A s t u d y of a n a l o g i c a l change!
vowel a l t e r n a t i o n i n t he verb i n t h e Low German and Dutch d i a l e c t s
J u d i t h Mary K n o tt
T hes i s s u b m i t t e d f o r t h e degree of Ph.D.
School of O r i e n t a l and A f r i c a n S t u d i e s U n i v e r s i t y of London
ProQuest Number: 10672634
All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The qu ality of this repro d u ctio n is d e p e n d e n t upon the q u ality of the copy subm itted.
In the unlikely e v e n t that the a u th o r did not send a c o m p le te m anuscript and there are missing pages, these will be note d . Also, if m aterial had to be rem oved,
a n o te will in d ica te the deletion.
uest
ProQuest 10672634
Published by ProQuest LLC(2017). C op yrig ht of the Dissertation is held by the Author.
All rights reserved.
This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States C o d e M icroform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 4 8 1 0 6 - 1346
A b s t r a c t
The purpose of t h e t h e s i s i s t o i d e n t i f y t he a n a l o g i c a l changes which have o c c ur r e d w i t h i n a l a r g e body of d a t a , and t o reduce t he se changes t o a sma ll number of t y p e s . E q u a l l y i m p o r t a n t l y , c e r t a i n c o n c e i v a b l e t y p e s of change which do not occur w i l l be s p e c i f i e d . To t h i s end, t he t h e s i s i n v e s t i g a t e s t h e h i s t o r y of v a r i o u s t y p e s of a l t e r n a t i o n
a f f e c t i n g t h e r o o t vowels of v er bs i n t he Low German, Dutch and Fl emish d i a l e c t s ( u s i n g d at a c o l l e c t e d from grammars of a p p r o x i m a t e l y 80 such d i a l e c t s ) . P a r t i c u l a r a t t e n t i o n i s pai d t o t h e l e v e l l i n g of
a l t e r n a t i o n s and t h e re p la ce me n t of one a l t e r n a t i o n by a n o t h e r . The f i r s t t h r e e c h a p t e r s deal w i t h c e r t a i n i m p o r t a n t
p r e l i m i n a r i e s . Chapter 1 c o n t a i n s an i n t r o d u c t i o n t o t h e d a t a , f o l l o w e d by a b r i e f a ccount of t h e methodol ogy employed, and t h e aims of the t h e s i s . Chapter 2 d i s c u s s e s markedness t h e o r y , and i t s r e l e v a n c e t o a n a l o g i c a l change. Chapter 3 d e a l s w i t h as pe ct s of t h e h i s t o r i c a l phonol ogy of t h e d i a l e c t s , from P r ot o- Ge rma ni c onwards, which are i m p o r t a n t f o r t h e subsequent d i s c u s s i o n of t he a l t e r n a t i o n s .
The n ex t t h r e e c h a p t e r s are each devoted t o one of t he t y p e s of a l t e r n a t i o n . In c h a p t e r 4 t he h i s t o r y of t he a b l a u t a l t e r n a t i o n s i s examined, from Pre-OS t o t h e modern d i a l e c t s . Chapter 5 d e a l s w i t h t h e
" e j - r a i s i n g " and umlaut a l t e r n a t i o n s ; and c h a p t e r 6 t r a c e s t he development of a l t e r n a t i o n s i n vowel l e n g t h .
In t h e f i n a l two c h a p t e r s , c o n c l u s i o n s are drawn from the p r e ce d i n g d i s c u s s i o n . Chapter 7 b r i e f l y c o n s i d e r s t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t he d i f f e r e n t t y p e s of a l t e r n a t i o n s , and t he r e l a t i o n s h i p s between them. In c h a p t e r 8, an a n a l y s i s , of t he a n a l o g i c a l changes observed i n t he dat a i s a t t e m p t e d . W i t h i n t h e two broad c a t e g o r i e s of
i n t e r p a r a d i g m a t i c and i n t r a p a r a d i g m a t i c change, v a r i o u s t y p e s of change are i s o l a t e d , t h e i r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c f e a t u r e s are i d e n t i f i e d , and t h e i r m o t i v a t i o n i s d i s c u s s e d .
3
Co nt en ts
Acknowledgements 6
P a r t ones P r e l i m i n a r i e s 7
Chapter is I n t r o d u c t i o n 8
1. 1 Data B
1.2 Methodol ogy 13
1.3 Aims 16
Notes t o c h a p t e r 1 17
Chapter 2s Markedness IB
2.1 Markedness c r i t e r i a 18
2 . 2 D i a c h r o n i c m a n i f e s t a t i o n s of markedness r e l a t i o n s 29
Notes t o c h a p t e r 2 33
Chapter 3: H i s t o r i c a l phonol ogy 35
3.1 PBmc 35
3 .2 OS 37
3 .3 Umlaut 38
3 .4 Vowel l e n g t h e n i n g / s h o r t e n i n g 40
3 .5 Other changes 41
Notes t o c h a p t e r 3 45
P a r t twos The a l t e r n a t i o n s 47
Chapter 4s A b l a u t 48
4.1 Pre-OS 48
4 .2 OS 54
4 .3 MLG 55
4 .4 MDu 59
4.5 The modern d i a l e c t s 63
4 . 5 . 1 The p r e t e r i t e i n d i c a t i v e (B and C) a l t e r n a n t s 64 4 . 5 . 2 The p as t p a r t i c i p l e (D) a l t e r n a n t 138
Notes t o c h a p t e r 4 146
Chapter 5s E - r a i s i n g and uml aut 151
5.1 The e - r a i s i n g and umlaut a l t e r n a t i o n s in t h e p r e s e n t
t en se of s t r o n g ve rb s 151
5 . 1 . 1 OS 151
5 . 1 . 2 MLG 153
5 . 1 . 3 MDu 156
5 . 1 . 4 The modern d i a l e c t s 157
5.2 The uml aut a l t e r n a t i o n in t he p r e t e r i t e of s t r o n g
v er bs 168
5 . 2 . 1 From OS t o MLG 168
5 . 2 . 2 The modern d i a l e c t s 169
5 .3 The " R u c k u m l a u t " a l t e r n a t i o n i n c e r t a i n t y p e s of
weak verb 175
5 . 3 . 1 From PGmc t o OS 175
5 . 3 . 2 MLG 182
5 . 3 . 3 MDu 186
5 . 3 . 4 The modern d i a l e c t s 190
Notes t o c h a p t e r 5 203
Chapter 6s Vowel l e n g t h 204
6.1 MLB 204
6 . 2 MDu 207
6.3 The modern d i a l e c t s 208
Notes t o c h a p t e r 6 219
P a r t t h r e e : C o n c l u s i o n s 221
Chapter 7s C o n c l u s i o n s on t h e a l t e r n a t i o n s 222 7.1 The r e l a t i v e s t r e n g t h of t h e a l t e r n a t i o n s 222 7.2 C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of major v e r su s minor - f o rma ti ons
w i t h r e s p e c t t o t he a l t e r n a t i o n s 225
Notes t o c h a p t e r 7 228
Chapter 8: C o n c l u s i o n s on a n a l o g i c a l change 229
8.1 The movement of v er bs between major and minor
f o r m a t i o n s 229
8 . 2 Other a n a l o g i c a l changes 236
8 . 2 . 1 I n t e r p a r a d i g m a t i c 236
8 . 2 . 2 — I n t r a p a r a d i g m a t i c 263
8 .3 F i n a l comments 271
Notes t o c h a p t e r 8 274
Appendi x: Index of v er bs 279
A St rong v e r b s 280
S trong v er bs by c l a s s 300
B Verbs b e l o n g i n g t o minor weak c o n j u g a t i o n s i n
t h e modern d i a l e c t s 302
B i b l i o g r a p h y A D i a l e c t grammars 309
B Other works 314
Maos
The l o c a t i o n s of t he d i a l e c t s 9
D i a l e c t areas menti oned i n t he t e x t 12
The merger of e and i_, □ and u. i n open s y l l a b l e s 43
The merger of #ej_ and *ai_, *qjl and #au_ 44
Class I 67
Cl ass I I 70
The merger of #au_ and * o: i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e spread of * o:
t h r o u g h o u t t h e p r e t e r i t e of c l a s s I I 72
Class I I - uml aut 74
Class 111 (a) 79
Class I I I <a) -- uml aut 81
Class I I H b i ) 83
Cl ass I I H b l > - uml aut 86
5
Class I I I ( b2) 87
Cl ass I I I ( b2) ~ uml aut 91
Class I V / V d ) 96
Class I V / V t l ) - uml aut 102
Class I V / V (2) 109
The r e l a t i o n s h i p between c l a s s I V/V (2) and c l a s s e s I I and VI 110
Class IV/V<2) - uml aut 114
Class VI 117
Class VI - umlaut 120
WAHS and WASK 123
Class V I I (2) 131
The d i s t r i b u t i o n of t h e B and C a l t e r n a n t s among f or ms 137 The vowel u. i n t he p as t p a r t i c i p l e of c l a s s e s
l l l t b l ) and I I I ( b 2 ) 139
Other phenomena a f f e c t i n g t h e p as t p a r t i c i p l e 142
Tabl es
L i s t of d i a l e c t s and grammars 10
cont d 11
Class V I I (1) 127
cont d 128
> sound change
>> a n a l o g i c a l change
— > s y n c h r o n i c d e r i v a t i o n
The symbol e_ ( I t a l i c e) w i l l be used f o r <>, except when i t i s necessary t o d i s t i n g u i s h i t c l e a r l y from e..
S i m i l a r l y , a, ( I t a l i c a.) w i l l be used f o r
V.
Acknowledoements
I would l i k e t o ex pr es s ray g r a t i t u d e t o a number o f p eo p le f o r t h e i r c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o t h i s t h e s i s , My t ha n ks must f i r s t go t o my s u p e r v i s o r , Thea Bynon. She has been a c o n s t a n t source of encouragement and a d vi c e d u r i n g t he p as t f o u r y e a r s , and w i l l r e c o g n i s e many of her own
s u g g e s t i o n s i n t h e t h e s i s ,
I would a l s o l i k e t o t hank o t h e r members of t he Department of P h o n e t i c s and L i n g u i s t i c s at SQAS, both s t a f f and f e l 1o w - s t u d e n t s . I have b e n e f i t e d g r e a t l y from t h e o p p o r t u n i t y of d i s c u s s i n g i d e a s w i t h them, and from t h e s t i m u l a t i n g and f r i e n d l y atmosphere w i t h i n t he
Depart ment . I mi ght menti on i n p a r t i c u l a r s Dave B e n n e t t , Kate B u r r i d g e , E r i c B 1 o v e r , Di ck Hayward, Baz McKee, K a t r i n a Mi ck ey , P r o f e s s o r R.H.
R obi ns , and Andy Spencer ( o f CSSD); but t h i s l i s t i s by no means e x h a u s t i v e .
I was f o r t u n a t e t o be a b l e t o v i s i t t he P o r s c h u n g s i n s t i t u t f Hr Deutsche Sprache ( Deut sc her B p r a c h a t l a s ) i n Marburg i n t h e summer Df
1983, t o c o n s u l t m a t e r i a l which was u n a v a i l a b l e i n Engl and, i n c l u d i n g u n p u b l i s h e d d i s s e r t a t i o n s . I v e r y much a p p r e c i a t e d t h e warm welcome and hel p which I r e c e i v e d from t he s t a f f of t h e i n s t i t u t e , and would l i k e t o t hank them a l l .
I a l s o wish t o acknowledge t h e D E S / B r i t i s h Academy Major S t a t e S t u d e n t s h i p which I r e c e i v e d f o r t h r e e y e a r s , and t h e e x t r a f unds the DES p r o v i d e d f o r my v i s i t t o Germany.
F i n a l l y , I must t hank my husband Simon; w i t h o u t h i s p a t i e n t and e n t h u s i a s t i c s u p p o r t , I would not have completed t h i s t h e s i s .
7
P a r t ones
P r e l i m i n a r i es
I I n t r o d u c t i o n
1. 1 Data The d a t a on which t h i s study i s based have been c o l l e c t e d from grammars of a p p r o x i m a t e l y BO Low Berman and D u t c h / F l e m i s h d i a l e c t s ! The d i a l e c t s a r e s i t u a t e d m a i n l y i n Nor t h Germany, t h e N e t h e r l a n d s , and Belgium* but f o r m e r l y German-speaki ng ar e a s of Poland a r e i n c l u d e d , as a r e two d i a l e c t s spoken i n German c o l o n i e s i n t h e S o v i e t Uni on. The map on p . 9 shows t h e l o c a t i o n s of t h e d i a l e c t s , and t he l i s t on p p . 10 and I I g i v e s d e t a i l s of t h e grammars used. Most of t h e grammars were w r i t t e n i n t h e l a t e 19th and e a r l y 20t h c e n t u r y , and many of t he
d i a l e c t s may s i n c e have d i e d o u t . They w i l l , however, be r e f e r r e d t o as
" t h e modern d i a l e c t s " t h r o u g h o u t , t o d i s t i n g u i s h them from o l d e r s t a g e s , t o which r e f e r e n c e w i l l a l s o be made: Old Saxon ( OS) , M i d d l e Low German
(MLG) and M i d d l e Dutch (MDu). 2
Me w i l l f r e q u e n t l y a l s o use br oa de r t erms t o r e f e r t o l a r g e r a r ea s than i n d i v i d u a l d i a l e c t s . The a p p r ox i ma t e l o c a t i o n s of t h e ar eas d e s i g n a t e d by such t er ms a r e i l l u s t r a t e d on t h e map on p. 12. I t should be emphasised t h a t an e x a c t d i v i s i o n of t he d i a l e c t s i n t o groups i s not i n t e n d e d , and t h a t t h e r e i s some o v e r l a p between t h e a r e a s .
There a r e two t r a d i t i o n a l t y p e s of ver bs i n t h e s e d i a l e c t s , as i n a l l Germanic l a n g u a g e s : weak and s t r o n g . They a r e p r i n c i p a l l y d i s t i n g u i s h e d by t h e f a c t t h a t in t he f or mer t he p r e t e r i t e and past p a r t i c i p l e a r e formed by t h e a d d i t i o n of a d e n t a l s u f f i x t o t h e r o o t * whereas i n t he l a t t e r t h e y a r e formed by vowel change. Only t h e d e n t a l s u f f i x of t h e weak ve r b s may s e r v e as a d i a g n o s t i c , however, because some weak v e r b s a l s o show r o o t - v o w e l a l t e r n a t i o n . In some of t h e modern Low German d i a l e c t s , t h e d e n t a l s u f f i x of t h e weak v e r bs has been l o s t i n t h e p r e t e r i t e * but i n t h e s e cases i t i s r e t a i n e d i n t h e past
p a r t i c i p l e , so t h a t t h e two t y p e s of ve r bs can s t i l l be r e a d i l y d i s t i n g u i s h e d .
I n a d d i t i o n , t h e weak v er bs may be d i v i d e d i n t o what we s h a l l c a l l "maj or " and "mi nor" t y p e s . These terms cor r espond a p p r o x i m a t e l y t o t h e more usual t erms " p r o d u c t i v e " and " u n p r o d u c t i v e " r e s p e c t i v e l y * but
9
-t->co o
CD
•H T3
<D X4->
o
CO£ o
• H4->
cdo o
CD
CO +->
o
<d
■a O
•H -P T3
T3
*b0 d
£ ■d
£ o •H
• H £
CO CD
CO 0) -P
•H u ca
s CD e
- 3
-P (1) *-- - £
si CM CD
-p LA •H O T3 •H
o
a
03c*h
co £
1N- CO 3 *— £
i •H
e ••
ca KN £
£ •H
bO OS
»• -P CD CM £
Si r - O
Eh o
L i s t of d i a l e c t s and grammars 1. A l t a i - G e b i e t a J e d i g 1966 2. C h o r t i t z a : Q u i r i n g 1928 3. B i e b e r s t e i n a Tessmann 1966
4. N o r t h - E a s t Qstpreussens Natau 1937 5. K o s c h n e i d e r e i a Semrau 1913
6. Lauenberga P i r k 1928 7. Schlawea Mahnke 1931
8. Rummelsburg-Biltow: tl i schke 1936 9. B u b l i t z : T i t a 1965
10. S aa t zi g- Dr amb u r ga Kuhl 1932
11. Neumark (Loppow)a T e u c h e r t 1 9 0 7 / 8 14. Stavenhagena Grimme 1910
15. Mecklenburga Ner ger 1869
16. P r i g n i t z <Boberaw)a Mackel 1905- 7 18. Nor th- We s t Jeri chowa Krause 1 8 9 9 / 1 9 0 0
19. South Jeri chowa Krause 1896 20. Hagdeburga Krause 1895 21. E i l s d o r f a Block 1910
22. D i n g e l s t e d t (Huyraundart) a H i l l e 1939 23. G od de c k e n r o de / I s i n g e r o d e a Lange 1963 24. Neuendor-Fa Schut ze 1953
25. D o r s t e : Da hl be r g 1937 26. Lessea L o F s t e d t 1933 2 7 . Kalenberga Mehlem 1944
28. Ravensberga J e l l i n g h a u s 1885 29. Eggea K l e i n n 1942
30. Rhodena M a r t i n 1925
31. Assinghausena Grimme 1910 32. G u t er sl oh a Wix 1921
33. Soesta H d t h a u s e n 1886 34. Qstbeverna Grimme 1910 35. Dorstena P i c k e r t 1 9 08 / 9 36. Mulheima Maurmann 1898 37. V e l b e r t a Bredtmann 1938 38. Ronsdorfa H o l t h a u s 1887 39. Llldenscheida F r e b e l 1957
40. Wermel ski rchena H a s e n c l e v e r 1904 41. Remscheida H o l t ha u s e n 1885
42. K r e f e l d a R o t t s c h e s 1875 43. Roermonda Kat s 1939 44. He e r l e a Jongeneel 1884 45. Montzena W e l t e r 1933 46. Eupena W e l t e r 1929 47. Limburga Mer te ns 1883
48. Kempenland ( Q e r l e ) i de Bont 1962 49. Aarschota Pauwels 1958
50. Br ussel sa M a z er ee l 1931
5 1. Z u i d o o s t v l a a n d e r e n a T e i r l i n c k 1924
11
53. W e s t v l a a n d e r e m V e r c o u i l l i e 1835 5 4 . Antwerp! Smout 1905
55. Schouwen- Dui vel and! de Vi n 1953 5 6 . O v e r f l a k k e e i Landheer 1951 57. O u d- B e i er l a n ds Opprel 1896 58. Culemborgi Ausems 1953
5 9 . W a t e r l a n d ! van Ginneken 1954 60. D r e c h t e r l a n d * Ka r st en 1931 61. B a r n e v e l d : van S c h o t h o r s t 1904 62. Grave: Jacob 1937
63. E l t e n - B e r g h : B r u j e l 1901
64. Vorden ( O v e r i j s s e l ) s S a l l e e 1895 65. Goor: Wanink 1948
66. Enschede: Bezoen 1938 67. Kampen: Gunnink 1908 68. Ruinen: Sassen 1953
69. V e e n k o l o n i e n : S c h u r i ng a 1923 70. L at he n : Sctub'nhoff 1908
71. South Emsland ( L i n g e n ) i B o r c h e r t 1955 72. L a v e l s l o h ( D i e p e n a u ) ; Schmeding 1938 73. Baden ( V e r d e n ) i Feyer 1941
74. Bremen! Bunning 1 9 3 4 / 5 , Heymann 1909 75. Ammerland: Feyer 1939
76. F r i e s i s c h e Wede: Feyer 1939 77. G l t i c k s t a d t : B e r n h a r d t 1 8 9 2 / 4
78. H ei de : Grimme 1910, Jorgensen 1 9 28 / 9 79. Husby: Bock 1933
8 0 . O s t h o l s t e i n ( Tr a v emi i nde ) : Piihn 1956 81. Lauenburg: He i g e n e r 1937
Dialectareasmentionedinthetext
T 3
s i n c e t h e d i a l e c t grammars -Fr equent l y do not e x p l i c i t l y s t a t e whet her a p a r t i c u l a r f o r m a t i o n i s p r o d u c t i v e or n o t , we have a voi ded t h i s t er m. 3
We may d e f i n e t h e maj or t y p e w i t h i n a d i a l e c t as t h e c o n j u g a t i o n which a p p l i e s most g e n e r a l l y w i t h i n a d i a l e c t , perhaps w i t h p h o n o l o g i c a l l y 4
c o n d i t i o n e d v a r i a n t s . A minor t y p e , on t h e o t h e r hand, i s one which a p p l i e s t o a s e t of v e r b s which must be l i s t e d ; t h e r e a r e u s u a l l y s e v e r a l minor weak t y p e s w i t h i n a d i a l e c t .
In summary, t h e r e a r e t h r e e t y p e s of verbs found i n a l l t he di a l e c t s : ^
| major
J
minor--- ---{ ... - I ...
weak | ! x | x
... -
Note t h a t t h e d e f i n i t i o n of a minor t y p e a l s o cove r s t h e s t r on g v e r bs:
f o r each d i a l e c t , t h e s t r on g v er bs a r e a c l osed g ro u p , which may be l i s t e d ; and h i s t o r i c a l l y s p e a k i n g , t h e r e have been o n l y a few cases of f or me r weak v e r b s j o i n i n g t h e s t r o n g c l a s s , whereas t h e o p p o s i t e
d i r e c t i o n of movement i s q u i t e common.
We have r e s t r i c t e d o u r s e l v e s t o a l t e r n a t i o n s i n v o l v i n g t h e r o o t vowel s of v e r b s . S i n ce vowel a l t e r n a t i o n i s such an i m p o r t a n t f e a t u r e of t h e s t r on g v e r b s , t h e main emphasis w i l l o b v i o u s l y be on them.
However, as we ment i oned above, weak ver bs may a l s o show some vowel a l t e r n a t i o n . I n d e e d , t h e minor t y p e s of weak ver b al ways show a l t e r n a t i o n i n t h e r o o t vo we l , and t h e s e ver bs a r e p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t e r e s t i n g i n t h a t we can obser ve a l t e r n a t i o n s a c t u a l l y d e v e l o p i n g d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d f o r which we have t e x t u a l e v i d e n c e .
1 . 2 Methodology We s h a l l c o n c e n t r a t e t h r o u g h o u t on a l t e r n a t i o n s between s u r f a c e f o r m s , r a t h e r t han on t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n of a b s t r a c t u n d e r l y i n g forms from which t h e s u r f a c e forms may be d e r i v e d . I t i s i n t e n d e d t h a t t h e d e s c r i p t i o n of t h e changes w i l l be n e u t r a l w i t h r e s p e c t t o any p a r t i c u l a r t h e o r e t i c a l model. The f i n d i n g s c o u l d ,
p e r h a p s , s e r v e as a b a s i s f o r f u t u r e a n a l y s e s w i t h i n a more a b s t r a c t f r a m e w o r k .
Qur main f o c u s of a t t e n t i o n w i l l be t h e t y p e of change
t r a d i t i o n a l l y known as " a n a l o g i c a l change". Andersen ( 1 9 8 0 ) r e j e c t s t h i s t erm on t h e grounds t h a t i t i s t oo g e n e r a l , and r e p l a c e s i t wi t h
"morphophonemic c h a n g e " , which he d e f i n e s as "a change i n t he r e l a t i o n s among v a r i a n t s of s i g n a n t i a " ( t h a t i s , among a l l o m o r p h s ) . T h i s cover s most of t h e changes t h a t would t r a d i t i o n a l l y be c l a s s e d as a n a l o g i c a l . Bybee ( 1 9 80 ) f o l l o w s Andersen in r e p l a c i n g " a n a l o g i c a l " by
"morphophonemic". However, t he new usage has some d i s a d v a n t a g e s . F i r s t l y , i t i s c l o s e l y t i e d t o A n d e r s e n ' s p h i l o s o p h y of t h e s i g n ; and s e c o n d l y , c o n f u s i o n might a r i s e because t he term "morphophonemic" has a l s o been used i n o t h e r senses, ( c f . , f o r exampl e, Matthews 1974, p.
1 9 8 ) , compared t o which Ande r se n' s d e f i n i t i o n i s r a t h e r wi de. We have t h e r e f o r e r e t a i n e d t h e t r a d i t i o n a l term " a n a l o g i c a l change".
In o r d e r t o escape A n d er se n ' s charge t h a t t h i s t erm i s too
g e n e r a l , we must a t t e m p t t o make i t more p r e c i s e . The f o l l o w i n g worki ng d e f i n i t i o n w i l l be adopt ed: an a n a l o g i c a l change i s one i n which a form becomes more s i m i l a r t o a n o t h e r , m o r p h o l o g i c a l l y r e l a t e d form or forms;
t h e forms may be m o p h o l o g i c a l l y r e l a t e d e i t h e r because t h e y are members of t h e same p a r ad i g m , or because t he y e x p r es s t he same gr ammat i cal c a t e g o r y or s e t of c a t e g o r i e s . T h i s w i l l be expanded bel ow. I t should be p o i n t e d out t h a t as i t s t a n d s , t h i s d e f i n i t i o n of a n al ogy suggests t h a t t h e i n t e r a c t i o n al ways occurs between t h e forms of i n d i v i d u a l
l e x i c a l i t e m s . In f a c t , i t w i l l emerge t h a t many of t h e changes t h a t we a r e c o n s i d e r i n g a r e r a t h e r more s y s t e m a t i c t han t h i s would i m p l y . They a f f e c t whole groups of ver bs ( l e a v i n g a s i d e h i g h l y f r e q u e n t l e x i c a l i t e m s ) , bound t o g e t h e r by t he f a c t t h a t t h e i r par adi gms a r e formed i n a s i m i l a r way ( f o r exampl e, t hey share t h e same s e t of r o o t - v o w e l
al t e r n a n t s ) .
The f i r s t p a r t of t h e d e f i n i t i o n d e a l s w i t h i n t r a p a r a d i g m a t i c change; t h i s i n v o l v e s t h e l e v e l l i n g of a l t e r n a t i o n s w i t h i n paradi gms.
The p a r t i c u l a r a l t e r n a t i o n s w i t h which we s h a l l be concerned a r e t hose
15
i n v o l v i n g r o o t vowel s w i t h i n t h e paradigms of v e r b s . The second p a r t c or r esponds t o i n t e r p a r a d i g m a t i c change) a g a i n , we s h a l l be 6
c o n c e n t r a t i n g on changes i n v o l v i n g t h e r o o t vowel s of v e r b s . Some of t h e s e changes can be d e s c r i b e d i n p r o p o r t i o n a l t erms (Paul 1 9 7 0 ) ; but we s h a l l a l s o e n c o un te r ' ' n o n - p r o p o r t i o n a l ' ' i n t e r p a r a d i g m a t i c changes, which do not f i t t h i s m o d e l .
The p r o p o r t i o n a l model has been c r i t i c i s e d by K i p a r s k y ( 1974) on t h e grounds t h a t i t i s both t oo weak ( i t cannot account f o r a l l cases of anal ogy) and t oo s t r o n g ( i t cannot d i s t i n g u i s h absurd p r o p o r t i o n s from those t h a t coul d d e f i n e a p o t e n t i a l a n a l o g i c a l c h a n g e ) . Si n c e we are not c l a i m i n g t h a t a l l cases of a n al ogy a r e p r o p o r t i o n a l , t he f i r s t c r i t i c i s m cannot a p p l y t o our use of t he t e r m . The second c r i t i c i s m depends on t h e p r o p o r t i o n a l model bei ng c o n cei ved of as a r e l a t i o n s h i p between forms of i n d i v i d u a l l e x i c a l i t e m s , i n i s o l a t i o n from t h e i r mo r p h o l o g i c a l f u n c t i o n . However, we s h a l l use t h e t erm " p r o p o r t i o n a l change" s i m p l y of changes which i t i s p o s s i b l e t o d e s c r i b e in
p r o p o r t i o n a l t e r m s , as opposed t o ones which i t i s not p o s s i b l e t o d e s c r i b e i n t h e s e t e r m s . The d i s t i n c t i o n p r o p o r t i o n a l / n o n - p r o p o r t i o n a l i s a c o n v e n i e n t way of d i v i d i n g up changes a c c o r d i n g t o t h e n a t u r e of t h e i n t e r a c t i o n between t h e groups of v e r b s . In p r o p o r t i o n a l change, t h e two i n t e r a c t i n g s e t s of ver bs a l r e a d y s har e an a l t e r n a n t i n common f o r some m o r p h o l o g i c a l c a t e g o r y or s e t of c a t e g o r i e s ) in
n o n - p r o p o r t i o n a l change, t he y do n o t . The t erm p r o p o r t i o n a l , t h e n , should not be t a k en t o i mp l y t h a t t he change me r el y i n v o l v e s an
i n t e r a c t i o n between two i n d i v i d u a l l e x i c a l i t e m s , nor between forms i n i s o l a t i o n from t h e i r m o r p h o l o g i c a l f u n c t i o n . R a t h e r , p a r t i c u l a r l e x i c a l i t ems a r e c on ce i v e d of as r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s of t h e group t o which t hey bel ong) and p a r t i c u l a r forms should be under st ood i n r e l a t i o n t o t he m o r p ho l o gi c a l c a t e g o r i e s which t h e y e x p r e s s .
At l e a s t some of t h e a n a l o g i c a l changes e n c o un te r e d could
perhaps be e xpr ess ed i n t erms of r u l e s i m p l i f i c a t i o n and r e o r d e r i n g ( c f . K i pa r s k y ( 1 9 6 8 ) ) . T h i s t r e a t m e n t i s , of c o u r s e , r u l e d out h e r e , because i t would r e q u i r e a more a b s t r a c t approach t o t h e phonology t han t h a t
which we have adopted h e r e . M o r e o ve r , t h e r e are a l s o t h e o r e t i c a l o b j e c t i o n s t o t h i s ki nd of a n a l y s i s ; f o r exampl e, i t obscures t h e c r u c i a l r o l e p l a y e d by t h e m o r p h o l o g i c a l f u n c t i o n of t he forms u nder goi ng a n a l o g i c a l change.
1 . 3 Aims An a t t e m p t w i l l be made t o a n a l y s e t h e a n a l o g i c a l changes t h a t t a k e p l a c e as u n i f o r m l y as p o s s i b l e , and t o r educe them t o a smal l number of t y p e s . E q u a l l y i m p o r t a n t l y , some p o t e n t i a l t y p e s of change t h a t do not i n f a c t occur w i l l be s p e c i f i e d . The sample of d a t a on which t h e st u d y i s based i s , I f e e l , s u f f i c i e n t l y l a r g e f o r such o b s e r v a t i o n s t o be of s i g n i f i c a n c e . In a d d i t i o n , i t seems t o be a u s e f u l e x e r c i s e t o a n a l y s e a l l t h e changes w i t h i n a g i v en domain, r a t h e r t han s e l e c t i n g i s o l a t e d examples i n sup p o r t of a p a r t i c u l a r t h e o r y . A secondary aim w i l l be t o i n v e s t i g a t e whether t he d i a c h r o n i c d a t a shed any l i g h t on t h e s y n ch r o n i c o r g a n i s a t i o n of morphology. T h i s , of c o u r s e , assumes t h a t l i n g u i s t i c change i s a p o t e n t i a l "window" on t h e s y n c h r o n i c s t r u c t u r e of language ( c f . K i p a r s k y 1 9 6 8 ) . As advocated by K i p a r s k y more r e c e n t l y ( 1 9 8 0 , 1 9 8 2 a ) , however, c a u t i o n w i l l be e x e r c i s e d i n e x p l o i t i n g t h e d i a c h r o n i c d a t a i n t h i s way.
V
Notes t o c h a p t e r 1
1. The b i b l i o g r a p h y of d i a l e c t grammars i n Panzer and Thummel ( 1971) was an i n v a l u a b l e a i d .
2. Data f o r t h e o l d e r s t a g es w i l l g e n e r a l l y be t a k e n from t h e f o l l o w i n g grammars* f o r OS, H o l th a u s e n 1921; f o r MLS, Lasch 1914; and f o r MDu, Franck 1910.
3. We have a l s o a v o i de d t h e t erms " r e g u l a r " and " i r r e g u l a r " , s i n c e t h e y ar e p o t e n t i a l l y ambiguous. " R e g u l ar " i s sometimes used t o mean " w i t h o u t a l t e r n a t i o n s " , and a t o t h e r t i me s t o mean a p p r o x i m a t e l y t h e same as our t erm " ma j o r " .
4. We may a l s o n o t e t h a t t h i s t y p e of c o n j u g a t i o n has a minimal amount of r o o t a l l o m o r p h y compared t o t he minor f o r m a t i o n s . We have n o t , however, t r e a t e d t h i s as a d e f i n i n g c h a r a c t e r i s t i c , but r a t h e r as an e m p i r i c a l o b s e r v a t i o n about t he major f o r m a t i o n ; see c h a p t e r 7.
5. The modal a u x i l i a r i e s , or s o - c a l l e d " p r e t e r i t e - p r e s e n t " v e r b s , whose p r e s e n t t e n s e d e r i v e s from an o l d s t r on g p r e t e r i t e f o r m a t i o n , but which have weak p r e t e r i t e and past p a r t i c i p l e f o r ms , a r e not i n c l u d e d i n t h i s s t u d y .
6. T h i s c o v e r s cases of a n a l o g i c a l e x t e n s i o n ; c f . t h e d i s c u s s i o n of t he e x t e n s i o n of uml aut ed p l u r a l s i n German by Bynon <1977, p . 3 8 ) * " Th i s has r e s u l t e d i n an i n c r e a s e i n u n i f o r m i t y i n so f a r as p l u r a l f o r m a t i o n i s concerned but a l s o an i n c r e a s e i n t h e f re qu en cy of a l t e r n a t i o n in t h e l e x i c o n " . We a r e c o n c e n t r a t i n g on t h e f or mer a s p e c t : i n t e r p a r a d i g m a t i c change as an i n c r e a s e i n u n i f o r m i t y i n t he f o r m a t i o n of a p a r t i c u l a r c a t e g o r y . T h i s a l l o w s us t o i n c l u d e n o n - p r o p o r t i o n a l i n t e r p a r a d i g m a t i c change* t h a t i s , t h e e x t e n s i o n of a p a r t i c u l a r a l t e r n a n t t o o t h e r forms w i t h a s i m i l a r m o r p h o l o g i c a l f u n c t i o n , w i t h o u t r e f e r e n c e t o o t h e r
a l t e r n a n t s w i t h i n t h e par adi gm. N o n - p r o p o r t i o n a l change cannot be d e s c r i b e d as t h e e x t e n s i o n of an a l t e r n a t i o n , s i n c e by d e f i n i t i o n an a l t e r n a t i o n i n v o l v e s a r e l a t i o n s h i p between two a l t e r n a n t s w i t h i n a par adi gm. In s c h e ma t ic t e r m s , n o n - p r o p o r t i o n a l change does not i n v o l v e t h e e x t e n s i o n of a r e l a t i o n s h i p x - y, but r a t h e r t h e e x t e n s i o n of y, i r r e s p e c t i v e of x.
2 Markedness
2 . 1 Markedness c r i t e r i a Ther e i s e v i d e n c e t h a t m o r p h o l o g i c a l
c a t e g o r i e s (such as s i n g u l a r , p l u r a l ) a r e a r r a nge d h i e r a r c h i c a l l y w i t h i n t h e i r c o n t a i n i n g c a t e g o r y (such as number). (When n e c e s s a ry we w i l l d i s t i n g u i s h between c a t e g o r i e s such as s i n g u l a r and p l u r a l and
c o n t a i n i n g c a t e g o r i e s such as number by r e f e r r i n g t o t h e l a t t e r as
" p a r a m e t e r s 1') . There a r e v a r i o u s c r i t e r i a a c c o r d i ng t o which t h i s h i e r a r c h y may be d e t e r m i n e d . However, as p a i n t e d out by Greenberg
( 1 9 6 6 ) , t h e c r i t e r i a t end t o converge on p a r t i c u l a r c a t e g o r i e s c r o s s - l i n g u i s t i c a l l y . That i s , w i t h i n a p a r t i c u l a r p a r a m e t e r , t h e c r i t e r i a tend t o s e l e c t t h e same c a t e g o r y i n d i f f e r e n t languages as more " b a s i c " , or " u n m a r k e d " . * I n d e e d , i t i s t h i s convergence which a l l o w s us t o r e g a r d m o r p h o l o g i c a l markedness as an e m p i r i c a l phenomenon.
Both Jakobson ( 1 9 3 9) and H j e l m s l e v ( 1953) have suggest ed s e t s of c r i t e r i a f o r d e t e r m i n i n g markedness r e l a t i o n s ; t h es e a r e summarised and 2
d i s c u ss e d by Greenberg ( 1 9 6 6 ) . We s h a l l d i s c u ss some of t h e s e c r i t e r i a , w i t h p a r t i c u l a r r e f e r e n c e t o t h e f o l l o w i n g c a t e g o r i e s which ar e r e l e v a n t t o t h e ve r b i n our d i a l e c t s :
Note t h a t t h e d i s t i n c t i o n between t h e i n d i c a t i v e and s u b j u n c t i v e
g e n e r a l l y s u r v i v e s o n l y i n t h e p r e t e r i t e , and has been l o s t even t h e r e i n many d i a l e c t s . Comments about t h e f r e q u e n cy and use of t h e s e
c a t e g o r i e s a r e based on a sample of Low German from t h r e e c h a p t e r s of R e u t e r ' s "Ut de F r a n z o s e n t i d " ( 1 8 5 9 ) . The t e x t c o n t a i n s a c o n s i d e r a b l e amount of d i r e c t speech, and t h i s was c o n s i d er e d s e p a r a t e l y from t h e n a r r a t i v e p o r t i o n s .
< i ) Ambiguous meaning of unmarked c a t e g o r y v e r s u s unambiguous meaning of marked c a t e g o r y
Jakobson g i v e s p r i o r i t y t o t h i s c r i t e r i o n ; f o r him i t i s t h e d e f i n i n g T e n s e / As p e c t
Mood
P r e s e n t , p r e t e r i t e , p e r f e c t I n d i c a t i v e , s u b j u n c t i v e S i n g u l a r , p l u r a l
1 s t , 2nd, 3rd Number
Person
19
c r i t e r i o n of markedness r e l a t i o n s . He s t a t e s t h e d e f i n i t i o n i n t he f o l l o w i n g ter ms ( 1 9 5 7 ) i "The g e n e r a l meaning of a marked c a t e g o r y s t a t e s t h e pr esence of a c e r t a i n p r o p e r t y As t h e g e ne r a l meaning of t he
c o r r e s p o n d i n g unmarked c a t e g o r y s t a t e s n o t h i n g about t h e presence of A and i s used c h i e f l y , but not e x c l u s i v e l y , t o i n d i c a t e t h e absence of A".
In o t h e r words, forms e x p r e s s i ng unmarked c a t e g o r i e s a r e ambiguous between a g e n e r a l and a s p e c i f i c meaning, whereas forms e x p r e s s i n g marked c a t e g o r i e s al ways have a s p e c i f i c meaning. Accor di ng t o
Greenberg ( 1 9 6 6 ) , t h i s i s e q u i v a l e n t t o H j e l m s l e v ' s ( 1953) c r i t e r i o n of
" f a c u l t a t i v e e x p r e s s i o n " of marked (or i n t e n s i v e ) c a t e g o r i e s ! a f f i x e s e x p r e s s i n g marked c a t e g o r i e s may in some l anguages be o p t i o n a l . He can see how t h i s c r i t e r i o n i s s i m i l a r t o Jakobson' s i f i t i s put i n t he f o l l o w i n g t e r m s . I f a language has an o p t i o n a l a f f i x a e x p r e s s i n g a p a r t i c u l a r p r o p e r t y A, t hen t he a f f i x l e s s form i s ambiguous between a g en e r a l meaning ( " e i t h e r t h e presence or t h e absence of A") and a
s p e c i f i c meaning ( " t h e absence of A " ) , whereas t h e form w i t h t h e a f f i x &
al ways e x p r e s s e s t h e pr es e n c e of t h e p r o p e r t y A. H j e l m s l e v i s c l a i m i n g t h a t c a t e g o r i e s e xpr ess ed by such o p t i o n a l a f f i x e s t end t o be marked (or
i n t e n s i v e ) ones.
J a k o b s o n ' s c r i t e r i o n , i n p a r t i c u l a r , may be a p p l i e d t o t he par ame t er of t e n s e i n our d i a l e c t s . In t h e sample of Low German from Reut er ( 1 8 5 9 ) , t h e p r e t e r i t e emerges as t h e main n a r r a t i v e t e n se ;
i n d e e d , t h i s seems t o be t h e p r i m a r y f u n c t i o n of t h e p r e t e r i t e (see t he f r e q u e n c y d a t a below; see a l s o L i n d g r e n 1 9 5 7 ) . However, t h i s f u n c t i o n i s not i n f r e q u e n t l y t a k e n over by t h e p r e s e n t t e n s e . Note t h a t t he p r e s e n t does not appear t o be f u l f i l l i n g any s p e c i a l f u n c t i o n h e r e , such as conveyi ng an i m p r e s s i o n of immediacy. I t i s s i mp l y s u b s t i t u t e d f o r t h e p r e t e r i t e i n c e r t a i n passages. One might s p e c u l a t e t h a t t h i s i s a c o l l o q u i a l usage which i n t r u d e s i n t o t h e w r i t t e n l anguage from t i m e t o t i m e . T h i s e x t e n s i o n of t h e p r e s e n t i n t o t h e domain of t h e p r e t e r i t e m i g h t , a c c o r d i n g t o J a k o b s o n ' s c r i t e r i o n , be t a k e n as e v i de n c e f o r t he unmarked s t a t u s of t h e p r e s e n t w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e p r e t e r i t e .
We may a l s o n o t e , w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e c a t e g o r y of p e r s o n , t h a t
Jakobson r e g a r d s t h e 3rd person as l e a s t marked, a c c o r d i n g t o t h i s
c r i t e r i o n (see a l s o B e n v e n i s t e 1 9 4 6 ) . He a n a l y s e s t h e r e l a t i o n s between t h e t h r e e per sons i n t o two b i n a r y o p p o s i t i o n s :
3r d vs 1st and 2nd
n o n - p e r s o n a l p er so n a l
2nd vs 1st
u n s p e c i f i e d s p e c i f i e d
person person
( u s u a l l y a d dr essee )
In each c a s e , t h e n e g a t i v e l y d e f i n e d , l e s s s p e c i f i c , member of an o p p o s i t i o n i s t h e unmarked c a t e g o r y . Thus, t he 3rd person i s unmarked w i t h r e s p e c t t o both t h e 1st and t h e 2nd, and t he 2nd person i s unmarked w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e 1 s t . T h i s g i v e s t he h i e r a r c h y 3 2 1 , i n o r d e r of i n c r e a s i n g markedness.
The use of 3rd person forms i n p l a c e of 2nd person forms i n Low German might perhaps be r eg ar d e d as e v i d e n c e , a c c o r d i n g t o t h i s
c r i t e r i o n , of t h e unmarked s t a t u s of t h e 3rd p er s o n , a t l e a s t w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e 2nd pe r s o n . In R e u t e r , t he 3rd p l u r a l i s used as a p o l i t e form of addr ess (as i n modern German)} t h e 3rd s i n g u l a r i s a l s o used as a form of address i n c e r t a i n s o c i a l c o n t e x t s . 3 However, car e
must be t a k e n when usi ng such f a c t s t o make j udgments about markedness r e l a t i o n s . Both of t h e s e uses have r a t h e r p r e c i s e f u n c t i o n s ; t hey a r e not s i mp l y r e p l a c e m e n t s of one form f o r a not he r w i t h no change of
meaning. T h i s problem i s even more a p par en t i f we vi ew t h e s e f a c t s w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e p ar a m e t e r of number. C l e a r l y , t h e use of t h e 3rd p l u r a l as a p o l i t e form of address f o r both s i n g u l a r and p l u r a l addr essees cannot be r e g a r d e d as e v i d e n c e of t h e unmarked s t a t u s of t h e p l u r a l v e r s u s t h e s i n g u l a r ( ! ) , because t h i s usage has a s p e c i f i c f u n c t i o n , namely p o l i t e n e s s . T h i s phenomenon c o u l d , i n f a c t , be a n al ys ed i n t erms of t h r e e c a t e g o r i e s : s i n g u l a r , p l u r a l and " p o l i t e " , of which t h e
c a t e g o r y p o l i t e i s most marked ( f o r exampl e, s i n g u l a r and p l u r a l ar e not d i s t i n g u i s h e d w i t h i n t h e c a t e g o r y p o l i t e ; see t h e c r i t e r i o n of
21
s y n c r e t i s m b e l o w ) . The p l u r a l form would t hen be be i n g used t o e x pr ess an even more marked c a t e g o r y . *
< i i ) O v e r t e x p r e s s i o n of marked c a t e g o r y ver s us z e r o e x p r e s s i o n of unmarked c a t e g o r y
Both Jakobson and H j e l m s l e v p o s t u l a t e t h e c r i t e r i o n t h a t marked
c a t e g o r i e s tend t o have o v e r t e x p r e s s i o n , whereas unmarked c a t e g o r i e s o f t e n remai n une x p r e s se d. In o t h e r words, t h e r e i s u s u a l l y an o v e r t l i n g u i s t i c form e x p r e s s i n g t he marked member of an o p p o s i t i o n , but t h e r e may be no c o r r e s p o n d i n g form e x p r e s s i n g t h e unmarked member.
In f a c t , t h e terms marked and unmarked a r e sometimes used s i m p l y w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h i s c r i t e r i o n a l o n e * "marked" i s used t o mean " w i t h an
o v e r t m a r k e r " , and "unmarked" t o mean " wi t h an o v e r t m a r k e r " . As we mentioned above, however, markedness seems t o be a w i de r phenomenon, i n v o l v i n g a convergence between v a r i o u s c r i t e r i a ; we w i l l t h e r e f o r e av o i d t h e use of t h e term w i t h t h i s more r e s t r i c t e d meaning.
The c r i t e r i o n of z er o e x p r e s s i o n may be a p p l i e d t o t h e p a r a me t er of t e n s e i n our d i a l e c t s . In al most a l l d i a l e c t s , t h e r e i s a s p e c i f i c p r e t e r i t e m a r k e r , - d . - , a t l e a s t in t h e weak v e r b s , w h i l e t h e p r e s e n t 5
t e n s e i s not o v e r t l y marked. The p e r f e c t t e n s e a l s o has a s p e c i f i c ma r k e r , i n t h a t i t i s formed from t h e a u x i l i a r i e s "have" or "be" p l u s t h e p a s t p a r t i c i p l e . According t o t h i s c r i t e r i o n , t h e n , both t he p r e t e r i t e and t h e p e r f e c t would be marked w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e p r e s e n t .
In t h e s t r o n g v e r b s , we can a l s o a p p l y t h i s c r i t e r i o n t o t h e p ar a m e t e r of mood i n some d i a l e c t s . Where f i n a l has been r e t a i n e d , t h e 1st and 3rd s i n g u l a r p r e t e r i t e s u b j u n c t i v e have t h e endi ng -e., whereas t h e 1st and 3rd s i n g u l a r p r e t e r i t e i n d i c a t i v e have no s u f f i x * 6
e . g . 33 ( S o e s t ) DRINK P r e t Ind sg 1 / 3 drunk P r e t Subj sg 1 / 3 drynke
A ccor di ng t o t h i s c r i t e r i o n , t h e n , t h e i n d i c a t i v e would be unmarked w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e s u b j u n c t i v e , In many d i a l e c t s , however, f i n a l ~e_ has been l o s t by p h o n o l o g i c a l change, and both forms have z e r o s u f f i x .
The p a r a m e t e r s of person and number i n t e r s e c t i n our d i a l e c t s ;
t o use Ma t th e ws ' term ( 1 9 7 4 , p . 1 4 7 ) , person and number a r e expressed c u m u l a t i v e l y . I t i s t h e r e f o r e i m p o s s i b l e t o say t h a t a p a r t i c u l a r person has z e r o e x p r e s s i o n , or t h a t t h e s i n g u l a r , f o r e x a mp l e, has z e r o
e x p r e s s i o n . However, we can make c e r t a i n o b s e r v a t i o n s about combined p e r s o n - a n d - number c a t e g o r i e s , such as 1st person s i n g u l a r .
There a r e two s e t s of d i a l e c t s i n which t h e 1st s i n g u l a r can be ana l ys e d as ha v i ng z e r o e x p r e s s i o n . F i r s t l y , i n some d i a l e c t s (and i n s t a n d a r d D u t c h ) , t he endi ng -a. of t he 1st s i n g u l a r p r e s e n t has been l o s t , so t h a t t h i s form now has a ba r e r o o t w i t h no s u f f i x :
e . g . 69 ( V e e n k o l o n i 4 ‘n) sg 1 wa : rk "work"
2 w a i r k s t 3 w a i r k t pi 123 wasrkn
S e c o nd l y , i n some d i a l e c t s , t h e 1st s i n g u l a r ending - e, has been r e t a i n e d , but t h e u n s t r e s s e d vowel - e - a l s o appear s t h r o u g h o u t t he p r e s e n t t e n s e paradigms 7
e . g . 33 ( S o e s t )
sg 1 koake "cook"
2 kaake st
3 koaket
pi 123 koaket
and i n t h e p r e t e r i t e and p a s t p a r t i c i p l e of t he major t y p e of weak v e r b s :
e . g . P r e t e r i t e sg 1 / 3 koakede Past p a r t i c i p l e koaket
The -{?.(-) may t h e r e f o r e be a n a l y s ed as p a r t of t h e v e r b a l r o o t , w i t h t h e r e s u l t t h a t t h e 1st s i n g u l a r has z e r o e x p r e s s i o n .
I t i s n o t a b l e t h a t , i n both s e t s of d i a l e c t s , i t i s t h e 1st s i n g u l a r which has z er o e x p r e s s i o n , and which would t h e r e f o r e , a c c o r d i n g t o t h e c r i t e r i o n bei ng di s cu s s e d a t p r e s e n t , be a n a l y s e d as unmarked.
T h i s c o n t r a s t s w i t h t h e s i t u a t i o n found c r o s s - l i n g u i s t i c a l l y , where t he 3rd s i n g u l a r most f r e q u e n t l y has z e r o e x p r e s s i o n . I t a l s o c o n t r a s t s
23
w i t h t he a n a l y s i s of t h e 3rd person as l e a s t marked a c c o r d i n g t o t he f i r s t c r i t e r i o n d i sc u ss ed above. Of c o u r s e , i t coul d be argued t h a t t h e s e cases of z e r o e x p r e s s i o n of t he f i r s t s i n g u l a r have a r i s e n by an h i s t o r i c a l " a c c i d e n t " a t h e 1st person s u f f i x has been eroded by sound change, l e a v i n g t h e 1st person w i t h o u t a marker ( c f , , f o r exampl e, t he g e n i t i v e p l u r a l in Old Church S l a v o n i c ) , However, t h e r e i s d i a c h r o n i c e v i d e n c e , in at l e a s t some d i a l e c t s of t he second t y p e d e s c r i b e d above, t h a t t he s i t u a t i o n has a r i s e n by a m o rp h o l o g i c a l r e a n a l y s i s of t h e 1st person farm as t h o u g h i t had no mar ker . B r i e f l y , we would ex p e c t t he 2nd and 3rd s i n g u l a r i n some of t h e s e d i a l e c t s t o show have l o s t t he u ns t re s s ed -e.- of t h e i r endi ngs (see c h a p t e r 6 ) . T h i s ex pe c t ed
p h o n o l o g i c a l devel opment i s r e t a i n e d in many s t r on g v e r b s . However, in t he major t y p e of weak v e r b s , t h e -e.- has been r e - i n t r o d u c e d s
ex pe c t ed a c t u a l
3rd sg * maskt masket
T hi s can be accounted f o r by an a n a l o g i c a l de v e l op me n t , i n which t he 2nd and 3rd s i n g u l a r a r e r e m o d e l l e d on t h e 1st s i n g u l a r , which we would expec t to r e t a i n i t s f i n a l -e_ ( t h e u n st r es s e d vowel was l o s t o n l y b e f o r e o b s t r u e n t s ) . T h i s pr es u p p o s es , however, a r e a n a l y s i s of t h e 1st
s i n g u l a r form as h av i ng no ma r k e r , r a t h e r than as base p l u s ending -e_i 8
1st sg mask+e r e a n a l y s e d as mai ke+zer o
t hen 3rd sg * m a : k + t >> ma:ke+t
We may t h e r e f o r e co n c l ud e t h a t a t l e a s t some of t h e cases of z er o e x p r es s i o n i n t h e f i r s t person a r e not si mpl y t he r e s u l t of sound change.
The a n a l y s i s of markedness r e l a t i o n s between t h e persons i s i n g en e r a l p r o b l e m a t i c , as we s h a l l see agai n bel ow. I t i s c l e a r , however, t h a t t he 2nd person i s not t h e l e a s t marked pe r s on. For exampl e, i n our d i a l e c t s , both t h e 1st and t he 3rd s i n g u l a r have z e r o e x p r e s s i o n i n t h e p r e t e r i t e , w h i l e t h e 2nd s i n g u l a r has o v e r t e x p r e s s i o n . S i m i l a r l y , none of t h e o t h e r c r i t e r i a s e l e c t s t he 2nd person as l e a s t marked,
( i i i ) S y nc r et i s m i n t h e marked c a t e g o r y
The f i n a l c r i t e r i o n proposed by Jakobson i s t h a t d i s t i n c t i o n s made
w i t h i n an unmarked c a t e g o r y a r e o f t e n n e u t r a l i s e d , or s y n c r e t i s e d , i n t he c o r r e s p o n d i n g marked c a t e g o r y . T h i s i s a l s o one of H j e l m s l e v ' s c r i t e r i a .
T h i s may be a p p l i e d t o t h e par ame t er of t e n s e i n our d i a l e c t s : t h e 1st and 3rd s i n g u l a r a r e n e a r l y always d i s t i n g u i s h e d i n t he p r e s e n t t e n s e , whereas t h e y a r e al ways s y n c r e t i s e d i n t h e p r e t e r i t e .9
The c r i t e r i o n a l s o a p p l i e s t o t h e p a r a m e t er of number. The 1st and 3rd persons a r e al ways s y n c r e t i s e d ( i n a l l d i a l e c t s ) i n t h e p l u r a l ; i n d e e d , i n most d i a l e c t s t h e r e i s s y n c r e t i s m between a l l t h e persons in t h e p l u r a l .
In a d d i t i o n t o t h e s e c r i t e r i a suggested by bot h Jakobson and H j e l m s l e v , we s h a l l a l s o d i sc us s two of t he c r i t e r i a proposed by H j e l m s l e v a l o n e : f r e q u e n c y and i r r e g u l a r i t y .
( i v ) Fr equency: forms e x p r e s s i n g unmarked c a t e o o r i e s have a h i a h e r t e x t f r e q u e n c y than forms e x p r e s s i n g marked c a t e g o r i e s
Thi s seems t o be an i m p o r t a n t c r i t e r i o n , f i r s t l y f o r t h e p r a c t i c a l reasons t h a t i t i s p o s s i b l e t o o b t a i n c o n c r e t e d a t a , i n d e p e n d e n t of any s p e c i f i c g r a mm a t i c a l a n a l y s i s . S ec o n d l y, as Greenberg ( 1 96 6 ) p o i n t s o u t , i t a l l o w s a f i n e r g r a d a t i o n among c a t e g o r i e s t han s i mp l y t he b i n a r y r e l a t i o n s h i p marked/ unmarked. In co nn ec t i on w i t h t h i s , Greenberg
suggest s t h a t t h e g r e a t e r t h e f r e q u e n c y d i s p a r i t y between c a t e g o r i e s , t h e g r e a t e r t h e conver gence between t h e o t h e r raarkedness c r i t e r i a . C o n v e r s e l y , where t h e f r e q u e n c y d i s p a r i t y i s l e s s o ve r w h e l mi n g , such as between t h e person c a t e g o r i e s , i t i s more l i k e l y t h a t c o n f l i c t s between t h e o t h e r c r i t e r i a w i l l a r i s e . Gr e e n b e r g , i n f a c t , c o n s i d e r s f r e q ue n c y t o be t h e p r i m a r y f a c t o r d e t e r m i n i n g mo r p ho l o gi c a l markedness r e l a t i o n s . He suggest s t h a t a l l t h e o t h e r c r i t e r i a may be d e r i v a b l e from t h i s one.
No t e , however, t h a t he does not c o n s i d e r f r e q u e n c y i t s e l f t o be an e x p l a n a t o r y p r i n c i p l e ; i t i s o n l y a symptom, which i s i t s e l f i n need of e x p l a n a t i o n .
The t a b l e below shows f r e q u e n c y d a t a f o r t h r e e c h a p t e r s of R e u t e r ' s "Ut de F r a n z o s e n t i d M ( 1 8 5 9 ) . For t h e p a r a m e t e r of
t e n s e / a s p e c t , d i r e c t speech and n a r r a t i v e s e c t i o n s a r e shown s e p a r a t e l y ,
25
because t he d i f f e r e n c e s r e v e a l i n t e r e s t i n g f a c t s , e s p e c i a l l y about t he use of t h e p r e t e r i t e . For t h e p a r a me t er of p e r s o n / n u mb e r , t h e sample i n c l u d e s o n l y s e c t i o n s of d i r e c t speech; i n n a r r a t i v e s e c t i o n s , t h e r e was an over whel mi ng m a j o r i t y of t h i r d person f or ms . I t was mentioned above t h a t t h e 3rd p l u r a l i s used as a p o l i t e form of a d d r e s s , and t h a t t h e 3rd s i n g u l a r i s a l s o used as a farm of a d d r e s s , i n c e r t a i n s o c i a l c o n t e x t s (see n . 3 ) . I n s t a n c e s of 3rd person forms i n t h e s e usages a r e i n c l u d e d w i t h t h e 2nd person ( s i n g u l a r i n a l l c a s e s ) ; but a s e p a r a t e count of 2nd person s i n g u l a r forms pr oper i s a l s o i n c l u d e d .
N a r r a t i ve D i r e c t Speech
( sample s i z e ; 652) (sample s i z e : 572)
i .10
P r e s e n t 21.327. P r e s e n t 63.467.
P r e t e r i t e 11 70.257. P r e t e r i t e 13. 647.
P e r f e c t 1 .237. P e r f e c t 8.577.
P l u p e r f e c t 6.757. P I u p e r f e c t 2.277.
C o n d i t i o n a l 0.467. Condi t i onal 0.707.
F u t u r e 2.107.
I m p e r a t i v e 9. 277.
D i r e c t Speech
(sample s i z e : 524; e x c l u d e s i m p e r a t i v e )
1st sg 18. 707. breakdown of 2nd sg
2nd sg 12.597. a c t u a l 2nd sg 2,997,
3rd sg 58.787. 3rd sg 4.837.
1st pi 2.677. 3rd pi 4.777.
2nd pi 0.387.
IHIfx
3rd pi 6.877.
We s h a l l deal f i r s t w i t h t e n s e / a s p e c t . The v e r y hi gh f i g u r e f o r t he p r e t e r i t e i n n a r r a t i v e s e c t i o n s i s i n d i c a t i v e of i t s t y p i c a l use as a n a r r a t i v e t e n s e , Note t h a t t h e f i g u r e f o r t h e p e r f e c t i s v e r y low h e r e . We would o b v i o u s l y e xp ec t t he s t a t i s t i c s f o r t h e s e c t i o n s of d i r e c t speech t o r e f l e c t t h e spoken language more c l o s e l y . I t i s n o t a b l e t h a t t h e p e r f e c t c o n s t i t u t e s a much h i g h e r p e r c e n t a g e of p a s t t e n s e forms i n
d i r e c t speech t han i n n a r r a t i v e s
Past t e n s e far ms Past t e n s e forms
i n n a r r a t i v e i n d i r e c t speech
P r e t 89. SOX P r e t 55.727.
P e r f 1. 57X P e r f 35.017.
P1 up 8.637. Plup 9.277.
The p r e t e r i t e s t i l l has t h e upper hand, however, even i n t h e s e c t i o n s of d i r e c t speech. T h i s does not accor d w i t h t h e e v i d en ce of many of t h e Low Berman d i a l e c t grammars, which c l a i m t h a t t h e p r e t e r i t e i s r a t h e r uncommon. However, t h i s may be accounted f o r by t h e f a c t t h a t t h e r e i s some n a r r a t i v e even w i t h i n t h e s e c t i o n s of d i r e c t speech. We have noted t h a t t h e p r e t e r i t e i s t h e t e n s e used i n n a r r a t i v e , and L i n d g r en ( 1 9 5 7 ) makes t he same o b s e r v a t i o n . N a r r a t i v e i s , of c o u r s e , r a t h e r unusual w i t h i n normal d i s c o u r s e , and t h i s may have made t h e f i g u r e f o r t he p r e t e r i t e a r t i f i c i a l l y h i g h .
In both s i n g u l a r and p l u r a l in d i r e c t speech, t h e 3rd person i s most f r e q u e n t , f o l l o w e d by t h e 1st p e r s o n, w i t h t h e 2nd person l e a s t f r e q u e n t . As we menti oned e a r l i e r , we have not i n c l u d e d f i g u r e s f o r person forms i n t h e n a r r a t i v e s e c t i o n s . The o r d e r i s t h e same, but 3rd persons forms a r e i n an overwhel mi ng m a j o r i t y . I t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t t h e f i g u r e f o r 3rd person forms i n d i r e c t speech might a l s o be r a t h e r
i n f l a t e d , because of n a r r a t i v e w i t h i n t he s e c t i o n s of d i r e c t speech.
The p e r c e n t a g e of 3rd person f arms i s , f o r exampl e, r a t h e r h i g h e r t han t h a t found i n t e s t s on o t h e r l anguages (based e i t h e r on r e c o r d s of spoken l a n g u a g e , or on p l a y s ) :
Low German 1st 21.377.
( R e u t e r ) 2nd 12.9B7.
3rd 65.657.
27
compared w i t h :
Russian 1st
2nd 3rd
31.97.
17.7%
50.47.
from Greenberg 1966; i n t u r n from J o s s e l s o n 1953
Spani sh 1st
2nd 3rd
30.57.
16.07.
53.47.
adapted from Bybee and Brewer 1980; i n t u r n from J u i l l a n d and Chang- Rodr i guez 1964
German 1 st
2nd 3rd
29.9%
20.87.
49.37.
t e s t on t h r e e German p l a y s ; f i g u r e s i n c l u d e s i n g u l a r al one
I t i s e v i d e n t from t h e t a b l e of person/ number forms t h a t t he s i n g u l a r i s f a r more f r e q u e n t t han t h e p l u r a l . I f t h e i m p e r a t i v e i s i n c l u d e d i n t h e t o t a l , we o b t a i n t h e f o l l o w i n g f i g u r e s :
(sample s i z e : 572) s i n g u l a r 90.917.
p l u r a l 9.09%
<v) I r r e g u l a r i t y : forms e x p r e s s i n g unmarked c a t e g o r i e s a r e more l i k e l y t o show i r r e g u l a r i t i e s than forms e x p r e s s i n g marked c a t e g o r i e s
I t i s perhaps p r e f e r a b l e t o r e g a r d t h e tendency f o r forms e x p r e s s i n g unmarked c a t e g o r i e s t o show more i r r e g u l a r i t i e s t han forms e x p r e s s i n g marked c a t e g o r i e s as a symptom, r a t h e r than a c r i t e r i o n , of markedness.
The t endency may be t h e r e s u l t of one of t he d i a c h r o n i c m a n i f e s t a t i o n s of markedness which we w i l l d i s c u s s below: unmarked forms a r e l e s s l i k e l y t o be a f f e c t e d by a n a l o g i c a l change, and tend t o r e t a i n t he i r r e g u l a r i t i e s i n t r o d u c e d by p h o n o l o g i c a l change. T h i s w i l l be di sc us se d i n more d e t a i l bel ow.
In summary, t h e c r i t e r i a di scussed above, when a p p l i e d t o our d i a l e c t s , s e l e c t t h e f o l l o w i n g c a t e g o r i e s as unmarked:
