Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-r6qrq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T03:02:19.184Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Null subjects in Old English

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 August 2013

George Walkden
George Walkden*
Affiliation:
University of Manchester
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The possibility of referential null subjects in Old English has been the subject of conflicting assertions. Hulk and van Kemenade (1995:245) stated that “the phenomenon of referential pro-drop does not exist in Old English,” but van Gelderen (2000:137) claimed that “Old English has pro-drop.” This paper presents a systematic quantitative investigation of referential null subjects in Old English, drawing on the York-Toronto-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Old English Prose (YCOE; Taylor, Warner, Pintzuk, & Beths, 2003) and the York-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Old English Poetry (YCOEP; Pintzuk & Plug, 2001). The results indicate substantial variation between texts. In those texts that systematically exhibit null subjects, these are much rarer in subordinate clauses, with first- and second-person null subjects also being rare. I argue that the theory of identification of null subjects by rich verbal agreement is not sufficient to explain the Old English phenomenon, and instead I develop an account based on Holmberg's (2010) analysis of partial null subject languages.

Type
Research Article
Information
Language Variation and Change , Volume 25 , Issue 2 , July 2013 , pp. 155 - 178
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

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

REFERENCES

Adams, Marianne. (1987). From Old French to the theory of pro-drop. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 5:1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, Cynthia L. (1995). Case marking and reanalysis: Grammatical relations from Old to Modern English. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andrew, Samuel O. (1940). Syntax and style in Old English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Axel, Katrin. (2005). Null subjects and verb placement in Old High German. In Kepser, S. & Reis, M. (eds.), Linguistic evidence: Empirical, theoretical and computational perspectives. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 27–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Axel, Katrin.. (2007). Studies on Old High German syntax: Left sentence periphery, verb placement and verb-second. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barðdal, Jóhanna. (2000). Oblique subjects in Old Scandinavian. NOWELE 37:25–51.Google Scholar
Bech, Kristin. (2001). Word order patterns in Old and Middle English: A syntactic and pragmatic study. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Bergen.Google Scholar
Bender, Emily. (1999). Constituting context: Null objects in English recipes revisited. University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics 6:53–68.Google Scholar
Berndt, Rolf. (1956). Form und funktion des verbums im nördlichen Spätaltenglischen. Halle: Max Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Bianchi, Valentina, & Frascarelli, Mara. (2010). Is topic a root phenomenon? Iberia 2:43–88.Google Scholar
Bies, Elizabeth A. (1996). Syntax and discourse factors in Early New High German: Evidence for verb-final word order. M.A. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Borer, Hagit. (1989). Anaphoric Agr. In Jaeggli, O. & Safir, K. J. (eds.), The null subject parameter. Dordrecht: Kluwer. 69–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Alistair. (1970). Verse influences in Old English prose. In Rosier, J. L. (ed.), Philological essays: Studies in Old and Middle English language and literature in honour of Herbert Dean Merritt. The Hague: Mouton. 93–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. (2000). Minimalist inquiries: The framework. In Martin, R., Michaels, D., & Uriagereka, J. (eds.), Step by step: Essays on minimalist syntax in honor of Howard Lasnik. Cambridge: MIT Press. 89–156.Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam.. (2001). Derivation by phase. In Kenstowicz, M. (ed.), Ken Hale: A life in language. Cambridge: MIT Press. 1–53.Google Scholar
Culy, Christopher. (1996). Null objects in English recipes. Language Variation and Change 8:91–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dekeyser, Xavier. (1986). English contact clauses revisited: A diachronic approach. Folia Linguistica Historica 7:107–120.Google Scholar
Eggenberger, Jakob. (1961). Das Subjektpronomen im Althochdeutschen: Ein syntaktischer Beitrag zur Frühgeschichte des deutschen Schrifttums. Grabs: self-published.Google Scholar
Endriss, Cornelia, & Gärtner, Hans-Martin. (2005). Relativische verbzweitsätze und definitheit. In d'Avis, F.-J. (ed.), Deutsche syntax: Empirie und theorie. Gothenburg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis. 195–220.Google Scholar
Erker, Daniel, & Guy, Gregory. (2012). The role of lexical frequency in syntactic variability: Variable subject personal pronoun expression in Spanish. Language 88:526–557.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Faarlund, Jan Terje. (1990). Syntactic change: Towards a theory of historical syntax. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, Olga, van Kemenade, Ans, Koopman, Willem, & van der Wurff, Wim. (2000). The syntax of early English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fisher, Ronald A. (1922). On the interpretation of χ2 from contingency tables, and the calculation of p. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 85:87–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frascarelli, Mara, & Hinterhölzl, Roland. (2007). Types of topics in German and Italian. In Schwabe, K. & Winkler, S. (eds.), On information structure, meaning and form: Generalizations across languages. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 87–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fulk, Robert D. (1992). A history of Old English meter. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Fulk, Robert D.. (2009). Anglian dialect features in Old English anonymous homiletic literature: A survey, with preliminary findings. In Fitzmaurice, S. & Minkova, D. (eds.), Studies in the history of the English language. Vol. 4. Empirical and analytical advances in the study of English language change. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 81–100.Google Scholar
Gärtner, Kurt. (1981). Asyndetische Relativsätze in der Geschichte des Deutschen. Zeitschrift für germanistische Linguistik 9:152–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, Georgia M. (1976). Main clause phenomena in subordinate clauses. Language 52:382–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane. (2004). Topicalization, CLLD and the left periphery. ZAS Papers in Linguistics 35:157–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haegeman, Liliane, & Ürögdi, Barbara. (2010). Referential CPs and DPs: An operator-movement account. Theoretical Linguistics 36:111–152.Google Scholar
Håkansson, David. (2008). Syntaktisk variation och förändring. En studie av subjektslösa satser i fornsvenska. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Lund.Google Scholar
Harris, Alice C. (1973). Psychological predicates in Middle English. Paper presented at: the Annual Meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, San Diego.Google Scholar
Haugland, Kari E. (2007). Old English impersonal constructions and the use and non-use of non-referential pronouns. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Bergen.Google Scholar
Holmberg, Anders. (2005). Is there a little pro? Evidence from Finnish. Linguistic Inquiry 36:533–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Holmberg, Anders.. (2010). Null subject parameters. In Biberauer, T., Holmberg, A., Roberts, I., & Sheehan, M. (eds.), Parametric variation: Null subjects in Minimalist theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 88–124.Google Scholar
Holmberg, Anders, & Roberts, Ian. (2010). Introduction: Parameters in minimalist theory. In Biberauer, T., Holmberg, A., Roberts, I., & Sheehan, M. (eds.), Parametric variation: Null subjects in minimalist theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1–57.Google Scholar
Hooper, Joan, & Thompson, Sandra. (1973). On the applicability of root transformations. Linguistic Inquiry 4:465–497.Google Scholar
Huang, C.–T. James. (1984). On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 15:531–574.Google Scholar
Hulk, Aafke, & van Kemenade, Ans. (1995). V2, pro-drop, functional projections and language change. In Battye, A. & Roberts, I. (eds.), Clause structure and language change. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 227–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ingham, Richard. (2006). On two negative concord dialects in early English. Language Variation and Change 18:241–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiernan, Kevin. (1990). Reading Caedmon's “Hymn” with someone else's glosses. Representations 32:157–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koopman, Hilda. (1992). On the absence of Case chains in Bambara. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 10:555–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meaney, Audrey L. (1984). Variant versions of Old English medical remedies and the compilation of Bald's Leechbook. Anglo-Saxon England 13:235–268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, Bruce. (1985). Old English syntax. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mitchell, Bruce, & Robinson, Fred. (2007). A guide to Old English. 7th ed.Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Müller, Gereon. (2005). Pro-drop and impoverishment. In Brandt, P. & Fuß, E. (eds.), Form, structure and grammar: A festschrift presented to Günther Grewendorf on the occasion of his 60th birthday. Tübingen: Narr. 93–115.Google Scholar
Neeleman, Ad, & Szendrői, Kriszta. (2007). Radical pro drop and the morphology of pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 38:671–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neeleman, Ad, & Szendrői, Kriszta.. (2008). Case morphology and radical pro-drop. In Biberauer, T. (ed.), The limits of syntactic variation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 331–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ohlander, Urban. (1943). Omission of the object in English. Studia Neophilologica 16:105–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pintzuk, Susan, & Plug, Leendert. (eds.) (2001). The York-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Old English Poetry. York: University of York.Google Scholar
Pogatscher, Alois. (1901). Unausgedrücktes Subjekt im Altenglischen. Anglia 23:261–301.Google Scholar
Poppe, Erich. (2006). Celtic influence on Old English relative clauses? In Tristram, H. (ed.), The Celtic Englishes. Vol. 4. Potsdam: Universitätsverlag Potsdam. 191–211.Google Scholar
Randall, Beth. (2005–2007). CorpusSearch 2. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Reinhart, Tanya. (1981). Pragmatics and linguistics: An analysis of sentence topics. Philosophica 27:53–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rizzi, Luigi. (1986). Null objects in Italian and the theory of pro. Linguistic Inquiry 17:501–557.Google Scholar
Roberts, Ian. (2010). Agreement and head movement: Clitics, incorporation and defective goals. Cambridge: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenkvist, Henrik. (2009). Referential null subjects in Germanic: An overview. Working Papers in Scandinavian Syntax 84:151–180.Google Scholar
Ross, John R. (1982). Pronoun-deleting processes in German. Paper presented at: the annual meeting of the Linguistic Society of America, San Diego, California.Google Scholar
Rusten, Kristian A. (2010). A study of empty referential pronominal subjects in Old English. M.Phil. dissertation, University of Bergen.Google Scholar
Santorini, Beatrice. (1989). The generalization of the verb-second constraint in the history of Yiddish. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Schlachter, Eva. (2010). Syntax und Informationsstruktur im Althochdeutschen: Untersuchungen am Beispiel der Isidor-Gruppe. Ph.D. dissertation, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin.Google Scholar
Sigurðsson, Halldór Ármann. (1993). Argument drop in Old Icelandic. Lingua 89:247–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sigurðsson, Halldór Ármann. (2004). The syntax of person, tense, and speech features. Italian Journal of Linguistics 16:219–251.Google Scholar
Suárez-Gómez, Cristina. (2009). On the syntactic differences between OE dialects: Evidence from the gospels. English Language and Linguistics 13:57–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swanton, Michael. (1996). The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Taraldsen, Knut Tarald. (1978). On the NIC, vacuous application, and the that-t filter. Unpublished manuscript. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Taylor, Ann, Warner, Anthony, Pintzuk, Susan, & Beths, Frank. (eds.) (2003). The York-Toronto-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Old English Prose. York: University of York.Google Scholar
Vainikka, Anne, & Levy, Yonata. (1999). Empty subjects in Finnish and Hebrew. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 17:613–671.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van der Wurff, Wim. (1997). Syntactic reconstruction and reconstructability: Proto-Indo-European and the typology of null objects. In Fisiak, J. (ed.), Linguistic reconstruction and typology. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 337–356.Google Scholar
van Gelderen, Elly. (2000). A history of English reflexive pronouns: Person, self, and interpretability. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Visser, Frederic Theodor. (1963–1973). An historical syntax of the English language. 4 vols. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Walkden, George. (2012). Syntactic reconstruction and Proto-Germanic. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
Weir, Andrew. (2008). Subject pronoun drop in informal English. M.A. dissertation, University of Essex.Google Scholar
Wenisch, Franz. (1979). Spezifisch anglisches Wortgut in den nordhumbrischen Interlinearglossierungen des Lukasevangeliums. Heidelberg: Carl Winter.Google Scholar
Wiklund, Anna-Lena. (2010). In search of the force of dependent verb second. Nordic Journal of Linguistics 33:81–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Walkden Supplementary Material

Walkden Supplementary Material

Download Walkden Supplementary Material(File)
File 11.1 KB