Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T07:57:33.249Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Order out of chaos? The English gender change in the Southwest Midlands as a process of semantically based reorganization

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 November 2008

MERJA STENROOS*
Affiliation:
Department of Cultural Studies and Languages, University of Stavanger, 4036 Stavanger, Norwaymerja.stenroos@uis.no

Abstract

The article presents a study of the process of gender change in the thirteenth-century Southwest Midlands, based on twenty texts localized in this area. The assumption is that a study limited to a single text community would give a better view of the patterns of change than studies spanning a wide chronological and/or geographical range. It is suggested that the system of pronominal gender assignment went through a process of semantically based reorganization during this period, and that the resulting patterns are most usefully described using the model of a hierarchy or continuum of individuation (Dahl 1999a: 99; Siemund 2008: 140). The gender assignment of individual nouns is found to be remarkably regular, and the material seems to give no reason to assume a period of confusion between the Old and postmedieval English systems of gender assignment.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ausbüttel, Erich. 1904. Das persönliche Geschlecht unpersönlicher Substantiva einschließlich Tiernamen im Mittelenglischen. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Benskin, Michael. 1991. The ‘fit-technique’ explained. In Riddy, F. (ed.), Regionalism in late medieval manuscripts and texts, 926. Cambridge: Brewer.Google Scholar
Benskin, Michael & Laing, Margaret. 1981. Translations and Mischsprachen in Middle English manuscripts. In Benskin, Michael & Samuels, M. L. (eds.), So meny people longages and tonges: Philological essays in Scots and mediaeval English presented to Angus McIntosh, 55106. Edinburgh: Middle English Dialect Project.Google Scholar
Black, Merja. 1997. Studies in the dialect materials of medieval Herefordshire. PhD dissertation, University of Glasgow.Google Scholar
Black, Merja. 1999. Parallel lines through time: Speech, writing and the confusing case of she. Leeds Studies of English 30, 5981.Google Scholar
Bybee, Joan & Hopper, Paul. 1984. Introduction. In Bybee, Joan & Hopper, Paul (eds.), Frequency and the emergence of linguistic structure, 124. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Clark, Cecily. 1957. Gender in the Peterborough Chronicle. English Studies 38, 109–15.Google Scholar
Clark Hall, J. R. 1960. A concise Anglo-Saxon dictionary. 4th edition, with supplement by H. D. Meritt. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Comrie, Bernard & Polinsky, Maria 1999. Gender in a historical perspective: radial categories meet language change. In Justus, Carol F. & Polomé, Edgar C. (eds.), Language change and typological variation: In honor of Winfred P. Lehmann on the occasion of his 83rd birthday, 566–87. Washington, DC: Institute for the Study of Man.Google Scholar
Corbett, Greville. 1979. The agreement hierarchy. Journal of Linguistics 15, 203–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Corbett, Greville. 1991. Gender. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Corbett, Greville & Fraser, Norman. 1999. Default genders. In Unterbeck, Barbara & Rissanen, Matti (eds.), Gender in grammar and cognition, 5597. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Curzan, Anne. 1999. Gender categories in early English grammars: their message to the modern grammarian. In Unterbeck, Barbara & Rissanen, Matti (eds.), Gender in grammar and cognition, 561–76. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Curzan, Anne. 2003. Gender shifts in the history of English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dahl, Östen. 1999a. Animacy and the notion of semantic gender. In Unterbeck, Barbara & Rissanen, Matti (eds.), Gender in grammar and cognition, 99115. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Dahl, Östen. 1999b. Elementary gender distinctions. In Unterbeck, Barbara & Rissanen, Matti (eds.), Gender in grammar and cognition, 577–93. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Dance, Richard. 2003. Words derived from Old Norse in Early Middle English: Studies in the vocabulary of the South-West Midland texts. Tempe, AZ: Arizona Center for Medieval and Renaissance Studies.Google Scholar
Dekeyser, Xavier. 1980. The diachrony of the gender systems in English and Dutch. In Fisiak, Jacek (ed.), Historical morphology, 577–93. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Enger, Hans-Olav. Forthcoming. Semantic assignment rules, especially the crazy ones.Google Scholar
Fleischman, Susan. 2000. Methodologies and ideologies in historical linguistics: On working with older languages. In Herring, Susan, van Reenen, Pieter & Schøsler, Lene (eds.), Textual parameters in older languages, 3358. Amsterdam: Benjamins.Google Scholar
Franzen, Christine. 1991. The tremulous hand of Worcester. Oxford: Clarendon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hockett, Charles F. 1958. A course in modern linguistics. New York: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howe, Stephen. 1996. The personal pronouns in the Germanic languages: A study of personal pronoun morphology and change in the Germanic languages from the first records to the present day. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, Charles. 1967a. The functional motivation of linguistic change: A study in the development of the grammatical category of gender in the Late Old English period. English Studies 48, 97111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, Charles. 1967b. The grammatical category of gender in early Middle English. English Studies 48, 289305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jones, Charles. 1988. Grammatical gender in English: 950 to 1250. London: Croom Helm.Google Scholar
Kitson, Peter. 1990. Old English nouns of more than one gender. English Studies 71, 185221.Google Scholar
Laing, Margaret. 1993. Catalogue of sources for a linguistic atlas of Early Medieval English. Cambridge: Brewer.Google Scholar
Laing, Margaret & Lass, Roger. 2007–. A linguistic atlas of Early Middle English, 1150–1350 [www.lel.ed.ac.uk/ihd/laeme1/laeme1.html] Edinburgh: University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, fire and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lass, Roger. 1992. Phonology and morphology. In Blake, N. (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language, vol. 2: 1066–1476, 23155. Cambridge: University Press.Google Scholar
Mcintosh, Angus, Samuels, M. L. & Benskin, Michael, with Laing, Margaret & Williamson, Keith. 1986 . A linguistic atlas of Late Mediaeval English. 4 vols. Aberdeen: University Press.Google Scholar
Markus, Manfred. 1988. Reasons for the loss of gender in English. In Kastovsky, Dieter & Bauer, Gero (eds.), Luick revisited: Papers read at the Luick Symposium at Schloss Liechtenstein, 15–18.9.1985, 241–58. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Millward, Celia M. 1996, A biography of the English language. 2nd edition. Boston: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
Nevalainen, Terttu & Raumolin-Brunberg, Helena. 1994. Its strength and the beauty of it: The standardization of the third person neuter possessive in Early Modern English. In Stein, Dieter & van Ostade, Ingrid Tieken-Boon (eds.), Towards a Standard English, 1600–1800, 171216. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Paddock, Harold. 1991. The actuation problem for gender change in Wessex versus Newfoundland. In Trudgill, Peter & Chambers, J. K. (eds.), Dialects of English: Studies in grammatical variation, 2946. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Platzer, Hans. 2005. The development of natural gender in Middle English, or: Sex by accident. In Ritt, Nikolaus & Schendl, Herbert (eds.), Rethinking Middle English: Linguistic and literary approaches, 244–62. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Poplack, Shana, Pousada, Alicia & Sankoff, David. 1982. Competing influences on gender assignment: Variable process, stable outcome. Lingua 57, 128.Google Scholar
Roberts, Jane & Kay, Christian. 1995. A Thesaurus of Old English. 2 vols. London: King's College Centre for Late Antique and Medieval Studies.Google Scholar
Ross, Alan. 1936. Sex and gender in the Lindisfarne Gospels. Journal of English and Germanic Philology 35, 321–30.Google Scholar
Sasse, Hans-Jürgen. 1993. Syntactic categories and subcategories. In Kastovsky, Dieter, Kaltenböck, Gunther & Reichl, Susanne (eds.), Proceedings of Anglistentag 2001, Universität Wien, 3546. Trier: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag.Google Scholar
Siemund, Peter. 2008. Pronominal gender in English: A study of English varieties from a cross-linguistic perspective. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sisam, Celia. 1951. The scribal tradition of the Lambeth Homilies. The Review of English Studies n.s. 6, 105–13.Google Scholar
Smith, Jeremy J. 1991. Tradition and innovation in South-West-Midland Middle English. In Riddy, Felicity (ed.), Regionalism in late medieval manuscripts and texts, 5365. Cambridge: Brewer.Google Scholar
Stanley, Eric G. 1969 . Layamon's antiquarian sentiments. Medium Ævum 38, 2337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stenroos, Merja. In preparation. Determiner systems and gender change in Early Middle English texts of the Southwest Midlands.Google Scholar
Wales, Katie. 1996. Personal pronouns in Present-day English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar