom. (PC2 1132)
   • agenes him risen sona t`a rice men t`e waeron swikes (PC2 1137)
   • t`a namen hi t`a men t`e hi wenden d`at ani god hefde[n] (PC2 1137)
   • Sume ieden on aelmes t`e waren sum wile rice men. (PC2 1137)
   • ac raeueden munekes & clerekes, & aeuric man ot`er t`e ouermyhte. (PC2 1137)
   • of t`e landes t`e lien to t`e circewican (PC2 1137)
   • Willelm Malduit, t`e heold Rogingham t`ae castel, (PC2 1137)
   • Willelm eorl of Albamar, t`e t`e king adde beteht Euorwic, (PC2 1138)
   • & te king makede Teodbald aercebiscop, t`e was abbot in t`e Bec. (PC2 1140)
   • t`e kinges dohter Henries, t`e hefde ben emperice i[n] Alamanie (PC2 1140)
   • & cursede alle t`e men t`e mid him heoldon (PC2 1140)
2. the relative particle t`at:
   • an ceste t`at was scort & nareu & undep (PC2 1137)
   • & fand t`e munekes & te gestes al t`at heom behoued (PC2 1137)
   • & he begaet in landes t`at rice men hefden mid strengt`e (PC2 1137)
   • lof & grin; d`at waeron rachenteges d`at twa ot`er t`re men hadden onoh to baeron onne, (PC2 1137)
   • I ne can ne I ne mai tellen alle t`e wunder ne alle t`e pines d`at hi diden wrecce men on t`is land; (PC2 1137)
   • oc namen al t`e god d`at t`arinne was & brenden syt`en t`e cyrce & al tegaedere. (PC2 1137)
   • & pineden him alle t`e ilce pining d`at ure Drihten was pined, (PC2 1137)
   • noht fort`i d`at he ne iaf him al d`at he cut`e axen him, (PC2 1140)
   • benam him al d`at he ahte to hauen. (PC2 1140)
   • t`is, & te ot`re foruuardes t`et hi makeden, (PC2 1140)

For Orm, the MED has no examples of t`e as a relative particle, but lists a dozen examples of t`at in the role in question:

• Min word... May%y% hellpenn t`a t`att redenn itt... tunnderrstanndenn All t`ess te bettre hu t`ey%y%m birrt` t`e Goddspell unnderrstanndenn.
• y%ho wass ec... Forrt`i wit`t` weppman weddedd, Wit`t` an t`att wass off hire kinn.
• t`a nowwt tatt Jesu Crist draf ut Off Godess hally%he temmple Tacnedenn uss.
• t`a hirdess... Haffdenn an haefedd hird, tatt wass Abufenn alle t`ot`re.
• Itt Ne mihhte nan wihht oppnenn, Wit`t`utenn Godess hally%he Lamb, t`att he sahh ec inn heffne.
• t`iss gode mann, t`iss gode prest, t`att we nu maelenn offe, Wass... y%ehatenn Zacaryas.
• Niss nan mahht tatt bettre may%y% t`e winnenn eche blisse t`ann allre mahhte rote may%y%.
• Icc hafe wennd inntill Ennglissh Goddspelless hally%he lare Affterr t`att little witt t`att me Min Drihhtin hafet`t` lenedd.
• Tatt child... Shall cumenn her to manne Biforenn Crist rihht i t`att gast & i t`att illke mahhte t`att Helyas shall cumenn efft Biforenn Cristess come.
• Acc son se time comm t`aerto t`att Godd it wollde betenn, Godd raew off mann.
• Taer Well fele wattress waerenn & swillke t`att he mihhte wel Fullhtnenn t`e follc t`aerinne.
• He dide himm etenn t`aer t`at Godd forrbodenn haffde.

back to top

interrogative pronouns take on a relative role in eME

By the end of the OE period, in the eastern portion of the Mercian dialect area, *hwa_m and *hwa_s had taken on a relative (i.e. linking) role which their counterparts did not have in West Saxon. Thus we find in Orm: ure laffdiy% mary%e toc... & ley%y%de ...tosamenn ay%y% I swit`e t`ohhtfull heorrte, All t`att y%ho sahh & herrde off crist Whas moderr y%ho wass wurrt`enn. The last part of this would have been rendered differently in early West Saxon, perhaps as: Al t`at he_o seah & hi_erde of cri_st T`aes mo_der he_o waes worden. Similarly, Orm has Herode king bitacnet`t` uss T`e lat`e gast off helle, & he may%y% wel bitacnenn himm Whamm he stod inn to folly%h`enn where early West Saxon would probably have expressed this with t`one like so: he_ maeg` wel beta_cnian hine T`one he_ sto_d in to_ folgienne.

The brief explanation for the appearance of the interrogatives hwa__s and hwa__m in roles previously performed by demonstratives, is that the particular demonstratives in question - t`aes and t`one, no longer existed in eME.

Bear in mind that interrogatives were used in indirect speech in OE, e.g.: Sage me hwilc word aerust ford`eode of Godes mud`e?. It is not such a leap from the role of link to indirect speech to a strictly relative role.

Somewhat later hwilc/which appears in a relative role. The nominative who does not appear as a linking particle until the fifteenth century.

hwilc as relative in Orm?

• I may%y% full aet`e cnawenn All whillke shulenn cwemenn me. I can perceive quite easily all which are bound to please me
• Forrt`i wass writenn witerrliy%… y%a whillke waerenn kingess t`a y%a whillke waerenn preostess. Because it was written prudently… both which were kings then and which were priests
• Prestess t`anne & daecness ec Shifftedenn hemm bitwenenn Whillc here shollde serrfenn firrst. Priests then deacons as well arranged them according to which army should serve first
• Prestess t`anne & daecness ec Shifftedenn hemm bitwenenn Whillc here shollde serrfenn firrst, Whillc sit`t`enn i t`e temmple.

In each case above, drawn from the MED, whillc/whillke performs an interrogative rather than a relative function. In the first example we can interpret whillke as being in apposition to all ¹⁶, so in effect: "Which [ones] are bound to please me? I can quite easily perceive all." Contrast this with a true relative: "The pastries which please me have savoury fillings." In the former there is an indirect question, while in the latter, no question is implied. Similarly, we find indirect questions in the remaining examples above: "Which were kings and which were priests?" and "Which army should serve first?"

hwa__ as relative?

The MED cites several twelfth century examples of hwa/wha as an independent relative referring to a person or persons, and introducing a noun clause, but in each case the clause serves as an indirect question, e.g.: 1150 Vsp.D.Hom. Daniel het siften on t`aes cynges gesihd`e axen geond þone flor, t`aet he eft mihte tocnawen hwa on t`one flor stope, Orm Forrt`i wass writenn witerrliy% & sey%y%d þurrh Goddspellwrihhte Wha wass t`att time Kaserrking.

In the early thirteenth century we find hwa where ModE would have whoever, anyone who: HMaid. Hwa t`at sehe t`enne hu t`e engles beod` isweamed… stani were his heorte y`if ha ne mealte i teares, c1200 St.Kath. Tu schalt ifinden hwa t`e ontswerie. Similar, but categorised separately by the MED is c1225 Body & S. Nullet` heo nimen gete, hwo hit biy`ete. The MED equates hwo here to ModE no matter who, regardless of who.

In short, neither hwilc nor hwa__ function as true relatives in either PC2 or Orm. In eME then, a ModE phrase such as "the powerful people who were traitors soon rose against him", is rendered with t`e or t`at rather than hwa__: "ay%aenes him risen sone t`a__ ri__ce men t`e (or t`at) waeren swikes".

For a detailed treatment of the development of relative pronouns in Middle English, see Fischer ¹⁷