Normalisation 3: grammar

simplification complete by 1150

There are two main threads that run through the story of Middle English (ME) - the simplification of the grammar inherited from Old English (OE) and the addition of vocabulary borrowed from French and Latin.

These two developments were not simultaneous. Much of the simplification of OE's grammar had taken place, in the Northumbrian dialect, and in the eastern part of the Mercian dialect area, before the end of the OE era. The influx of French and Latin words came later - a trickle at first before the mid-thirteenth century, and then a flood in the fourteeth and fifteenth centuries.

The grammatical innovations that leap from the pages of PC2 and Orm were mainly in the realm of nouns, adjectives and demonstratives. Three grammatical genders had become one. Ten classes of noun declensions (not counting sub-groups) had become one. Four noun cases had been reduced to three - the nominative (subject), the genitive (possessive) and the dative (following a preposition), though the latter was only sporadically appplied. Since the only remaining plural case ending was now identical to the genitive singular - -es, eight separate noun case forms had been whittled down to three.

Simplification to the verb system wasn't quite as dramatic by the end of the OE period, but was evident none the less.

The simplification of OE grammar, by the time it reaches eME, is essentially levelling within paradigms, and is threefold:

1. a reduction in the number of items within paradigms (mainly noun and adjective);
2. a reduction in the number of classes of paradigms (to a single class for nouns);
3. a reduction in stem alternation and other complexities or anomalies within paradigms.

The levelling that had taken place in late OE, is not only evident in both PC2 and Orm, but is consistently applied. It is not dealt with here. For more detail, see the separate pages on the simplification of paradigms for nouns, adjectives, articles and verbs.

This page deals with levelling underway in the early Middle English period up to 1250.

back to top

core vs optional grammar

Two varieties or levels of eME grammar are used in this site - core and optional.

The changes to noun, adjective and verb paradigms which were complete by 1150, are shared by the core grammar and the optional grammar of eME. Changes which simplify eME grammar further, and arise before 1250, are found in the core grammar but not in the optional grammar. In a nutshell, there is a greater degree of simplification in the core grammar.

Well begun is half done. In the case of levelling and the core grammar of eME however, well begun is enough. In short, levelling and assimilation encountered in the early Middle English period, is incorporated in the core grammar of eME in this site, even if inconsistently applied. By the same token, any elements of OE grammar that are retained sporadically in East Midland texts, remain in the optional grammar of eME.

Another way of looking at this is through the wording of definition 6. Both the core and optional grammars contain the collection of grammatical features applied consistently in both PC2 and Orm. To that, the core grammar adds grammatical simplifications which enter via principles 3 & 4, while the optional grammar adds grammatical features inherited from OE but applied inconsistently in PC2 or Orm.

Bear in mind that principles 3 & 4 play no part in the optional grammar. Innovations can still enter the optional grammar as additional eME forms via principle 2. However, conservative forms inherited from OE prevail in paradigms. Hence, secy%en, based on OE sec`g`an and Orm seggen (/dZ`/), overrides say%en, based on Orm sey%y%en and PC2 saien (/j/), in the optional grammar.

One aspect that warrants discussion is the comparative spread throughout the East Midland dialect of the respective grammatical features which distinguish the two varieties. The spread of optional grammar features is probably greater. The core grammar features simplifications, while the optional grammar features complexities and anomalies. However, both appear inconsistently in the mid-11th to mid-12th centuries, whether that is in PC2 or Orm or texts from dialect areas other than East Midland. Examples of levelling are often not available for all paradigm forms in all of the nouns, adjectives and verbs in the groups identified, but the same is true for forms matching older OE paradigms. A degree of pattern extension is involved in both.

the user perspective

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.

From the perspective of the ModE speaker, the core grammar is the smaller load to learn, while the optional grammar adds further cases, anomalies and complexities to paradigms, as well as classes to weak verbs.

Coming from OE, the optional grammar is the smaller departure, being more conservative, while the core grammar has the larger number of changes. In fact, when moving in this direction, the terms 'optional' and 'core' are somewhat counter-intuitive. For that reason, those familiar with OE may be best served by thinking of eME grammar in terms of their milestone years, i.e. 'levelling complete by 1150' and 'levelling before 1250', rather than 'optional' and 'core'.

Crucially, the core grammar is the grammar presented in the reference pages for each of the main parts of speech under 'language' in the main navigation of this site. The optional grammar is presented in a single page under 'language'. For the ModE speaker, it is effectively a list of add-ons to the core grammar of eME, which the user may wish to deploy in a translation or piece of original prose; hence the labels core and optional.

back to top

types of simplification

What sort of simplification is still underway in 1150 or arises before 1250, and is incorporated in the core grammar of eME? And what were the "distinct groups of words with shared characteristics" referred to in Principle 4 (above)? The following list provides an overview:

• removal of stem alternation (levelling) in
  1. wa- and wo_-stem adjectives
  2. wa- and wo_-stem nouns
  3. a-stem nouns ending in <h>
  4. strong contracted verbs
  5. the fremmen and <cy%/y%> groups in class I weak verbs
  6. class III weak verbs
  7. class II weak verb exceptions - ferien and herien
• loss of case forms
  1. dative in nouns
  2. accusative, genitive and dative in the indefinite article
• miscellaneous anomalies
  1. genitive marker absent in certain nouns (added)
  2. dual pronoun forms wit unk unker and y%it ink inker (dropped)
  3. two stem vowels in the preterite of strong classes 4 and 5 (merged)
  4. henen, t`enen, hwenen (vowel assimilation)
  5. syncope in class II weak preterites (permitted)

If some of these terms aren't familiar to you, a brief overview will provide further clarification below. Beyond that, most of the levelling listed above is discussed in detail in the separate pages on the simplification of paradigms for nouns, adjectives, articles and verbs.

back to top

a language in transition

Orm's variable approach to the noun tre__ (tre__s/trewes gen/pl) and the verb hafenn/habbenn not only indicates a language in transition, but illustrates the differences between paradigms in the core and optional grammars rather neatly.

Traces of dual stems in some nouns and adjectives and in the present tense forms of certain verbs, can still be seen in Orm. However, and this is key - those traces are occasional and inconsistent. For every pair of tre trewwess, Orm has tre tres (tree trees), and for every habbenn hafet`t`, Orm has hafenn hafet`t` (have has). The anomalies trewes, trewe, habbe, habben are cut from the core grammar but remain in the optional grammar of eME.

Here's how the two pairs of paradigms line up:

The crux is that the core grammar has a single stem in both these cases - tre__ and haf~. Neither of these needs to be called out in the reference pages on nouns and verbs, since they behave just like the standard paradigms. The same is not true of course, for their counterparts in the optional grammar. Note also that the dative case is absent in the core grammar.

Keep in mind that the grammar of the normalised eME in this site is based on the East Midland dialect alone. Generally then, only PC2, Orm, SO and Ch forms are considered. West Midland and Southern texts have no bearing in decisions on whether or not a conservative feature, inherited from OE, shoud be retained in the normalised eME of this site, though they may add weight to linguistic innovation which draws eME closer to ModE.

While Normalisation 2: additional eME forms deals with dictionary entry forms - the nominative of nouns, the infinitive of verbs etc, this page looks at all forms, i.e. changes to forms within noun, adjective and verb paradigms, due to case, number, strong/weak status, person, tense and mood i.a.

Note that the simplification of a paradigm can arise via principle 2 or principle 3. An example of the former is sec`g`an, saeg`t` > say%en, say%t` (to say, says). The infinitive form say%en which is supported by both PC2 and Ch, qualifies as an additional eME form via principle 2, which requires two eME sources, one of which must be either PC2 or Orm . Principle 3 on the other hand, requires evidence of levelling in a paradigm in any text dated before 1250. Either can eliminate stem alternation and other complexities or anomalies in a paradigm.

back to top

in PC2 and Orm

Simplification may be found in PC2 but not Orm, or may occur inconsistently in both PC2 and Orm. In either case, the simplification is applied throughout the following groups. This may be levelling of stem alternation via principles 3 & 4 or the removal of a complexity or anomaly via the definition (no. 6) of core eME grammar itself:

1. stem alternation in wa- and wo_-stem adjectives

   The alternation of <u> in strong sg forms and <w> in weak or pl forms, occurs inconsistently in eME. It is evident in Orm - naru strong sg, narwe pl, but not in PC2 - nareu strong sg (note that <w> appears as <u> in PC2), nor in AW - nearow nom sg strong, nearewe weak, nor in ModE narrow. See the simplification of adjective paradigms in eME for more detail.

   Levelling in this group is achieved as follows:

   pre-1250 removal of stem alternation:

   1. <w> absent in pl: y`are

   2. <w> present in nom sg strong: falew, y`eolow, mearuw, nareu/nearow, caluw, cylew

   via principle 3 - extend removal of stem alternation throughout paradigm:

   y%are y%are, falew falewe, y%elew y%elewe, marew marewe, narew narewe, calew calewe, kilew kilewe (yare/[ready], fallow, yellow, [tender], narrow, callow, [spotted])

   via principle 4 - extend pattern of simplified paradigm to entire group:

   salew salewe, basew basewe, hasew hasewe (sallow, [purple], [grey])

2. stem alternation in class III weak verbs

   OE class III consisted of four verbs: habban to have, libban to live, sec`g`an to say, hyc`g`an/hogian to think about, consider. These four verbs were characterised by stem alternation in the present tense - either <bb/f> or <c`g`/g`>. Contrast the typical pr sg3 forms - haeft`, leofat`, saeg`t`, hyg`t`/hogat` with the corresponding infinitives above. For more detail, see class III weak verbs.

   Levelling to a single stem is found for each of the four verbs in a pre-1250 MED source. Note that PC2 is more progressive than Orm:

   1. PC2 hauen, Orm hafenn/habbenn hafe
   2. PC2 liuen, Orm libbenn
   3. PC2 saein, Orm seggenn/sey%y%enn
   4. Owl hoy`et` pr sg3, VH 1150 hoged` pr sg3

   Via principle 3, the pattern of a single stem is extended throughout each of the four paradigms in this group: hafen hafet`, lifen lifet`, say%en say%et`, hogen hoget`.

3. two stem vowels in the preterite forms of class 4 & 5 strong verbs

   This is observed consistently in Orm, which has a for sg 1/3 and ae for the plural, e.g. sahh saey%henn, satt saetenn, spacc spaekenn, y%aff y%aefenn, but not in PC2 which usually displays the same vowel a for plural preterite forms, e.g. forbaren, namen, stali[n], drapen, iauen. See more at strong class 4 & 5 preterites.

   Via principle 4, the levelling observed in most class 4 & 5 preterites in PC2 is extended to all verbs in classes 4 & 5, e.g. bar baren, y%af y%afen.

4. dative case marker -e for nouns

   This affects nouns ending in a consonant, following a preposition. It is observed inconsistently in PC2, which has e.g. both in tune and in t`e hus. After prepositions, the noun in the singular is just as often uninflected in PC2. See more at the modern paradigm.

   Since core eME grammar is defined as the collection of grammatical features applied consistently in both PC2 and Orm, there is no dative marker for nouns in the core eME grammar.

5. accusative and genitive forms for the indefinite article

   This is observed inconsistently in Orm, which has both an and aenne for the accusative, e.g. Illc mann an peninng m acc y%aefe but Y`e shulenn findenn aenne child nt acc. PC2 displays only an for the accusative. The indefinite article is marked for the genitive case in Orm - Inn aness weress hewe, but not in PC2. For more, see the indefinite article.

   Given their inconsistent application, separate accusative and genitive forms for a__n are excluded from the core eME grammar, via definition 6.

6. syncope of unstressed penultimate syllables in nouns and adjectives

   Unstressed penultimate syllables were often dropped in the inflected forms of nouns and adjectives before n, r and l, e.g. OE dryhten/dryhtnes, mic`el/micle. According to Wright <sup>2</sup>, the unstressed vowel "regularly disappeared in open syllables when the stem syllable was long", though fugol, with short stem vowel, was one of a group declined like engel engles <sup>3</sup>. The syncope can still be found in Orm - deofell/deofless, mikkell/miccle, and in PC2 - od`er/od`re, castel/castles, minster/minstre, gysles. On the other hand, we see PC1 fugeles, PC2 drihtines, micele, AW deoueles, fuheles, and Lmn & Owl fuy`eles, to give just a few examples. See more at unstressed penultimate syllables.

   Given the inconsistent nature of this syncope, the unstressed penultimate syllable is retained in inflected forms of nouns and adjectives in the core grammar, via definition 6: casteles, de__feles, drihtenes, fugeles, micele, minstere, o__t`ere, y%i__seles etc.

7. genitive forms without the -(e)s marker

   This is a relic of three different OE noun classes:

   1. the feminine o_-stems of the strong declension, in which the gen marker was a final <e>, e.g. sa_wol sa_wle;
   2. the stems in -r of the minor declension, in which a gen marker was absent, e.g. mo_dor mo_dor, and similarly for faeder, bro_d`or, dohtor, sweostor;
   3. weak declension nouns with gen marked by <-an>: hlae_fdig`e hlae_fdig`an, heorte heortan.

   For reflexes of the first group, the absence of -s in the gen marker is observed inconsistently in Orm, which has both sawle and sawless.

   For the reflexes of the second group, against Orm's moderr, brot`err gen we can counterbalance moderes Genesis and Exodus 1250, and faderes Poema Morale 1175.

   Ch has an occasional "zero" marker for the genitive in reflexes of the third group - lady lady, herte herte. Orm on the other hand, consistently has he(o)rrtess as the genitive. For more, see unchanged possessives.

   In all three cases, we can enlist either principle 4 or definition 6. Thus, in the core grammar of eME, all genitive forms have the -(e)s marker.

8. dual pronoun forms

   wit unk unker and y%it ink inker correspond to ModE we two, us two, of us two and you two, of you two. See more at changes to pronouns.

   The dual forms are found in Orm, Lmn, AW and Owl i.a., but not in PC2. For that reason (see definition 6), dual forms are not presented in the core grammar.

   Note - the absence of dual forms in PC2 is unsurprising given it is a chronicle. See below.

back to top

in other pre-1250 sources

This section includes not only pre-1250 sources found in the MED, but also variant OE forms.

In the first two cases below, the pre-1250 MED sources include Orm (and PC1), but less prominently here than in the list above. With that proviso, the following list summarises the simplification of core eME grammar arising from pre-1250 sources other than PC2 and Orm:

1. stem alternation in wa- and wo_-stem nouns

   The alternation of <u> in nom sg forms and <w> in oblique or pl forms, occurs inconsistently in eME. See simplification of OE noun paradigms: wa- and wo_-stems for more detail. There is also a brief overview above.

   Levelling in this group is achieved as follows:

   pre-1250 forms which show stem levelling:

   1. <w> absent in gen, dat or pl: bales pl, smeres gen, tres pl, cnes pl, ter dat, leohe dat

   2. <w> present in nom sg: barewe, t`eww, schadwe, mae_dwa m

   via principle 3 - extend removal of stem alternation throughout paradigm:

   bale bales, smere smeres, tre__ tre__s, cne__ cne__s, tere teres, le__ le__s, barew barewes, t`ew t`ewes, scadew scadewes, maedew maedewes (bale/[harm], smear, tree, knee, tar, lee/[shelter], [grove], thew/[servant], shadow, meadow)

   via principle 4 - extend pattern of simplified paradigm to entire group:

   mele meles, sinew sinewes, straw strawes, laesew laesewes, sarew sarewes, badew badewes (meal/[flour], sinew, straw, leasow/[pasture], [device], [battle])

2. stem alternation in a-stem nouns ending in <h>

   In OE masculine a-stems with final <h>, the <h> appeared at the end of the stem in the nominative and accusative singular only. Throughout the rest of the paradigm, the <h> was missing and the preceding vowel, if short, was lengthened. This stem alternation is applied inconsistently in eME reflexes. Moreover, there is scant evidence of the vowel lengthening, and final <h> tends to be replaced by <e>. See more at a-stem nouns ending in <h>.

   Levelling in this group is achieved as follows:

   pre-1250 removal of stem alternation:

   1. <h> absent in nom sg: wale, mare, fere, feo, sho

   2. <g> (<k> or <h>) present in gen, dat or pl: slo_ges gen, woge dat, elces gen, salhas pl

   via principle 3 - extend removal of stem alternation throughout paradigm:

   wale wales, mare mares, fere feres, fe__ fe__s, sco__ sco__s, slo__h slo__ges, wo__h wo__ges, elk elkes, salh salges ([foreigner], mare, [life/soul], fee/[money], shoe, slough/[mire], wough/[depravity], elk, sallow/[willow])

   via principle 4 - extend pattern of simplified paradigm to entire group of nouns:

   sele seles, halh halges, farh farges, alh alges, eh eges, horh horges (seal, haugh/[nook], piglet, [temple], [steed], [phlegm])

3. stem alternation in strong contracted verbs

   Strong contracted verbs are those characterised in Primitive OE by a stem-final <h> which was lost between vowels by the 8th century. <h> was missing from the end of the stem in the infinitive, present 1st person singular, present plural, present participle, subjunctive present and imperative forms. Preterite forms had final <h> in sg1/3 and <g> in sg2 & pl.

   Levelling in this group is achieved as follows:

   via principle 2 - extend <h>-less stem to pr sg2/3 (survivors to ModE):

   fle__n fle__t` s2, se__n se__t` s5, slaen slaet`, flaen flaet` s6

   pre-1250 insertion of <g/y`/h> (/J`/) or <ng> at end of stem:

   OE si_gan, wri_ga, 1250 tegen (< *ti_han), AW wrihen, Lmn wriy`en inf; OE t`i_gat`, feogad`, AW siy`et`, 1225 seiy`ed`, 1250 tgen (< *te_ohan), 1225 LH slage, AW wrihet` pr pl; AW wrihe pr sg1; Orm fanngenn, AW underuongen, hongi, Lmn hangest, AW honged`, 1250 honget` class 7 inf or pr, si_ge sbj pr sg, si_gende pr ptc

   via principle 3 - extend <g> (/J`/) or <ng> throughout a verb's paradigm:

   si__gen si__get`, wri__gen wri__get`, ti__gen ti__get`, t`i__gen t`i__get` s1; te__gen te__get` s2; fegen feget` s5; fangen fanget`, hangen hanget` s7

   via principle 4 - extend simplified paradigm to remaining verbs in group:

   li__gen li__get` s1; plegen pleget` s5; lagen laget`, t`wagen t`waget` s6

   Note: the insertion of the final consonant (cluster) of the p ptc throughout the paradigm only survives to ModE in hang and fang. This is largely due to the dropping of <g/y`> (/J`/) after a front vowel in later ME. See more at strong contracted verbs part 2.

4. stem alternation in the fremmen and <cy%/y%> groups

   Gemination occurred in four groups of class I weak verbs in OE (WS). It entailed the doubling of the stem-final consonant in the infinitive and present participle as well as the first person and plural forms of the present tense, the subjunctive forms and the plural imperative form. Gemination was extended throughout the paradigms of the class I settan, cwec`c`an and cwellan groups in the Mercian dialect by the end of the OE era and is evident in Orm, Lmn and AW. Stem alternation persists to some degree however, in the fremmen/fremen and <cy%/y%> groups in eME. See more at gemination in class I weak verbs part 2.

   Levelling in this group is achieved as follows:

   pre-1250 removal of stem alternation:

   1. gemination absent in inf, pr sg1, pr pl, pr ptc etc: fremian framian, fremen fremien freamien fremad` fremiaed`; g`eswefian; clynan; hlynian; sceat`ian, sceat`an, scad`ied`; t`enian; t`iy%ean; leiy%en leged`

   2. gemination present in pr sg2, pr sg3, pt, p ptc etc: cnysset` cnyssed cnyssedan; waggid`, Waggestaf, Waggespere

   via principle 3 - extend removal of stem alternation throughout paradigm:

   fremen/framen, swefen, clinen, linen, skat`en, t`enen, t`iy%en, ley%en, cnissen, waggen

   via principle 4 - extend simplified paradigm to remaining verbs in both groups:

   aswefen, biy%en

5. hwenen, t`enen, henen

   OE hwanon, t`anon, heonon become eME forms hwanen, t`anen, henen (whence, thence, hence) after the expected eME sound and spelling changes are applied. t`enen qualifies as an additional eME form via PC1 t`enen and Lmn t`enene/t`ennen.

   The <e> in the stem is then extended to hwanen from t`enen and henen through principle 4. See more at Normalisation: detail

6. ferien, herien

   ModE ferry and herry obs. (to praise) are the exceptions to the normal development of class II weak verbs in the East Midland dialect and on to ModE, in which the <i> of the class II ending is lost throughout the paradigm. Rather, the <i> is extended throughout the paradigm.

   Thus OE ferian feret` ferode > ferien feriet` feriede > ferry ferries ferried, which contrasts with OE lufian lufet` lufode > lufen lufet` lufede > love loves loved.

   herien (to praise) qualifies as an additional eME form through ModE herry obs. and the pre-1250 forms AW heried` pr sg3, and Lmn herey`ede pt sg3. Principle 3 extends the <i> throughout the paradigm, while principle 4 extends the pattern to ferien (which exhibits the same tendency later in ME). See more at simplification of verb paradigms.

7. syncope in the preterite of class II weak verbs

   Syncope (or dropping) of the unstressed vowel in the preterite suffix was common in OE weak verbs. The exception was the class II group of weak verbs, where it was effectively proscribed. This distinction falls away in eME when syncope appears in the preterite of reflexes of class II weak verbs. For example, OE behofode, leornode and lufode become bihofde, lernde and lufde in AW, Orm and Lmn respectively. Other pre-1250 examples are andswarde, onswerde from OE andswerian.

   This pattern - the syncope of the unstressed vowel, can be spread via principle 4 to the preterites of all reflexes of weak class II verbs in the core grammar, thus merging all weak verbs into a single class. Alternatively we can involve definition 6, according to which, Orm's lernde countermands the compulsory retention of the unstressed vowel in reflexes of weak class II preterites, thus excluding that rule from the core eME grammar. See more at a single class of weak verbs.

back to top

borderline cases

A few of the cases above don't quite meet the stipulations or intent of principles 3 & 4 as firmly as their companions. These are listed below, together with a brief description of the reason for their borderline status.

For example, while all the following involve closely related words with shared characteristics, can we talk of a 'group' in the first two cases? Do two or three items constitute a group? Perhaps not. And the fourth case is an outlier in that the assimilation it describes doesn't survive to ModE.

Some may prefer to turn to the optional grammar in the following cases.

1. hwenen, t`enen, henen - do three constitute a group?
2. ferien, herien - do two constitute a group? There is also some doubt about the pre-1250 support for herien.
3. syncope in the preterite of class II weak verbs - are five verbs enough to justify extending a pattern to an entire class? More investigation of relevant MED quotations is needed.
4. stem alternation in strong contracted verbs - insertion of <g/y`> at the end of the stem in the inf, pr sg1 and pr pl i.a. is largely reversed in later ME.
5. dual pronouns - PC2 isn't a reliable indicator of the usage of dual pronouns since it uses 3rd person forms exclusively.

back to top