2. Old English

2.1. Introduction

Old English (hence OE) is a SOV language (the Germanic languages are OV/VO) with a head-final parameter: whatever the projection, the complement will precede the head (except for COMP whose complement is on its right).

(5)

It is also a V2 language: the finite verb raises to the second position of the sentence, whereas the topic on its left can be any element of the sentence. We shall first follow (49) ((49))´s analysis on the OE sentence as an IP-V2 structure, i.e. the finite verb raises from V (its base-position) to I (or T) (the second position). That is what happens when we have a simple (or matrix) sentence, where TP is equivalent to IP.

(6)

(6.a)

Seuerus	se	casere	onfeng	micelne	dæl	Breotene...
Severus-NOM	the-NOM	emperor-NOM	received-IND.PRET	great-ACC	part-ACC	Brittany-GEN...

Severus the emperor received a great part of Brittany... (cobede,BedeHead:1.6.14.6)

(6.b)

In an embedded clause, we always have an IP-V2 structure. But for Pintzuk, there are two variants of this structure: an INFL-medial (7.a) and an INFL-final (7.b) ones.

(7)

(7.a)

(7.b)

(8)

...	þe	god	worhte	þurh	hine...
...	which	God	wrought	through	him...

... which God wrought through him... ((49) (49): 75)

INFL-medial structure:

(9)

[_C þe [_TP god_j [_T worhte [_VP t_j þurh hine [_V t_i]]]]]

INFL-final structure:

(10)

[_C þe [_TP god_j [_VP t_j þurh hine [_V t_i [_T weorhte [_PP þurh hine]]]]]]

And finally, for a small number of sentences (questions, sentences whose topic is a negative element or the time adverbs þa or þonne), we find a CP-V2 structure: the finite verb raises from V to T and to C, where Spec,CP is realized.

(11)

(12)

Ða	gewænde	seo	wydewe	ham...
Then	went-PRET	the-NOM	widow-NOM	back home...

Then, the widow went back home... (coaelive,ÆLS_[Eugenia]:144.277)

2.1.1. The different syntactic structures in contemporary English

Before dealing with the analysis of the Old English preterite present verbs, let us give the syntactic structures of some types of verbs, which we are to use in the course of our work. They all follow the same pattern: Subject + Finite Verb + Non finite Verb.

In contemporary English (CE), there are two types of verbs: lexical verbs and operator verbs. Among these different verbs, we can find control, raising or causative ones, or verbs whose complement is a TP.

A control structure is a structure whose infinitive clause has a PRO subject controlled by its antecedant:

(13)

(13.a)

They want to stay.

(13.b)

where the complement of the finite verb is a CP.

In Example (14.a), the complement of the finite verb is a TP.

(14)

(14.a)

They heard John cry

(14.b)

As for causative verbs, they are operator verbs: they are part of the event, but they are not the event; they introduce a notion of cause to the event. These are verbs such as make, have or cause in CE.

(15)

(15.a)

He made him cry.

(15.b)

At last, we can find raising structures. In CE, a raising verb lacks an external argument (i.e. a subject) and does not case-assign its complement, which generally is an infinitive clause. A raising verb is a lexical one such as seem or appear in CE. Moreover, modals can be found amongst raising verbs, and we assume modal verbs to be base-generated under T.

(16)

(16.a)

It seems that he understands her.

(16.b)

(17)

(17.a)

He seems to understand her.

(17.b)

(18)

(18.a)

He can understand her.

(18.b)

We kindly ask the reader to keep these structures in mind as we shall go back to them when analysing the preterite presents in parallel with causative verbs and raising structures.

2.2. The preterite present verbs

In Old English, there are two main classes of verbs: strong and weak verbs(note: ➳). The class of preterite present verbs is a particular one to which we shall add the anomal verb WILLAN.

Preterite presents are verbs which morphologically have a perfect form but a present meaning (for instance, “I have got” in CE); WILLAN is an athematic verb, i.e. lacking a theme (note: ➳))

in *-mi: the first person singular for the indicative present was *-mi in Indo-European and in Germanic (bio-m en VA “I am”).

The verbs we are focusing on are the following (we shall follow Mossé´s classification from class 1 to class 6 (note: ➳) ((45) ((45)): 118-21):

• Class 1: WITAN know, AGAN (note: ➳) have, possess.

• Class 2: *DUGAN exist, be useful (note: ➳)

• Class 3: UNNAN grant, CUNNAN be able, can, know, ÐURFAN need, be necessary, DURRAN dare.

• Class 4: MUNAN remember, *SCULAN be obliged to, should.

• Class 6: *MOTAN be allowed to, can.

• Non classified: MAGAN be able to (note: ➳).

• Anomal verb: WILLAN want.

Present-day Modal verbs are to be found in this class of verbs. In the diachronic literature, it is generally assumed that modal verbs to have “appeared” during the Middle English period. Before that, they were mere lexical verbs identical to the other verbs (see for instance (2) ((2)) ou (59) ((59))).

From a syntactic point of view, we are opposed to this statement given that the changes and evolutions within a language are progressive. So, the hypothesis underlying our analysis is the existence of a specific syntactic position for this class of verbs, as early as the Old English period. This position is different from the one assigned to strong and weak verbs which are base-generated under the head of VP.

Our analysis shall lead us to show that preterite present verbs are base-generated under a specific position we name v_Modal. Throughout our work, whe shall take into account the complex relations which exist between tense, mood and modality. To achieve this, we shall study their evolution through the use of different texts from different periods of time: Beowulf (cobeowulf in the examples to come) dating back to the 8^th century (≃ 680), Bede the Venerable´s Ecclesiastical History (cobede) dating from the 9^th-10^th centuries (890) and Apollonius of Tyre (coapollo) dating back to the 11^th century (1050).

2.3. Syntax and functional heads

We have just mentioned that OE is an SOV language with a V2 typology. Whether OE is a CP-V2 or an IP-V2 language, the functional heads C, T, (certainly) Neg and v, the head of transitivity, and the lexical head V exist. The analysis to come will allow us to add another head: another v, namely v_Modal still in the domain of vP.

2.3.1. The functional heads C, T and the lexical head V

We shall show the existence of such heads with examples taken from the OE corpus. The following example

(19)

and	cwæð:	þu	iunga	mann,	canst	ðu	þone	dom	mynra	dohtor	gifta?
and	said:	you-NOM	young-NOM	man-NOM,	know-IND.PRES	you-NOM	the-ACC	sentence-ACC	my-GEN	daughter-GEN	mariage gift-GEN?

and said: “Thou young man knowest thou the condition of my daughter´s nuptials?” (coapollo,ApT:4.9.44; 1050)

illustrates Structure (11), and shows the existence of the head C. As for the following example,

(20)

Forðam	gif	hit	gewurðan	mæg,	ic	wille	me	bedihlian	on	eowrum	eðle.
Because	if	it-NOM	be	may-IND.PRES,	I-NOM	want-PRES	me	conceal	in	your-DAT	contry-DAT.

Therefore, if it may be, I will conceal myself in your country. (coapollo,ApT: 9.9.156)

it illustrates Structure (6.b) and shows the existence of the functional head T and the lexical head V.

Let us give some more examples to highlight what has just been said:

(21)

&	he	openlice	sæde	þæt	he	his	bebodum	hyrsumian	ne	wolde.
&	he-NOM	openly	said-PRET	that	he-NOM	his	orders-DAT	obey	NEG	want-PRET.

and he openly said that he did not want to obey his orders. (cobede,Bede_1:7.36.12. 292; 890)

(22)

þonne	sceal	he	hine	eaðmodlice	ahabban	from	onsægdnesse	þæs	halgan	gerynes...
then	shall-IND.PRES	he-NOM	him-ACC	respectfully	restrain	from	sacrifice	the-GEN	holy-GEN	sacrament-GEN...

then he must respectfully restrain himself from sacrifying the holy sacrament... (cobede, Bede_1:16.86.16.784)

(23)

Nolde	eorla	hleo	ænige	þinga	þone cwealmcuman	cwicne	forlætan.
NEG+wanted-PRET	warriors-GEN	protector-NOM	no-INSTR	thing-GEN	murderous guests-ACC	swift-ACC	go off.

Not for anything the protector of warriors let the murderous guests go off alive. (cobeowul,26.791. 678; 680)

(24)

Ne	meahte	ic	æt	hilde	mid	Hruntinge	wiht	gewyrcan.
NEG	might-PRET	I-NOM	in	fight-DAT	with	Hrunting-DAT	something-ACC	do.

With Hrunting I might not do anything in the fight. (cobeowul,51.1659.1375)

Examples (22) and (25.a) (=(19)) show the existence of the functional head C since we are dealing with CP-V2 structures,

(25)

(25.a)

and	cwæð:	þu	iunga	mann,	canst	ðu	þone	dom	mynra	dohtor	gifta?
and	said:	you-NOM	young-NOM	man-NOM,	know-IND.PRES	you-NOM	the-ACC	sentence-ACC	my-GEN	daughter-GEN	marriage gift-GEN?

and said: “Thou young man knowest thou the condition of my daughter´s nuptials?” (coapollo,ApT:4.9.44; 1050)

(25.b)

Indeed, this example shows a CP-V2 structure, with movement of the finite verb from V to T, then from T to C. According to Pintzuk´s analysis ((49) ((49)), chapter 3), the way to know whether the structure is CP-V2 or IP-V2 is to note the position of the subject clitic: if it goes before the finite verb, it is an IP-V2 structure; but if it goes after the finite verb (as illustrated in our example), it is a CP-V2 structure (note: ➳). The constituant order on that kind of sentences (i.e. direct questions, sentences beginning with a negative constituant, or the time adverbs þa and þonne) is derived from the movement of the finite verb from T to C ((49) ((49)): 133).

Example (26.a) (=(20)) underlines the existence of the functional heads T and the lexical head V. This example is an IP-V2 structure.

(26)

(26.a)

Forðam	gif	hit	gewurðan	mæg,	ic	wille	me	bedihlian	on	eowrum	eðle.
Because	if	it-NOM	be	may-IND.PRES,	I-NOM	want-PRES	me	conceal	in	your-DAT	country-DAT.

therefore, if it may be, I will conceal myself in your country. (coapollo,ApT:

9.9.156)

(26.b)

For now, we will not go into details concerning this embedded structure. We shall go back to it further on in our work.

OE is generally assumed to be an asymmetrical language: V2 for matrix sentences, but not for embedded sentences since the position C is filled by a lexical complementizer. Pintzuk´s analysis shows that the structure of the OE sentence is IP-V2, both in matrix and embedded sentences (except for the small number of sentences we have just mentioned). She was able to prove the existence of INFL-medial structures for OE embedded sentences (with the finite verb raising from V to T, by analyzing the distribution of particles, pronouns, one-syllable adverbs, as well as the low frequency of the syntactic phenomenon called Verb (Projection) Raising (note: ➳). For embedded sentences, there is the coexistence of two structures: INFL-medial versus INFL-final structures. Within INFL-medial structures, the finite verb raises to T, which is in V2 position; in INFL-final structures, the finite verb also raises to T, but the order within TP is different for the head T is in final position.

Examples (23) and (24 show the existence of the functional head Neg, but not its syntax yet.

The existence of these functional heads allow us to introduce the theoretical framework we are working in: Chomsky´s Minimalist Program. Chomsky defines C and T as belonging to the Core Functional Categories of the sentence. C expresses force and mood and can be unselected (semantic selection); it selects T and has an EPP feature (i.e. a Spec). Concerning T, it must always be (semantically) selected, either by C (and then it possesses a bundle of φ features (features for person, gender and number), or by V,and then T is defective. Moreover T has an EPP feature and it selects V.

Then the structure of a sentence is (CP)-TP-VP, and we shall apply it to the OE examples to follow.

(27)

This structure can be applied to the following examples:

(28)

(28.a)

and	cwæð:	þu	iunga	mann,	canst	ðu	þone	dom	mynra	dohtor	gifta?
and	said:	you-NOM	young-NOM	man-NOM,	know-IND.PRES	you-NOM	the-ACC	sentence-ACC	my-GEN	daugther-GEN	marriage gift-GEN?

and said: “Thou young man knowest thou the condition of my daughter´s nuptials?” (coapollo,ApT:4.9.44; 1050)

(28.b)

[_CP [_C canst [_TP [_Spec ðu [_T canst_i [_VP [_V canst_i þone dom mynra dohtor gifta ?]]]]]]]

(29)

(29.a)

Forðam	gif	hit	gewurðan	mæg,	ic	wille	me	bedihlian	on	eowrum	eðle.
Because	if	it-NOM	be	may-IND.PRES,	I-NOM	want-PRES	me	conceal	in	your-DAT	country-DAT.

therefore, if it may be, I will conceal myself in your country. (coapollo,ApT: 9.9.156)

(29.b)

[_CP Forðam [_C gif [_TP hit [_VP [_V gewurðan [_T mæg, [_TP [_Spec ic [_T wille [_VP [_V wille_i [_TP me bedihlian on eowrum eðle.]]]]]]]]]]]]

(30)

(30.a)

Ne	meahte	ic	æt	hilde	mid	Hruntinge	wiht	gewyrcan.
NEG	might-PRET	I-NOM	in	fight-DAT	with	Hrunting-DAT	something-ACC	do.

With Hrunting I might not do anything in the fight. (cobeowul,51.1659.1375)

(30.b)

[_CP [_C Ne meahte [_TP ic [_T meahte_i [_VP [_V meahte_i [_TP æt hilde mid Hruntinge wiht gewyrcan.]]]]]]]

At this stage, we shall not go any deeper into the base position of the preterite present verbs.

Examples (21), (23) and (24) give an illustration of the present and past forms of the preterite presents, but still we cannot say if these are indicative or subjunctive forms. Indeed, OE had two moods with different endings for each of them. The forms of Examples (19), (20) and (22) are in the indicative mood. If mood can be seen through endings on verbs, it would imply that there are two functional heads for both moods: one for the realis mood and one for the irrealis mood. We assume T to host [-irrealis] mood. But we shall go back to this point further on, once the syntactic position for preterite present verbs is defined.

2.4. Preterite presents and v_Modal

We have previously mentioned that preterite presents made up a class of verbs on its own, which was different from strong and weak. Why are they different? First, they are all defective (except WILLAN), i.e. they do not possess a complete system of conjugation (see Appendix A). Second, there is a vowel alternation between the infinitive form and the indicative present form which is not found with strong and weak verbs  (note: ➳).

Finally, preterite presents are the only verbs to have a specific ending for all the plural present forms: -on (witon, agon, cunnon, sculon, ..., whereas the lexical verbs have an -að (nimað “they take”, demað “they decide”, habbað “they have”) ending. They also are specified by the use of a dental suffix in -t(e), -d(e) and -ð(e) for the past singular forms, like weak verbs. Preterite presents are built both on strong and weak verbs (note: ➳).

These morphological differences are to be useful for our analysis. Indeed, if they have a specific morphology, the starting point of our analysis can be to grant them a specific syntactic position.

In Examples (19) to (24), we underlined the existence of the heads C, T and V, but we have purposely put aside Neg and the head for the preterite presents.

Let us now focus on them by questioning their base-position.

We propose there are two heads for the preterite presents verbs: V, for preterite presents used as lexical verbs, and a modal little v (i.e. v_Modal) for preterite presents followed by an infinitive complement.

Then, when a preterite present verb is followed by an object, it is base-generated under (lexical) V. It then merges to v and behaves the same way strong and weak verbs do: it is Structure (31). But when it is followed by an infinitive, it is to be considered as a semi-lexical verb (for grammaticalization is not completed yet). As a consequence, it is no longer base-generated under V but under v_Modal: it is Structure (32). Why assume such a position? All the instances of preterite presents verbs that have been found in the corpus are either to have a root reading or an epistemic reading (but we shall go back to this in further details in Section 2.8.2). We then have the following two verbal structures: (31) when the preterite present is lexical and (32) when it is semi-lexical:

(31)

(32)

In the examples to come, the preterite present is used alone (i.e. lexically):

(33)

No	hie	fæder	cunnon,	...
No	they-NOM	father-ACC	know-IND.PRES,	...

They know of no father, ... (cobeowul,42.1355.1119; 680)

(34)

Ac	sio	ðeod	þone	cræft	þæs	fiscaþes	ne	cuðe,	...
But	the-NOM	people-NOM	the-ACC	craft-ACC	the-GEN	fishing-GEN	NEG	knew-PRET,	...

But the people did not know the craft of fishing, ... (cobede,Bede_4:17.304.10.3076; 890)

(35)

ic	secge	ðe	to soðan	þone	forlidenan	man	ic	wille.
I-NOM	say-IND.PRES	he-NOM	in sooth	the-ACC	shipwrecked-ACC	man-ACC	I-NOM	want-PRES

I will say to thee in sooth that I desire the shipwrecked manJ. (coapollo,ApT:20.15. 427)

Let us take again Example (33) (now (36.a)) and give its structure where CUNNAN is first base-generated under V, then merges under v then T:

(36)

(36.a)

No	hie	fæder	cunnon,	...
No	they-NOM	father-ACC	know-IND.PRES,	...

They know of no father, ... (cobeowul,42.1355.1119; 680)

(36.b)

In most cases, the preterite present verb is followed by an infinitive (a strong or a weak verb, or another preterite present (in italics):

(37)

Nu	ic	eower	sceal	frumcyn	witan,	...
Now	I-NOM	you-ACC	shall-IND.PRES	ancestors-ACC	know,	...

Now I must learn your lineage, ... (cobeowul,10.251.203; 680)

(38)

Ic	to	sæ	wille	wið	wrað	werod	wearde	healdan.
I-NOM	to	sea-DAT	PRES	against	wrath-ACC	hosts-ACC	watcher-ACC	keep.

I shall go back to the sea to keep watch against hostile hosts. (cobeowul,12.318.257)

(39)

Wille

ic

asecgan

sunu

Healfdenes,

mærum

þeodne,

min

ærende,

aldre

þinum,

gif

he

us

geunnan

wile

þæt

we

hine

swa

godne

gretan

moton.

will-PRES

I-NOM

dire

son-DAT

Healfdene-GEN,

great-DAT

prince-DAT,

my-ACC

errand-ACC,

lord-DAT

your-DAT,

if

he-NOM

us-DAT

grant

wants-PRES

that

we-NOM

him-ACC

thus

kindness-ACC

address

shall-IND.PRES.

I will tell my errand to Healfdene´s son, the great prince your lord, if, good as he is, he will grant that we might address him. (cobeowul,13.344.285)

(40)

ac	wit	on	niht	sculon	secge	ofersittan,	...
but	the two of us-NOM	at	night-ACC	shall-IND.PRES	sword-ACC	forgo,	...

but we shall forgo the sword in the night, ... (cobeowul,22.681. 575)

(41)

...	þæt	he	wið	ælfylcum	eþelstolas	healdan	cuðe,	ða	wæs	Hygelac	dead.
...	that	he-NOM	against	foreigners-DAT	native throne-ACC	hold	could-PRET,	since	was-IND.PRET	Hygelac-NOM	dead-NOM.

... that he could hold his native throne against foreigners now that Hygelac was dead. (cobeowul,73.2367.1931)

(42)

he

scolde

eaðmodlice

for

heo

þingian,

þæt

heo

ne

þorfte

in

swa

frecne

siðfæt

&

in

swa

gewinfulne

&

in

swa

uncuðe

elþeodignesse

faran.

he-NOM

might-PRET

humbly

for

her-ACC

ask,

so that

she-NOM

NEG

needed-PRET

in

so

dangerous-ACC

journey-ACC

&

in

so

toilsome-ACC

&

in

so

incertain-ACC

pilgrimage-ACC

go.

that he might, by humble entreaty, obtain (of the Holy Gregory), that they should not be compelled to undertake so dangerous, toilsome, and uncertain a journey. (cobede,Bede_1:13.56. 6.521; 890)

(43)

Ic

gehyhte

&

wende,

þæt

wit

nu

hraðe

scoldon

ætgædre

in

ece

liif

gongan.

I-NOM

hoped-IND.PRET

&

believed-IND.PRET,

that

both-NOM

now

swiftly

should-IND.PRET

ensemble

dans

eternal-ACC

life-ACC

go.

I was in hopes that we should have entered together into life everlasting. (cobede,Bede_3:19.244.7.2499)

(44)

...þæt	he	swa	in	toweardnesse	ecelice	ricsian	mid	Criste	moste.
...that	he-NOM	so	in	hereafterr	eternally	reign	with	Christ-DAT	pouvait-PRET.

... so you will hereafter reign in Christ. (cobede,Bede_3:21.248.21. 2544)

(45)

...	ond	hy	ealle	þa	bliðe	mode	lustlice	healdon	woldon...
...	and	they-NOM	all-NOM	this-ACC	cheerful-INSTR	mind-INSTR	willingly	wanted-IND.PRET.

... and they would all most willingly observe (it) with a cheerful mind... (cobede, Bede_4:5.276.32.2812)

(46)

Gif	hit	nænge	þinga	to dæge	beon	mægge.
If	that-NOM	no-INSTR	thing-GEN	today-DAT	be	might-SUBJ.PRES.

If today that might happen with none of these things. (cobede,Bede_4: 12.290.20.2932)

(47)

...	þæt	nænig	ðara	onweardra	his	heortan	degolnessa	him	helan	dorste...
...	that	no-one-NOM	the-GEN	opponants-GEN	his	heart-GEN	secret-ACC	him-DAT	conceal	dared-PRET...

... none of the opponants dared to conceal the secret of his heart... (cobede,Bede_4:28.362.27.3643)

(48)

and	gif	ðu	þæt	ne	dest,	þu	scealt	oncnawan	þone	gesettan	dom.
and	if	you-NOM	this-ACC	NEG	do-IND.PRES,	you-NOM	shall-IND.PRES	understand	the-ACC	appointed-P.PASSE-ACC	sentence-ACC.

and if thou doest that not, thou shalt suffer the appointed doom. (coapollo,ApT:5.5. 71; 1050)

(49)

Hlaford

Apolloni,

gif

ðu

þissere

hungrigan

ceasterwaru

gehelpest,

na

þæt

an

þæt

we

willað

þinne

fleam

bediglian...

Lord-NOM

Apollonius,

if

you-NOM

these

hungry

citizens

help-IND.PRES,

no at all

this-DAT

only

that

we-NOM

will-IND.PRES

this-ACC

flight-ACC

conceal.

Lord Apollonius, if thou helpest these hungry citizens, we will not only conceal thy flight, ... (coapollo,ApT:9.18.164)

Let us illustrate Structure (32) with Example (48) (now (50.a)):

(50)

(50.a)

and	gif	ðu	þæt	ne	dest,	þu	scealt	oncnawan	þone	gesettan	dom.
and	if	you-NOM	this-ACC	NEG	do-IND.PRES,	you-NOM	shall-IND.PRES	understand	the-ACC	appointed-P.PASSE-ACC	sentence-ACC.

and if thou doest that not, thou shalt suffer the appointed doom. (coapollo,ApT:5.5. 71; 1050)

(50.b)

When we are dealing with negation, the adverbial negative particle ne (following the terminology used in the diachronic literature) immediately precedes the finite verb,

(51)

...	no	ðu	ymb	mines	ne	þearft	lices	feorme	leng	sorgian.
...	no	you-NOM	about	me-GEN	NEG	needs-IND.PRES	body-GEN	comfort through food-DAT	longer	trouble.

... no longer will you need trouble yourself to take care of my body. (cobeowul,16.448.374; 680)

(52)

ða	hine	Wedera	cyn	for	herebrogan	habban	ne	mihte.
after	the-ACC	Weather-Geats-GEN	people-NOM	because of	fear of war-DAT	keep	NEG	might-PRET.

After that the country of the Weather-Geats might not keep him. (cobeowul,16.459.386)

(53)

Ða	ne	meahte	he	eaðelice	þa	unstillnesse	onfallendra	mengu	aberan...
Then	NEG	could-PRET	he-NOM	easily	the-ACC	agitation-ACC	oppressing-GEROND-GEN	crowd-GEN	bear...

he could no longer bear the crowds that resorted to him... (cobede,Bede_3:14.216.32.2220; 890)

(54)

ac	he	ne	mihte	hine	þar	findan	on	ðam	flocce.
but	he-NOM	NEG	could-PRET	him-ACC	there	find	in	the	troops-DAT.

but he could not find him in the company. (coapollo,ApT:13.9.232)

Moreover, this adverbial particle merges with that specific class of verbs (to be more accurate, it merges with AGAN, WILLAN and WITAN (note: ➳)):

(55)

and	hi	noldon	me	þa	agifan.
and	they-NOM	NEG+wanted-IND.PRET	me	her-ACC	restore.

and they would not restore her to me. (coapollo,ApT:50.10.534; 1050)

(56)

Nat	he	þara	goda	þæt	he	me	ongean	slea.
NEG+knows-PRES	he-NOM	these-GEN	tools-GEN	that	he-NOM	me-DAT	against	strike-SUBJ.PRES.

He knows no good tolls with which he might strike against me. (cobeowul,22.681.574; 680)

(57)

...	þæt	he	þa	weorþuncge	Eastrena	on riht	ne	heold	ne	nyste.
...	what	he-NOM	the-ACC	observance-ACC	Easter-GEN	correct-ACC	NEG	respected-IND.PRET	nor	NEG+knew-PRET.

... what he imperfectly understood in relation to the observance of Easter. (cobede, Bede_3:14.206.1.2087; 890)

What is striking is that merging only happens with this specific class of verbs (even if it is not compulsory), but not with strong and weak verbs (except with wesan and habban).

Let us sum up their differences:

1. They have a specific relationship with negation since ne can merge with the preterite present.

2. They are morphologically different from the other classes of verbs (as far as their endings are concerned). The plural form of the indicative present is not the strong or weak verbs; furthermore, there is a vowel alternation between the infinitive and the present indicative forms.

3. The preterite present verbs can generally take

   • an object NP (either noun or pronoun), like any other class of verbs,

   • a VP where there is an infinitive verb (for strong and weak verbs, it belongs either to TP or CP).

   as a complement.

When an infinitive follows a lexical verb (strong or weak), it belongs to TP or CP, according to the type of verb one is dealing with. We shall analyze this in more detail in the next section (note: ➳)

(58)

(58.a)

(58.b)

(59)

Þa	het	he	hraðe	his	þegnas	hine	secan	&	acsian.
Then	ordered-IND.PRET	he-NOM	immediately	his	soldiers-ACC	him-ACC	seek	&	call.

Whereupon he sent some soldiers to make a strict search after him. (cobede,Bede_1:7.34.25.280)

(60)

...	þæt	seolfe	he	ne	blinneþ	mærsian	&	weorþian	a	butan ende...
...	that	self-NOM	he-NOM	NEG	ceases-IND.PRES	glorify	&	celebrate	always	ever.

... or rather never ceases to celebrate... (cobede, Bede_5:20.474.6.4756)

Let us take Example (59) (now (61.a)) and give its structure (which will be identical for Example (60)).

(61)

(61.a)

Þa	het	he	hraðe	his	þegnas	hine	secan	&	acsian.
Then	ordered-IND.PRET	he-NOM	immediately	his	soldiers-ACC	him-ACC	seek	&	call.

Whereupon he sent some soldiers to make a strict search after him. (cobede,Bede_1:7.34.25.280)

(61.b)

All the given examples allow us to say that preterite presents are base-generated under V when they are lexical. But when they are semi-lexical, they are base-generated under v_Modal. We further assume that they are raising verbs with a structure very close to the CE causative structures. They do behave like operators: they are part of the event of the sentence but they are not the event (because of that, they are said to be “causative”). Moreover, they do not have an external argument (i.e. a subject, the visible subject is the subject of the infinitive verb) and they do not case-assign their complement. Subject and object are assigned θ-roles by the infinitive. Still, agreement is visible between the subject and the preterite present.

2.4.1. The functional head v

At the beginning of this chapter, we have defined three functional heads (C, T and Neg (even if we have not defined the syntactic position of the latter)) by means of examples. We are now going to define a fourth functional head – little v – which also belongs to the CFCs of a phase. In (10) ((10)): 15, v is a “light” verb, head of transitive structures. It must always be selected by the functional category T. In its turn, it selects a VP and an NP (i.e. the external argument of v). It has an EPP feature as C and T do. Moreover, within the minimalist framework, C and v define the strong phases of a derivation. Let us point out that fact in OE.

(62)

...	þa	cliopode	heo	hi	hire	to	mid	liðere	spræce...
...	then	called-PRET	she-NOM	her-ACC	her-DAT	to	with	gentle-DAT	speech-DAT.

then she called her to her with gentle speech... (coapollo,ApT:2.14.24)

The structure of this sentence is the following:

(63)

In this structure, there are two strong phases vP and C. The speaker first chooses elements which correspond to a (lexical or grammatical) category from his/her lexicon. Both the verb and its complements are generated under VP which has semantically been selected by v. This is why V merges with v the head of transitivity of the (strong) phase. Then, the subject in Spec,vP satisfies the EPP feature of TP. Next, an additional Spec is adjoined to vP for the internal argument.

The speaker then chooses the following elements in his/her lexicon:

• V = cliopode [+past,-irréel,+sg3],

• NP_Subject = heo [+sg3,+fem,+nom],

• NP_Object = hi [+sg3,+masc,+acc],

• PP = hire to [+sg3,+fem,+dat],

• PP = mid liðere spræce [+dat].

Next, the chosen components combine with one another:

(64)

At this point of the derivation, it can still crash because the tense features of the verb and T are not satisfied yet. As a consequence, the derivation cannot be spelled out. So, v is to merge with T to satisfy the uninterpretable tense features of T, and the subject in Spec,vP is to raise to Spec,TP to satisfy the φ features of T. Once satisfied, the tense features and the φ features of the subject are erased/cancelled. But still, there is no Spell-Out since TP is not a strong phase. As we have just said, T is semantically selected by C. Merge of the time adverb þa under Spec,CP triggers movement from v to C. The derivation is now over and can be spelled out.

So, we have just underllined the existence of v, another functional head. But we shall question Neg later in our work.

Within Halle et Marantz´s Distributed Morphology (DM), and more particularly in (43) ((43)), v has the following features:

1. It creates a verb.

2. It provides event semantics.

3. It provides agentive semantics for agentive constructions.

4. It merges with an external argument.

5. There is an Agree relation with the object.

According to Marantz, Features 1 to 3 go together, i.e. the semantic content of v acts on the semantic content of the sentence. For a specific v, we can have Features 1 to 3 without Features 4 and 5, as we can have Features 4 and 5 without Features 2 and 3.

Following our hypothesis, v_Modal has Features 1, 2 and 3: it creates the preterite present which is a semi-lexical verb (that we can consider as an “operator”; it provides event semantics (it adds up information to the relation set by the non finite verb); and it might provide agentive semantics (yet, can a raising verb provide agentive semantics?). But v_Modal does not have Features 4 and 5 because the external argument merges with the non finite verb, and because there is no Agree relation with the infinitive verb to which it does not assign case.

2.5. Existence of two positions for the preterite presents

Up to now, we have postulated the existence of two syntactic positions for the preterite presents:

1. The position V when the preterite present is direct transitive (followed by an NP), indirect transitive (followed by a PP) or bitransitive (followed by two objects).

2. the position we have named v_Modal when the preterite present is transitive (the complement is an infinitive, i.e. a VP). This latter position is lower than T.

2.5.1. Infinitive structures

For the sake of our analysis, it is necessary to define what an infinitive structure is and what the differences are when the finite verb is either lexical or semi-lexical.

The analysis we carried out in the past section allows us to say two syntactic positions exist in OE for preterite present verbs depending on their lexical or semi-lexical use. When lexical, the syntactic position is V; when semi-lexical, the syntactic position is v_Modal. The following example illustrates the first position. But in both cases, the subject is generated under Spec,vP (but when vP is tacit, the subject is under Spec,VP).

(65)

(65.a)

Ac	sio	ðeod	þone	cræft	þæs	fiscaþes	ne	cuðe,	...
But	the-NOM	people-NOM	the-ACC	craft-ACC	the-GEN	fishing-GEN	NEG	knew-PRET,	...

But the people did not know the craft of fishing, ... (cobede,Bede_4:17.304.

10.3076; 890)

(65.b)

When a preterite present does not have a NP complement, it is VP where the infinitive verb is.

Let us have a close look at the infinitive structures where there is either a lexical or a semi-lexical verb, so that we can define the differences between these two types of verbs.

In CE, infinitive clauses have the following structures, with a lexical verb with TO ((66.b)) or without TO ((67.b)); or with a modal verb (68.b)):

(66)

(66.a)

They want to stay.

(66.b)

(67)

(67.a)

They heard John cry.

(67.b)

(68)

(68.a)

Mary can swim.

(68.b)

The infinitive verb is the complement for the modal and it is base-generated under VP. As for the other types of infinitives where the finite verb is lexical, they are clauses, that is a complex sentence with a finite and non finite verb. Concerning the lexical V, it does not raise to T, but it is the tense affix that lowers to V. This is Affix Hopping.

Now, what about Old English? Do infinitive clauses belong to a VP (which is our hypothesis)? Before analyzing these clauses, let us first focus on infinitives following a finite lexical verb.

From the OE period, we can find two types of infinitive clauses: the ones introduced by TO (Examples (69) to (75)), and the ones which are not introduced by TO (Examples (59) and (60)).

(69)

ræd	eahtedon	hwæt	swiðferhðum	selest	wære	wið	færgryrum	to	gefremmanne.
plan-ACC	soughtt-IND.PRET	what-NOM	strong-hearted-DAT	the best-NOM	was-SUBJ.PRET	avec	awfulness-DAT	TO	follow-DAT.

sought a plan, what would be best for strong-hearted men to do against the awful attacks. (cobeowul,8.171.138)

(70)

No	þæt	yðe	byð	to	befleonne...
No	that-NOM	easy-NOM	is-IND.PRES	TO	flee-DAT.

That is not easy to flee from... (cobeowul,32.1002.835)

(71)

and	þæt	gefremed	man	gewilnode	to	bediglianne.
and	that-ACC	stranger-ACC	man-ACC	wanted-PRET	TO	conceal-DAT.

and he wanted to conceal that stranger. (coapollo,ApT:1.14.13)

(72)

willaþ	þæt	gewrecan	gif	we	magon,	þeah	we	beotiaþ	to	∅.
want-IND.PRES	that-ACC	revenge	if	we	can-IND.PRES,	even if	we-NOM	threaten-IND.PRES	TO	∅.

and desire, if we can, to take revenge, and (if we are unable), we nevertheless threaten to do so. (coblick, HomS_10_[BlHom_3]:33.127.447)

(73)

&	het	him	to	gelangian	þa	ylcan	Gotan.
&	ordored-IND.PRET	him-DAT	TO	send	the-ACC	same-ACC	Goths-ACC.

& he ordered him to send for the same Goths. (cogregdH,GD_1_[H]:10.80.10.794)

(74)

Eft

þæs

on

mergen

het

se

manfulla

dema

þa

eadigan

Agnen

him

to

gefeccan.

Again

this-GEN

on

morning-ACC

ordered-IND.PRET

le-NOM

wicked-NOM

judge-NOM

the-ACC

saint

Agnes-ACC

him-DAT

TO

seek.

The morning after, the wicked judge ordered Saint AGnes to be sought for again. (coaelive,ÆLS[Agnes]:91.1774)

(75)

Ða

cwæð

to

him

oþer

of

hys

leorningcnihtum,

Drihten,

alyfe

me

ærest

to

farenne

&

∅

bebyrigean

minne

fæder.

Then

said-IND.PRET

to

him-DAT

other-NOM

of

his

disciples-DAT,

Lord-NOM,

allow-SUBJ.PRES

me

before

TO

go-DAT

&

∅

bury

my-ACC

father-ACC.

Another of his disciples then said to him: “may the Lord allow me first to go and bury my father”. (cowsgosp,Mt_[WSCp]:8.21.462)

If we look closely at these examples, we can notice that when an infinitive clause is introduced by TO, the infinitive can be marked dative, which does not seem to be the case when TO is absent. We noticed this in Example (72): there is an ellipsis of the non finite verb, which would show that TO becomes a functional head (we shall explore that later in our work). On the contrary, in Example (73), the infinitive is unmarked. We can then wonder what this TO syntactically stands for: is it the well-known functional head in CE, is it a preposition governing the dative case, or is it a semi-lexical item which will lead us to say that TO follows the same syntactic path preterite presents do? In view of the preceding examples, we can consider TO as a semi-lexical preposition (i.e. undergoing grammaticalization) governing the dative case (see (62) ((62))). Yet, the syntactic representation of this element would be the functional head T having a [+dat] feature which is checked out by the [+dat] feature of the infinitive (if this feature is marked).

Let us now illustrate what we have just said with the following three examples: (76) where TO is not present, (77) where TO precedes the non finite verb, and (79.a) where PRO the subject of the infinitive is controlled by the subject of the sentence.

(76)

Þa	het	he	hraðe	his	þegnas	hine	secan	&	acsian.
Then	ordered-IND.PRET	he-NOM	immediately	his	soldiers-ACC	him-ACC	seek	&	call.

Whereupon he sent some soldiers to make a strict search after him. (cobede,Bede_1:7.34.25.280)

(77)

and	þæt	gefremed	man	gewilnode	to	bediglianne.
and	this-ACC	stranger-ACC	man-ACC	wished-PRET	TO	conceal.

and the perpetrated crime sought to conceal. (coapollo,ApT:1.14.13)

Whose structure is,

(78)

As for the example

(79)

(79.a)

No	þæt	yðe	byð	to	befleonne...
No-NOM	easy-NOM	is-IND.PRES	TO	flee-DAT.

That is not easy to flee from... (cobeowul,32.1002.835)

(79.b)

In Examples (80) to (84),we give again instances of preterite presents followed by an infinitive, in Examples (80) to (82), they are followed by an infinitive clause where the non finite is realized; but in Examples (83) to (84), there is an ellipsis of the non finite verb.

(80)

ne	mihte	snotor	hæleð	wean	onwendan.
NEG	could-PRET	wise-NOM	hero-NOM	sadness-ACC	change.

nor might the wise warrior set aside his woe. (cobeowul,8.189.153)

(81)

ic	geðristlæhte	þæt	ic	dorste	þis	weorc	ongynnan.
I-NOM	assumed-PRET	that	I-NOM	dared-PRET	this-ACC	work-ACC	begin.

I assumed I dared to begin this work. (cobede,BedePref:4.10.163)

(82)

and	hi	noldon	me	þa	agifan.
and	they-NOM	NEG+wanted-IND.PRET	me	her-DAT	restore.

and they would not restore her to me. (coapollo,ApT:50.10.534)

(83)

cwæð	heo:	Wilt	ðu,	wit unc	abidde	ondrincan.	Cwæð	ic:	Ic	wille	∅...
said-IND.PRET	she-NOM:	want-IND.PRES	you-NOM,	me and you-NOM	call-SUBJ.PRES	drink.	said-IND.PRET	I-NOM:	I-NOM	want-PRES	∅...

she said, ´Would you like me to call for something to drink?´ - ´Yes,´ said I, ´and am very glad if you can.´ (cobede,Bede_5:3.392.32.3921)

(84)

unc	sceal	worn	fela	maþma	gemænra	∅,	siþðan	morgen	bið.
we-DAT	shall-IND.PRES	a lot-NOM	many	treasures-GEN	precious-GEN	∅,	since	morning-NOM	is-IND.PRES.

many of our treasures will be shared when morning comes. (cobeowul,55.1782.1472)

2.5.2. Causatives structures

In contemporary English, causative verbs are operator verbs: they are neither lexical nor auxiliary verbs, they are part of the event but they are not the event. A causative verb is a v having the features 1 to 5 we have already mentioned in Section2.4.1: it creates a verb, provides event and agentive semantics, merges with an external argument and has an Agree relation with an object. Let us give some examples of causative verbs again in CE, then let us focus on OE to see if we can find such instances.

(85)

He had them eat the cake.

(86)

He made him cry.

The structure of (86) is,

(87)

In CE causative structures, the object of the finite verb is a VP. Is it the same in OE? We have considered the instances of the verb don “cause, do”:

(88)

(...)	doð	foroft	drymen	&	wiccan	on	heora	scincræfte,	to	beswicenne...
(...)	cause-IND.PRES	very often	magicians-NOM	&	soothsayers-NOM	by	their	craft-DAT,	TO	deceive-DAT...

Very often with their craft, the magicians and soothsayers are deceiving... (coaelhom,ÆHom_18:91.2543)

(89)

Þone

oðerne

dæl

he

dyde

∅

gehealden

mid

him

to

bebyrgenne

æfter

his

forðsiðe.

This-ACC

other-ACC

speech-ACC

he-NOM

caused-PRET

∅

follow

with

him-DAT

TO

bury-DAT

after

his-DAT

death-DAT.

he had this other speech be followed before him for his burial once he died. (coaelive,ÆLS_[Basil]:123.531)

(90)

and	dydon	on	wæter	wanhalum	to	þicgenne,	...
and	caused-IND.PRET	opn	water-ACC	stagnant-DAT	TO	drink-DAT,	...

and they made (him) drink this stagnant water, ... (coaelive,ÆLS_[Oswald]:200.5496)

(91)

Ond	heo	leornunge	godcundra	gewreota	hire	underþeodde	dyde	to	bigongenne,	...
And	she-NOM	knowledge-DAT	holy-GEN	scriptures-GEN	her-DAT	subjected-P.PASSE-DAT	caused-PRET	TO	attend-DAT,	...

And she obliged those who were under her direction to attend so much to reading of the Holy Scriptures, ... (cobede,Bede_4:24.334.16.3354)

the last examples have the following structure which applies to the other examples (even (89) where TO is not visible):

(92)

Considering these examples (they are not numerous in the corpus we are using, the infinitive structure of this causative verb is TP in Old english, and not VP like in CE. They are then different from preterite present verbs which have a VP complement.

Let us go back to preterite presents. The (finite) preterite present is followed by an infinitive in (80) to (82). In Examples (83) to (84), the finite verb is alone but there is the ellipsis of the infinitive verb. We will now analyse the structure of these verbs and show that the infinitive complement is indeed a VP. We will then be able to differenciate causative verbs from preterite present verbs and claim that causative verbs are VP whereas preterite presents are v_Modal (according to the analysis in (43) ((43)), our v_Modal only has three features out of five, two of them dealing only with semantics). Before starting our analysis, let us give some examples we have already mentioned:

(93)

willaþ	þæt	gewrecan	gif	we	magon,	þeah	we	beotiaþ	to	∅.
want-IND.PRES	that-ACC	revenge	if	we	can-IND.PRES,	even if	we-NOM	threaten-IND.PRES	TO	∅.

and desire, if we can, to take revenge, and (if we are unable), we nevertheless threaten to do so. (coblick,

HomS_10_[BlHom_3]:33.127.448)

(94)

...	þæt	heo	his	wedenheortnisse	gestilden,	ac	heo	ne	meahton	∅.
...	that	he-NOM	his	madness	eased-SUBJ.PRET,	but	he-NOM	NEG	could-IND.PRET	∅.

... did all he could to assuage the madness of the unfortunate man, but could not prevail. (cobede,Bede_3:9.184.32. 1853)

(95)

unc	sceal	worn	fela	maþma	gemænra	∅,	siþðan	morgen	bið.
we-DAT	shall-IND.PRES	a lot-NOM	many	treasures-GEN	precious-GEN	∅,	since	morning-NOM	is-IND.PRES.

many of our treasures will be shared when morning comes. (cobeowul,55.1782.1472)

The first step of our analysis is drawing a parallel between Example (93) and Examples (94) to (95). So far, the examples where the infinitive clause was introduced by TO have showed us that TO tended to be a functional head, that is a semi-grammatical preposition. Example (93) confirms this statement: with the ellipsis of the infinitive, TO is considered as a functional head (we assume it is T); if TO had been a preposition, the ellipsis of the infinitive would not have occurred. We then suggest to draw a parallel between this structure, where we assume TO to be base-generated under T, and Structures (94) to (95). This analysis will allow us to show that v_Modal is the syntactic position where preterite presents are base-generated when they are followed by an infinitive. So, when there is an ellipsis of the non finite verb, both heads hosting TO and a preterite present are “functional”. Their syntactic structures are slighty identical: the structure corresponding to TO + V is,

(96)

and the structure corresponding to Pret.Pres. + V (note: ➳) is,

(97)

According to this structure, preterite present verbs seem to be raising verbs: the semantic subject of the non finite verb raises to Spec,TP to become the grammatical subject of the sentence, where Agree is visible between the subject and preterite present.

Let us go back to Examples (93) and (94) (now (98.a) and (99.a)) and illustrate them.

(98)

(98.a)

willaþ	þæt	gewrecan	gif	we	magon,	þeah	we	beotiaþ	to	∅.
want-IND.PRES	that-ACC	revenge	if	we	can-IND.PRES,	even if	we-NOM	threaten-IND.PRES	TO	∅.

and desire, if we can, to take revenge, and (if we are unable), we nevertheless threaten to do so. (coblick,

HomS_10_[BlHom_3]:127.446)

(98.b)

(99)

(99.a)

þæt	heo	his	wedenheortnisse	gestilden,	ac	heo	ne	meahton	∅.
...	that	he-NOM	his	madness	eased-SUBJ.PRET,	but	he-NOM	NEG	could-IND.PRET	∅.

... did all he could to assuage the madness of the unfortunate man, but could not prevail. (cobede,Bede_3:9. 184.32.1854)

(99.b)

Let us refine our analysis of preterite presents to stress their syntactic difference. We are going to look at:

1. examples displaying the structure MD + INF + OBJ-ACC,

   (100)

   Mæssepreost

   sceal

   habban

   mæsseboc

   and

   pistelboc,

   and

   sangboc

   and

   rædingboc

   and

   saltere

   and

   handboc

   (...).

   Priest-NOM

   must-IND.PRES

   have

   book of mass-ACC

   and

   book of gospels-ACC,

   and

   book of chants-ACC

   and

   book of reading-ACC

   and

   psalms-ACC

   and

   handbook-ACC

   (...).

   The priests must possess the book of prayers, the book of the Gospels, the book of chants as well as the book of psalms and the handbook.. (colwstan1,ÆLet_2_[Wulfstan_1]:157. 226)

   (101)

   Hwylc

   man

   is

   þæt

   mæge

   ariman

   ealle

   þa

   sar

   &

   þa

   brocu

   þe

   se

   man

   to

   gesceapen

   is?

   What-NOM

   man-NOM

   is-IND.PRES

   that

   may-SUBJ.PRES

   number

   all-ACC

   the-ACC

   pain-ACC

   &

   the-ACC

   diseases-ACC

   that

   the-NOM

   man-NOM

   to

   destined-P.PASSE

   is-IND.PRES?

   What man is he that may number all the pains and diseases that man is born to? (coblick,HomS_17_[BlHom_5]:55.99.795)

   (102)

   forþon	þe	heo	wolde	gehyran	his	word	&	his	lare.
   for	that	she-NOM	would-PRET	hear	his	words-ACC	&	his	knowledge-ACC.

   for she would hear his words and his teaching. (coblick, HomS_21_[BlHom_6]:67.30.825)

   (103)

   Hwæt,	hi	eac	witon	hwær	hi	eafiscas	secan	þurfan,	...
   What,	they-NOM	thus	know-IND.PRES	where	they-NOM	river fish-ACC	seek	need-IND.PRES,	...

   What, then they know where to find the fish they need, ... (cometboe,176.19.24.318)

2. examples displaying the structure MD + OBJ-ACC + INF,

   (104)

   Tealde

   &

   wende

   þæt

   he

   mid

   swinglan

   sceolde

   þa

   beldu

   &

   þa

   anrednesse

   his

   heortan

   anescian,

   ða

   he

   mid

   wordum

   ne

   mihte.

   said-PRET

   &

   translated-PRET

   that

   he-NOM

   with

   whip-DAT

   should-PRET

   the-ACC

   courage-ACC

   &

   the-ACC

   perseverance-ACC

   his

   heart-GEN

   weaken,

   that

   he-NOM

   with

   words-DAT

   NEG

   could-PRET.

   He said that he had to weaken the courage and perseverance of his heart by scourging himself, the which he could not do with words. (cobede,Bede_1:7. 36.32.307)

   (105)

   ac	he	ma	wile	his	treowa	&	his	gehat	wið	þe	gehealdan...
   but	he-NOM	no more	will-PRES	his	agreement-ACC	&	his	promise-ACC	with	you	hold...

   but he will not hold his promise towards you... (cobede,Bede_2:9. 130.24.1253)

   (106)

   þæt	us	mæg	þa	gyfe	syllan	ecre	eadignesse	&	eces	lifes	hælo.
   it-NOM	us	may-IND.PRES	the-ACC	gift-ACC	give	eternal-GEN	happiness-GEN	&	eternal-GEN	life-GEN	salvation-ACC.

   (it) can confer on us the gifts of life, of salvation, and of eternal happiness. (cobede,Bede_2:10.136.15.1320)

   (107)

   Nu	nealæceþ	þæt	we	sceolan	ure	æhta	&	ure	wæstmas	gesamnian.
   Now	gets closer-IND.PRES	that	we-NOM	should-IND.PRES	our-ACC	gains-ACC	&	our-ACC	fruits-ACC	gather.

   The time is nigh at hand that we should gather together our substance and our gains. (coblick, HomS_14_[BlHom_4]:39.1.509)

   (108)

   Sum	mæg	ryne	tungla	secgan.
   Some-NOM	can-IND.PRES	course-ACC	stars-ACC	tell.

   Some can fortell the course of the stars. (cochrist,21.671.453)

   (109)

   ...	þæt	he	sceolde	boccræftas	&	gewrita	wisdomas	leornian.
   ...	that	he-NOM	should-PRET	science-ACC	&	scriptures-GEN	knowledge-ACC	learn.

   ... that he had to learn science and the knowledge of the scriptures. (cogregdC, GDPref_2_[C]:95.10.1078)

   (110)

   Næ

   mæg

   ic

   ana

   eower

   gemang

   acuman

   &

   eower

   swarnyssa

   &

   eowre

   saca.

   No

   may-IND.PRES

   I-NOM

   one

   your-ACC

   assembly-ACC

   bear

   &

   your-ACC

   heaviness-ACC

   &

   your-ACC

   enemeis-ACC.

   I cannot bear either your assembly, your heaviness or your enemies any longer. (cootest,Deut:1.11.4454)

3. examples displaying the structure V + INF + OBJ-ACC,

   (111)

   Þa	heht	heo	gesomnian	ealle	þa	gelæredestan	men	&	þa	leorneras:
   Then	ordered-IND.PRET	he-NOM	gather	all-ACC	the-ACC	learned-ACC	men-ACC	&	the-ACC	disciples-ACC...

   by whom he was ordered, in the presence of many learned men... (cobede, Bede_4:25.344.20.3463)

   (112)

   Broðor	mine,	nu	we	gehyrdon	secgan	þa	weorðunga	þyses	ondweardan	dæges...
   Brother-NOM	my-NOM,	now	we-NOM	heard-IND.PRET	tell	the-ACC	celebration-ACC	this-GEN	present-GEN	day-GEN...

   My brother, we have now heard of the celebration of the present day... (coblick,HomS_47_[BlHom_12]:137.106.1661)

   (113)

   &	het	sceawian	ðæt	land	&	ða buruh	Iericho,	...
   &	wished-IND.PRET	look	this-ACC	country-ACC	&	the-ACC town-ACC	Jericho,	...

   he wished to visit this country and the city of Jericho, ... (cootest,Josh:2.1.4382)

4. examples displaying the structure V + OBJ-ACC + INF,

   (114)

   Þa	het	se	cyning	sona	neoman	þone	mete	&	þa	swæsendo...
   Then	ordered-IND.PRET	the-NOM	king-NOM	soon	take	this-ACC	meat-ACC	&	this-ACC	food-ACC...

   he immediately ordered the meat set before him... (cobede, Bede_3:4.166.6.1591)

With these examples, we shall try and show that the syntax of lexical verbs and preterite presents when the object is case-marked accusative: v_Modal does not assign case, moreover, the object is semantically bound to a lexical V.

We then propose that in this kind of structures (with a preterite present verb), the object is semantically bound to the infinitive V (whatever its position: either between the preterite present and the infinitive or after the infinitive). It is indeed the object of the infinitive, as the subject is semantically bound to V before becoming the grammatical subject of the preterite present. Hence, we put forward the following hypothesis: in those structures, preterite presents are raising verbs as early as the OE period.

On the other hand, when there are two lexical verbs (one finite and another non finite), we are faced with two cases: either the object is bound to the finite verb (and it is the verb which assigns to the object), or it is bound to the non finite verb (and it is the subject of this verb).

Within the OE corpus, when we have looked through instances of pretereite presents and lexical verbs, more than two thirds of them dealt with preterite presents, as for the last third, we have mainly found the two lexical verbs hetan and habban.

These examples allow us to underline the syntax of the preterite present verbs and to validate the hypothesis of v_Modal (when the object is marked accusative, it semantically is the non finite verb´s). So, it seems that preterite presents syntactically behave in a different way to lexical verbs.

It is also to be noted that accusative-marked objects are the finite verbs semantic objects (unlike preterite presents which do not have objects, except a VP object).

Hence, we can infer that preterite presents are not lexical but semi-lexical verbs in OE since they assign no accusative case to any object. Furthermore, in early OE, preterite presents are raising verbs. These two statements allow us to claim that they are base-generated under the different syntactic position v_Modal.

2.5.3. The v_Modal position

We have just seen we could find two types of structures for preterite presents:

1. Pret.Pres + NP ou,

2. Pret.Pres + Infinitive (VP).

For the first case, the preterite present is a lexical verb as strong and weak are. For the second case, it is directly base-generated under v_Modal (when it is followed by an infiniitve) and the subject is base-generated under Spec,vP. We then proposed the functional head v_Modal to syntactically dominate V. For the OE period of language, preterite presents are not grammatical yet (and therefore cannot be base-generated under T). This is why we call them semi-lexical verbs.

The following examples (with WITAN and MUNAN in particular) give an illustration of the lexical status of preterite present verbs. Their syntax can either be Pref.Pres + NP or Pref.Pres + CP.

(115)

...	wite	þu	þæt	Apollonius	ariht	arædde	mynne	rædels?
...	know-PRES	you-NOM	that	Apollonius-NOM	rightly	interpreted-PRET	my-ACC	riddle-ACC?

... knowest thou that Apollonius hath rightly read my riddle? (coapollo,ApT:6.1.76)

(116)

Ac

gemyne

þu

þæt

þu

þisne

ele,

þe

ic

þe

nu

sylle,

synd

in

þa

sæ.

But

remember-IND.PRES

you-NOM

that

you-NOM

these-ACC

oils-ACC,

that

I-NOM

toi

always

give-PRES,

are-IND.PRES

to

the-ACC

sea-ACC.

but do you remember to cast this oil I give you into the sea. (cobede,Bede_3:13.200.4.2025)

(117)

wolde

þæt

he

in

þon

ongete,

þæt

þæt

mon

ne

wæs,

se

þe

him

æteawde,

...

voulut-PRET

que

il-NOM

à travers

cela-INSTR

sût-SUBJ.PRET,

que

cet-NOM

homme-NOM

NEG

était-IND.PRET,

celui-NOM

que

lui-DAT

révéla-PRET,

...

Grâce à cela, il voulut qu´il sût que cet homme n´était pas celui qui le révélât, ... (cobede,Bede_2:9.130.16.1245)

(118)

men	ne	cunnon	hwyder	helrunan	hwyrftum	scriþað.
men-NOM	NEG	know-IND.PRES	where	hell-demons-NOM	turn-DAT	go-IND.PRES.

men do not know where hell-demons direct their footsteps. (cobeowul,7.162. 127)

We have just defined two syntactic positions for preterite present verbs: V for lexical preterite presents and v_Modal for semi-lexical preterite presents.

Semi-lexical preterite present is then directly base-generated under v_Modal, and merges with T to satisfy its tense and φ features (with Spec,TP).

Let us take Example (33) (now (119.a)) again to underline what has just been said.

(119)

(119.a)

...	þæt	he	wið	ælfylcum	eþelstolas	healdan	cuðe,	ða	wæs	Hygelac	dead.
...	that	he-NOM	against	foreigners-DAT	native throne-ACC	hold	could-PRET,	since	was-IND.PRET	Hygelac-NOM	dead-NOM.

... that he could hold his native throne against foreigners now that Hygelac was dead. (cobeowul,73.2367.1931)

(119.b)

The subject is assigned a θ-role by the infinitive, and the preterite present is then base-generated under v_Modal. For the derivation not to crash, the subject raises to Spec,TP to satisfy the EPP feature of T. Then, the preterite present satisfies its tense feature with T´s and its φ features with the subject´s under Spec,T. Once these features have been satisfied, the derivation can be spelled out.

2.6. Negation

Let us now go back to the functional head Neg. Examples (23) and (24) underlined the fact that cliticization of the negative adverbial particle ne onto preterite presents could exist, and that that particle always immediately preceded the finite verb. We shall see that this cliticization is not compulsory.

2.6.1. Negative Concord and Neg Criterion

2.6.1.1. Negative Concord

Like any other Germanic language, OE has this phenomenom of negative concord: if there are (more than) two negative elements in a single sentence, they do not cancel each other out but they conjointly express one and only one negation (see (29) ((29))).

(120)

Siððan

of

þære

tide

nænig

Sceotta

cyninga

ne

dorste

wið

Angelþeode

to

gefeohte

cuman

oð ðysne

andweardan

dæg.

When

from

this-DAT

period-DAT

no

Scot-GEN

king-GEN

NEG

dared-PRET

against

Britain

to

fight-DAT

approach

till here-ACC

present-ACC

day-ACC.

From that time, no king the Scots durst come into Britain to make war on the English to this day. (cobede,Bede_1:18.92.24.856)

(121)

...	no	ðu	ymb	mines	ne	ðearft	lices	feorme	leng	sorgian.
...	no	you-NOM	about	me-GEN	NEG	needs-IND.PRES	body-GEN	comfort through food-DAT	longer	trouble.

... no longer will you need trouble yourself to take care of my body. (cobeowul,16.448.374)

(122)

forðam þe

Apollonius

him

ondræt

þines

rices

mægna

swa þæt

he

ne

dear

nahwar

gewunian.

because

Apollonius-NOM

himself-DAT

dreads-IND.PRES

this-GEN

realm-GEN

power-ACC

so that

he-NOM

NEG

dares-IND.PRES

nowhere

live.

for that Apollonius dreads the powers of the realm, so that he dares continue nowhere. (coapollo,ApT:7.17.108)

2.6.1.2. Neg Criterion

According to (24) ((24)), the Neg criterion determines the syntax of negative sentences: “all N-words carry a semantic-syntactic feature Neg and this feature is subject to a specific licensing condition”(note: ➳). Hence the introduction of a Neg Criterion: “a NEG operator must be in a spec-head configuration with a X⁰ [+NEG]; and an X⁰ [+NEG] must be in a spec-head configuration with a NEG operator” ((26) ((26)): 116). This criterion is insprired by Rizzi´s WH criterion.

Within the Minimalist framework, the spec-head relationship is not important but the way this relation is satisfied by local c-command is (minimal research within a minimal domain): “Apparent SPEC-H relations are in reality head-head relations involving minimal search (local c-command)” ((8) ((8)): 12).

2.6.2. The negative adverbial particle ne and NegP

Let us go back to the negative adverbial particle ne. According to Zanuttini´s analysis in (25) ((25)), the negative particle ne is the head of the negative projection Neg, since it precedes the finite verb and another negative constituant is not needed for a sentence to be negative. What we question now is the position of this functional projection. Following Zanuttini, we propose the next position:

(123)

Let us now illustrate with Example (124) the position NegP.

(124)

ac	he	ne	mæg	for	scame	in	gan	buton	scrude.
but	he-NOM	NEG	can-IND.PRES	for	shame	in	go	without	clothing-DAT.

but, for shame, he may not enter without clothing. (coapollo,ApT:14.15.267)

(125)

According to Chomsky´s Minimalist Program, all the constituants of a sentence are chosen within the lexicon fully marked, i.e. nouns or verbs bear the mark of singular, plural, gender, number, person, ...; they represent a set of features. So, for a derivation to be grammatical, each and every constituant must have its set of features satisfied by a (functional) category possessing the same features. Negation acts the same way: it is chosen at the same time as the finite verb and has an uninterpretable [+neg] feature which is satisfied by the functional head Neg having that same feature. While satisfying this feature, Neg merges with T.

According to Halle and Marantz´s Distributed Morphology, we have the following steps:

Before the morphological fusion of T with v_Modal, we first have,

(126)

then after the morphological fusion of T with v_Modal,

(127)

and finally, after the morphological fusion of the head Neg with T+v_Modal, we have,

(128)

once these morphological fusions are done, there is Vocabulary Insertion.

2.6.3. ne and noht

At that point in our analysis, the OE sentence has a functional head Neg. In the corpus, very few examples displaying not have been found. When it is conjointly found with the negative adverbial particle ne, it is to be considered as a negative quantifier in the OE corpora ((52)) et ((67) ((67))), since it cannot be the only negation of the sentence at that period of time. Nevertheless, it is case-marked accusative (ACC) which turns it into a direct object of the infinitive verb.

(129)

Þa	ondswared	he	þæt	he	noht	swylcra	cræfta	ne	cuðe.
Alors	répondit-PRET	il-NOM	que	he-NOM	nothing-ACC	such-GEN	craft-GEN	NEG	knew-PRET.

Then he answered that he did not know such a craft. (cobede,Bede_4:23.328. 8.3291)

(130)

&	cwæð:	Ne	con	ic	noht	singan.
&	said-PRES:	NEG	know-IND.PRES	I-NOM	nothing-ACC	sing.

and he said: I do not know how to sing. (cobede,Bede_4:25.342.29.3445)

(131)

...	forþon	ic	naht	singan	ne	cuðe.
...	for	I-NOM	nothing-ACC	sing	NEG	knew-PRET.

... because I did know any song to sing. (cobede,Bede_4:25.342.29.3446)

In these specific cases, the Neg criterion applies: there is a relationship between Neg and the negative N.

Let us give an illustration of Example (130):

(132)

the Neg criterion takes place without T blocking the local c-command relation between the head Neg, ne and Q, naht. Then, at the morphological level, there is Merger of Neg with T (to get the linear order ne).

2.6.4. Consequence(s) of negative concord

Within one single sentence, OE can have several negative elements expressing one and only one negation. Ne can then be associated with negative adverbs. Following (12) ((12)), could we assume these adverbs to be Specs of functional heads? Our hypothesis is that a functional head corresponds to each type of adverb. Let us study some examples.

(133)

forðam þe

Apollonius

him

ondræt

þines

rices

mægna

swa þæt

he

ne

dear

nahwar

gewunian.

because

Apollonius-NOM

himself-DAT

dreads-IND.PRES

the-GEN

realm-GEN

power-ACC

so that

he-NOM

NEG

dares-IND.PRES

nowhere

live.

for that Apollonius dreads the powers of the realm, so that he dares continue nowhere. (coapollo,ApT:7.17.108)

(134)

Ond

he

þes

biscop

ricum

monnum

no

for

are

ne

for

ege

næfre

forswigian

nolde,

...

And

he-NOM

the-NOM

bishop-NOM

powerful-DAT

men-DAT

nor

because of

prosperity

nor

because of

fear

never

conceal

NEG wanted-PRET,

...

He never gave money to the powerful men of the world (...) if he happened to entertain them, ... (cobede,Bede_3:3.162.12.1557)

Examples (133) and (134) underline the use of both ne and a negative adverb (which are base-generated in situ). As for Example (135), the only negation of the sentence is a negative adverb.

(135)

Na	þu	minne	ðearft	hafalan	hydan...
No	you-NOM	my-ACC	need-IND.PRES	head-ACC	hide...

You will not need to hide my head... (cobeowul,16.445.368)

We have mentioned that the Neg criterion implies a head-to-head relation, so all the different negative adverbs are to be heads for the Neg criterion to apply.

Thus, the place adverb nahwar of Example (133) and the time adverb of Example (134) are both under an Adv head. The head Neg then c-commmands these two adverbs (under respectively AdvP_Place and AdvP_Time); Example (135) is the most interesting one: if the adverb is the only negation in the sentence, what is its position? We propose it is generated under a position which differs from the ones precedingly described. It cannot be Spec,CP since no subject-verg inversion can be seen (which is the case in sentences where the first element is either a negative constituant or the adverbs þa/þonne (see (69) ((69)) and (49) ((49)))).

It cannot be Neg₁, otherwise the adverb would immediately precede the finite verb. Then there exists a position above TP where this type of (time) adverb is base-generated. We assume it is a head different from Neg so that the Neg criterion will apply.

(136)

Let us take Example (135) (now (137.a)) again and give its syntactic structure.

(137)

(137.a)

Na	þu	minne	þearft	hafalan	hydan.
No	you-NOM	my-ACC	need-IND.PRES	head-ACC	head...

You will not need ti hide my head... (cobeowul,16.445.368)

(137.b)

Under Neg, one can notice an empty element: even if ne is not realized, the Neg criterion indeed takes place.

2.7. Adverbs and functional heads

Now, let us try and see if there are as many functional heads in OE as in CE (according to Cinque´s classification), but we assume adverbs to be base-generated under functional heads corresponding to each type of adverb but not under Specs. To achieve that, we have selected examples that appear to be relevant for our analysis, i.e. examples where there are several adverbs in the same sentence, so that we can see if such a classification exists in OE.

(138)

Nænig	heora	þohte	þæt	he	þanon	scolde	eft	eardlufan	æfre	gesecean...
No	them-GEN	thought-PRET	that	he-NOM	from there	should-PRET	often	dear home-ACC	never	seek...

None of them thought that he would ever again seek from there his dear home... (cobeowul,23.691.582)

(139)

sceolde	hwæðre	swa	þeah	æðeling	unwrecen	ealdres	linnan.
should-PRET	if	so	yat	prince-NOM	unavenged-NOM	elder-GEN	lose.

yet it had happened that a prince had to lose life unavenged. (cobeowul,76.2441. 1992)

(140)

þonne	wolde	heo	ealra	nyhst	hy	baþian	&	þwean.
then	wanted-PRET	she-NOM	all-GEN	at last	them-ACC	bath	&	wash.

She finally wanted to bathe and wash them all. (cobede,Bede_4:21. 318.18.3198)

(141)

se	sceal	nede	in	helle	duru	unwillsumlice	geniþerad	geladed	beon...
he-NOM	shall-IND.PRES	necessarily	in	hell-GEN	gate-ACC	unwillingly	damned-P.PASSE-NOM	led-P.PASSE	be...

he will certainly be damned, and enter the gate of hell whether he will or no... (cobede,Bede_5:15.442.21.4451)

(142)

No	he	wiht	fram	me	flodyþum	feor	fleotan	mihte...
No	he-NOM	nought	fra from	me-DAT	flood-waves-DAT	far	swim	could-PRET...

He could not swim at all far from me in the flood-waves... (cobeowul,18.541.460)

(143)

ne	mæg	ic	her	leng	wesan.
NEG	can-IND.PRES	I-NOM	here	any longer	stay.

I cannot stay here any longer. (cobeowul,86.2799.2283)

(144)

Nales

þæt

sona

þæt

innstæpe

&

ungeþeahtenlice

þæm

gerynum

onfon

wolde

þæs

Cristenan

geleafan...

None

that

immediately

this-ACC

directly

&

rapidly

the-DAT

sacrements-DAT

receive

wanted-PRET

the-GEN

christian-GEN

beliefs-GEN...

he would not immediately and unadvisedly embrace the mysteries of the Christian faith... (cobede,Bede_2:8.124.13.1180)

(145)

Ðæt	hwæðre	æðelice	ongetan	meahton	ealle	þa	þæt	cuðon.
This-ACC	yet	all	understand	could-IND.PRET	all-NOM	that-NOM	that	knew-IND.PRET.

Yet, they could all understand what they had the knowledge of. (cobede,Bede_4:26.348.29.3518)

(146)

...	þæt	he	ðær	eac	swylce	bebyrged	beon	moste...
...	that	he-NOM	there	also	thus	buried-P.PASSE	be	should-PRET...

... that he might also be buried in the same place...... (cobede,Bede_4:30.374.1.3735)

(147)

Hwider	mæg	ic	nu	faran?
Wher	can-IND.PRES	I-NOM	now	go?

Where can I go now? (coapollo,ApT:12.9.198)

(148)

Hat	him	findan	hwar	he	hine	mæge	wurðlicost	gerestan.
Bid-IMP	him	find	where	he-NOM	him-ACC	may-SUBJ.PRES	honourably	rest.

bid that there be found for him where he may rest most honourably. (coapollo,ApT:17.27.365)

In Examples (149), (151), (153) and (155), adverbs have the following syntactic positions:

(149)

Nænig	heora	þohte	þæt	he	þanon	scolde	eft	eardlufan	æfre	gesecean...
No	them-GEN	thought-PRET	that	he-NOM	from there	should-PRET	often	dear home-ACC	never	seek...

None of them thought that he would ever again seek from there his dear home... (cobeowul,23.691.582)

which has the following structure,

(150)

(151)

sceolde	hwæðre	swa	þeah	æðeling	unwrecen	ealdres	linnan.
should-PRET	if	so	yat	prince-NOM	unavenged-NOM	elder-GEN	lose.

yet it had happened that a prince had to lose life unavenged. (cobeowul,76.2441. 1992)

which has the following structure,

(152)

(153)

þonne	wolde	heo	ealra	nyhst	hy	baþian	&	þwean.
then	wanted-PRET	she-NOM	all-GEN	at last	them-ACC	bath	&	wash.

She finally wanted to bathe and wash them all. (cobede,Bede_4:21.318. 18.3198)

which has the following structure,

(154)

(155)

se	sceal	nede	in	helle	duru	unwillsumlice	geniþerad	geladed	beon.
he-NOM	shall-IND.PRES	necessarily	in	hell-GEN	gate-ACC	unwillingly	damned-P.PASSE-NOM	led-P.PASSE	be...

he will certainly be damned, and enter the gate of hell whether he will or no...

Lui, que l´on a involontairement condamné aux portes de l´enfer, doit nécessairement être disculpé. (cobede,Bede_5:15.442.21.4451)

whose structure is,

(156)

Let us first have a look at these four examples. In Example (150), the adverbs oft et æfre are under two functional heads (if we follow Cinque´s analysis and hierarchy: 106) Asp_{Frequentative} and Asp_Perfective. We then have a first structure:

(157)

[T [oft Asp_{Frequentative} [v_Modal [æfre Asp_Perfective]]]]

In Example (156), nede and unwillsumlice also are under functional heads. These are relevant for our analysis since Mod_Necessity and Mod_Volition are modal heads. We then have the second structure,

(158)

[T [nede Mod_Necessity [v_Modal [(un)willsumlice Mod_Volition]]]]

For Cinque, Mod functional heads are hierarchically higher than Asp heads. And if we sum up our remarks, we have the following hierarchy:

(159)

[T [nede Mod_Necessity [oft Asp_{Frequentative} [$v_{Asp}$ [(un)willsumlice Mod_Volition [æfre Asp_Perfective]]]]]]

In the preceding structure, we have only taken into account Mod and Asp heads. Let us now be more accurate by adding the functional heads corresponding to the other adverbs we mentioned in Examples (150) to (156).

(160)

[þonne Adv_Time [C [þanon Adv_Place [hwæðre [swa [þeah [T [nede Mod_Necessity [oft Asp_{Frequentative} [$v_{Asp}$ [(un)willsumlice Mod_Volition [æfre Asp_Perfective [nyhst]]]]]]]]]]]]].

Yet, these few examples only demonstrate the use of a small number of adverbs. Here is a classification of adverbs we have found when used along preterite present verbs, keeping in mind that an adverb can have different meanings and then belong to different categories. Our reference texts are still Beowulf, Cura Pastoralis and Apollonius of Tyre. We are using Cinque´s method to classify them.

• Time adverbs : a “always”, æfre/næfre “ever, never”, ærest “first”, æror “before”, eac “since”, emb “before, after”, fyrmest “first”, geara “well, rapidly, near”, gen “already, now, still”, get “already, still”, iu “precedingly”, leng “long”, nu “now”, oft “often”, sel/selust “soon”, seldon “rarely”, somed “simultaneously”, sona “soon”, symble “always”, syððan “since, now, then”, toweardlice “towards”, þa/ þonne “then”, þonne “already” ;

• Place adverbs : ær “soon, already”, emb “near”, fyrr/feorr “far”, furður “further”, hider “hither”, nahwar “nowhere”, þær “where”, uute/utan “out”, wide “wide” ;

• modality adverbs : aninga “necessarily”, eað “willingly”, lustlice “willingly”, nede “necessarily”, (un)willsumlice “willingly”,

• manner adverbs : aeðmodlice “humbly, kindly”, eað “lightly”, aninga “rapidly”, fæstlice “constantly, strictly”, fremsumlice “kindly”, freolslice “freely”, fullice “perfectly, fully”, furðum “exactly, already”, fyrmest “specially”, gearwe “well, fully”, geornlicor “cautiously”, hergendlice “praiseworthily”, hrædlicor “suddenly”, hu “how”, hwæðre “whether, alreday”, liðelice “slowly, lightly”, lustlice “happily”, smealice “precisely, subtly”, somed “together”, sweotole/sweotollice “clearly, precisely”, þonne “then, already”, uneaðelice “with difficulty”, wel “well, fully”.

• Other types of adverbs : eac “also”, fordon “thus, because”, hrædlicor “suddenly”, hwædre “yet, already”, no “no, never”, swa “so, consequently”, þonne “thus, already”.

Let us go back to (12) ((12)): 106 and see if we can apply it to OE adverbs.

We have to admit that OE does not seem to have as many functional heads as CE has, even if some adverbs do not enter this hierarchy.

Hence the followong functional heads:

(161)

[sweotole/sweotollice clearly, precisely, fullice perfectly, fully, gewislicost certainly, surely, gerisenlice honorably, conveniently, huru yet, certainly, openlicor obviously, hluttorlice sincerely, clearly, rihtlice right, well, smealice precisely, subtly Mood_Evidential [eft again, nu now, iu precedingly, eac since T(Past) [þa/þonne then, nu now, teowardlice towards T(Future) [nede necessarily, aninga willingly Mod_Necessity [eað willingly, lustlice willingly Mod_Volitional [swa thus, consequently Mod_Obligation [hioweslice? informally Asp_Habitual [eft again, gelomlice frequently Asp_{Repetitive(I)} [eft again, gelomlice frequently Asp_{Frequentative(I)} [aninga rapidly Asp_{Celerative(I)} [emb before, after, iu precedingly, syððan since, now, then, eac? since T(Anterior) [get yet, again, gen already, now, again, swa thus, consequently Asp_Continuative [a/(n)æfre never, always, simble always, constantly Asp_Perfect[ær before, once Asp_{Retros- pective} [sona soon, sel/selust soon, hrædlicor suddenly Asp_Proximative [leng long Asp_Durative [neah near, almost Asp_Prospective [fullice perfectly, completely Asp_{Sg.Completive(I)} [wel well, sel/selust soon, geara formerly, once Voice [aninga rapidly, geara formerly, once Asp_{Celerative(II)} [fullice perfectly, completely Asp_{Sg.Completive(II)} [eft again, gelomlice frequently Asp_{Repetitive(II)} [eft again, gelomlice frequently Asp_{Frequentative(II)}]]...

In Section 2.8.2, some of the heads we have listed will help us in our analysis, specially Mod(ality) heads. In Section 2.8.1, we shall show the existence of the functional head Mood_Irrealis (even if it does not appear in the preceding hierarchy).

2.8. Tense, mood and modality

2.8.1. Tense and mood

2.8.1.1. Tense

In OE, there are two tenses: present and past. Within the Minimaliste theory, these two tenses have the form of formal features possessed by T.

(162)

These features are satisfied by the same features a verb has, as shown in the following example,

(163)

(163.a)

Hwider	mæg	ic	nu	faran?
Where	can-IND.PRES	I-NOM	now	go?

Where can I go now? (coapollo,ApT:12.9.198)

(163.b)

In this example, we know mæg is a present form because of its morphology, i.e. its root vowel æ (to be opposed to i for a past form). Then, this verb has a [-past] feature when chosen into the lexicon, as well as a [+modal] feature inherent to preterite present verbs. The [+modal] feature is satisfied by a v having the same feature, i.e. v_Modal; as for the [-past] feature, it is satisfied by T. We then have:

• MAGAN : root vowel /-æ/, ending ∅, marks of present sg 1 et 3 (in the plural, root vowel /-a/ and ending /-on/)

• v_Modal = [+modal], [-past]

• T = [-past]

which gives the following structure (even if we are dealing with Distributed Morphology, we think it makes our analysis clearer to use structures):

(164)

or, accordin to DM,

(165)

[T-V-Agr-sg2] ⟷ mæg [modal, present, sg2]

This form is then inserted into the sentence.

At this stage of the computation, mæg still has a [-past] feature which must be satisfied by T. Once this feature is satisfied, it is erased. But we can add the [-irrealis] feature to the [-past] feature. We then assume the existence of the functional head Mood for subjunctive forms, as well as the fact that the [-irrealis] mood is to be found under T for indicative forms.

Let us now take an example where Agree is visible.

(166)

Gif	ðu	wilt	mine	æðelborennesse	witan...
If	you-NOM	want-IND.PRES.	my-ACC	noblility-ACC	know...

If thou wilt know my nobility... (coapollo,ApT:15.17.298)

At the level of the morphological component, WILLAN is structured as follows,

(167)

Now, if the φ features of the verb are satisfied with Spec,T, we obtain,

(168)

The morphology of past forms will enable us to identify them.

(169)

ac	he	ne	mihte	hine	þar	findan	on	ðam	flocce.
but	he-NOM	NEG	could-PRET	him-ACC	there	find	in	the-DAT	troops-DAT.

but he could not find him in the company. (coapollo,ApT:13.9.232)

We have:

• MAGAN : root vowel /-i/, as well as the dental suffix /-t/, marks of preterite ; moreover, we have the ∅ ending, telling us it is a singular form (to be opposed to /-on/ for plural).

As far as future is concerned, strictly speaking, it does not exist in OE, nor in CE. The speaker uses present forms or periphrases with WILLAN or SCULAN in the present. Then, we have to give a new label to T(Futur) (in (161)), i.e. T(Present).

2.8.1.2. Mood

In the course of our analysis, we have noticed that OE has two moods: an indicative mood and a subjunctive/irrrealis one. Yet, in the corpora, many examples have ambiguous readings (when morphology is of no help in differenciating indicative from subjunctive forms as their endings are identical), or some preterite presents do not have subjunctive forms.

In (161), we noticed the existence of a functional head for the realis mood (T), but none for the irrealis mood. Does such a head exist? We tend to think it does since we have seen OE possesses an irrealis mood, and many examples in the corpora examplify its existence. We assume this functional head to be higher than T. Within the irrealis domain, we include both subjunctive and conditional (note: ➳), and later on in our work, epistemicity as well.

Datum from the OE corpora underline the presence of the functional head Mood_Irrealis in (161), even if some forms are, as we have just said, ambiguous. Moreover, the great number of ambiguous forms is a sign of the fusion of indicative and subjunctive forms in ME.

In the preceding Sub-Section, we underlined the existence of the functional head Mood_Realis (under T), to which we add the the functional head Mood [+irrealis].

Let us go back to Example (168). In that morphological structure, we have made the root and ending clear to the reader. The ending indicates tense, person and mood. If we now give its structure (with CUNNAN for instance), we have,

(170)

and if we make a linearization out of it, we obtain,

(171)

[T-V-sg] ⟷ cunne [modal,past,irrealis,sg]

and

(172)

[T-V-pl] ⟷ cunnen [modal,past,irrealis,pl]

The corresponding syntactic structure is:

(173)

Let us add T to this structure.

(174)

Let us now give illustrations of subjunctive (examples (exemples (175) to (177)) and indicative forms (examples (178) to (179)).

(175)

...	læf	folc	ond	rice,	þonne	ðu	forð	scyle	metodsceaft	seon.
...	leave-IMP	people-ACC	and	kingdom-ACC,	whereas	you-NOM	constantly	should-SUBJ.PRES	destiny-ACC	consider.

leave to your kinsmen folk and kingdom when you must go forth to look on the Ruler´s decree. (cobeowul,37.1176.971)

(176)

ond

eac

swylce

leafnesse

sealde,

þæt

heo

mosten

Cristes

geleafan

bodian

&

læran.

and

also

likewise

permission

granted-PRET,

that

they-NOM

could-SUBJ.PRET

Christ-GEN

faith

preach

&

teach.

and he gave his permiison for them to preach and teach the faith of Christ. (cobede,Bede_1:14.60.11.564)

(177)

Ðæt	mæden	cwæð:	“Sege	me	gewislicor	þæt	ic	hit	mæge	understandan...”
the-NOM	maiden-NOM	said-IND.PRET:	“tell-IMP	me	plainly	that	I-NOM	it-ACC	may-SUBJ.PRES	understand...”

The maiden said, “Tell me more plainly, that I may understand it...” (coapollo,ApT:15.18.299)

(178)

him	mid	scoldon	on	flodes	æht	feor	gewitan.
him-DAT	with	should-IND.PRET	on	flood-GEN	power-ACC	far	go.

... with him far out into the sea´s possession. (cobeowul,4.36.36)

(179)

Eac	neah	þan	ealle	þa	ðing,	þe ðanon	cumað,	wið	ælcum	attre	magon.
also	almost	this-INSTR	all-NOM	the-NOM	things-NOM,	whence	come-IND.PRES,	against	each-DAT	poison-DAT	may-IND.PRES.

almost all things in the island are good against poison. (cobede,Bede_1:1.30.3.225)

So as to illustrate our analysis, let us first give their morphological structures and then the syntactic structures of Examples (182.a) and (183.a).

The morphological “structure” of (182.a) is,

(180)

(180.a)

(180.b)

[T-irrealis] ⟷ mæge [modal,present,irrealis,sg]

As for (183.a), its structure is,

(181)

(181.a)

(181.b)

[T-realis-pl] ⟷ scoldon [modal,past,realis,pl]

(182)

(182.a)

Ðæt	mæden	cwæð:	“Sege	me	gewislicor	þæt	ic	hit	mæge	understandan...”
The-NOM	maiden-NOM	said-IND.PRET:	“tell-IMP	me	plainly	that	I-NOM	it-ACC	may-SUBJ.PRES	understand.”

The maiden said: “Tell me more plainly, that I may understand it.” (coapollo,ApT:15.18.299)

(182.b)

(183)

(183.a)

him	mid	scoldon	on	flodes	æht	feor	gewitan.
him-DAT	with	should-IND.PRET	on	flood-GEN	power-ACC	far	go.

... with him far out into the sea´s possession. (cobeowul,4.36.36)

(183.b)

2.8.1.3. Tense and conditional

Let us now focus on the conditional “tense” which is also part of the irrealis domain.

In the OE corpora ((52) ((52)) and (67) ((67))), we have found the following examples where we have underlined the form gif (in italics) in Examples (184) to (191)); in Examples (193) to (207), we believe the past morphological forms are conditionals with respect to the context and tense.

In contemporary English, one of the conditional structures is: if + past tense + WOULD/SHOULD/COULD/MIGHT/MUST (in the matrix sentence). So, what about Examples (184) to (191)? In OE, we have the following structures:

1. if + Subj.Pres + CONDITIONAL ,

   (184)

   Gif

   nu

   hæleða

   hwone

   hlisan

   lyste,

   unnytne

   gelp

   agan

   wille,

   þonne

   ic

   hine

   wolde

   wordum

   biddan

   þæt

   he

   hine

   æghwonon

   utan

   ymbeþohte,

   ...

   If

   now

   men-GEN

   few-ACC

   glory-GEN

   please-SUBJ.PRES,

   useless-ACC

   help-ACC

   have control over

   will-PRES,

   then

   I-NOM

   him-ACC

   would-PRET

   orders-DAT

   ask

   that

   he-NOM

   him-ACC

   everywhere

   from outside

   thought about-PRET,

   ...

   If men like glory a little, they will control a useless help; I then had wanted to ask him to think of orders, ... (cometboe,165.10.1.137)

2. if + Subj.Pret + CONDITIONAL,

   (185)

   ...

   sua

   hie

   manegra

   unðeawa

   gestiran

   meahton

   mid

   hiora

   larum

   &

   bisenum,

   gif

   hi

   ongemong

   monnum

   beon

   wolden.

   ...

   as

   they-NOM

   many-GEN

   faults-GEN

   cause

   could-IND.PRET

   with

   their

   learnings-DAT

   &

   examples-DAT,

   if

   they-NOM

   among

   men-DAT

   be

   would-SUBJ.PRET.

   ... as they could have been mistaken by their education and example if they had been amongst men. (cocura,CP:5.45.20.257)

   (186)

   Him

   mon

   sceal

   cyðan

   ðara

   goda

   sum

   ðe

   hie

   on

   him

   habbað

   oððe

   ðara

   sum

   ðe

   hie

   habban

   meahton,

   gif

   hie

   næfden.

   Him-DAT

   one-NOM

   shall-IND.PRES

   prove

   these-GEN

   abilities-GEN

   something-ACC

   that

   they-NOM

   on

   him-DAT

   have-IND.PRES

   or

   these-GEN

   ones-ACC

   that

   they-NOM

   have

   could-IND.PRET,

   if

   they-NOM

   NEG+had-SUBJ.PRET.

   They must prove their capacities they have or could have on him, if they do not already have them. (cocura,CP:41.303.2.2011)

3. if + Ind.Pres + CONDITIONAL,

   (187)

   Ðonne

   mæg

   he

   witan

   be

   ðy,

   gif

   he

   hierran

   folgað

   habban

   sceal,

   hwæðer

   he

   ðonne

   don

   mæg

   ðæt

   ðæt

   he

   ær

   ðencð

   ðæt

   he

   don

   wolde,

   ...

   Then

   can-IND.PRES

   he-NOM

   know

   with

   this-INSTR,

   if

   he-NOM

   higher-ACC

   destiny-ACC

   have

   shall-IND.PRES,

   whether

   he-NOM

   then

   do

   can-IND.PRES

   that-ACC

   that

   he-NOM

   soon

   attempts-IND.PRES

   that

   he-NOM

   make

   would-PRET,

   ...

   Thanks to this, he can then know if he shall have a higher destiny, if he does, which he would try and do, ... (cocura,CP:9.57.14.363)

   (188)

   Hu

   gerades

   mæg

   ðonne

   se

   biscep

   brucan

   ðære

   hirdelican

   are,

   gif

   he

   self

   drohtað

   on

   ðam

   eorðlicum

   tielongum

   ðe

   he

   oðrum

   monnum

   lean

   sceolde?

   How

   long since

   can-IND.PRES

   then

   the-NOM

   bishop-NOM

   cohabit with

   this-DAT

   domestic-GEN

   desire-GEN,

   if

   he-NOM

   self-NOM

   behaves-IND.PRES

   on

   the-DAT

   worldly-DAT

   culture-DAT

   that

   he-NOM

   other-DAT

   men-DAT

   blame

   should-PRET?

   How can the bishop live with this desire if he himself acts according the wordly culture whereas he should blame the other men? (cocura,CP:18.133.3.909)

   (189)

   Hu

   bið

   þonne

   gif

   we

   nellað

   to

   þam

   Hælende

   clypian,

   þonne

   Moyses

   werignyss

   ne

   mihte

   beon

   beladod?

   How

   is-IND.PRES

   then

   if

   we-NOM

   NEG+will-IND.PRES

   to

   the-DAT

   Lord-DAT

   speak,

   then

   Moses-GEN

   cursing-NOM

   NEG

   could-PRET

   be

   prevented-P.PASSE?

   How can this be, if we do not want to speak to the Lord, when Moses´ curse could be prevented? (coaelive,ÆLS[Pr_Moses]: 43.2897)

   (190)

   And

   se

   ðe

   nele

   Godes

   bodan

   hyran

   mid

   rihte

   ne

   godcundre

   lare

   gyman

   swa

   he

   sceolde,

   he

   sceal

   hyran

   feondan,

   gif

   he

   nele

   freondan.

   And

   the

   one-NOM who

   NEG+will-PRES

   God-GEN

   foundation

   serve

   by

   right-DAT

   nor

   religious-GEN

   knowledge-GEN

   observe

   as

   he-NOM

   should-PRET,

   he-NOM

   shall-IND.PRES

   obey

   enemies-DAT,

   if

   he-NOM

   NEG+will-PRES

   friends-DAT.

   And the one who will not serve God´s foundation, nor observe the religious knowledge as he should, he shall obey to his enemies if he does not want any friends. (cowulf,WHom_17:50.1398)

4. if + past + CONDITIONAL,

   (191)

   &	þæt	mot	ure	gehwylc	rihtlice	healdan	gif	we	aht	gefaran	scylan;
   &	that-ACC	must-IND.PRES	ours-GEN	all-NOM	rightly	celebrate	if	we-NOM	possessions-ACC	obtain	should-IND.PRET;

   & we all must rightly celebrate it we should obtain possessions; (cowulf,WHom_18:138.1503)

   (192)

   ðonne

   he

   sceal

   ymb

   monigra

   monna

   are

   ðencan,

   gif

   he

   nolde

   ða ða

   he

   moste

   Pymb

   his-GEN

   anes.

   then

   he-NOM

   shall-IND.PRES

   about

   many-GEN

   men-GEN

   freedom

   consider,

   if

   he-NOM

   NEG+would-PRET

   when

   he-NOM

   must-PRET

   about

   his

   only-GEN.

   then he shall consider the freedom of many men, even if he would not when he had had to do it. (cocura,CP:9.57.19.365)

Before analyzing other examples, let us have a closer look at those we have just given. According to contemporary grammars, Examples (185), (192) and (186) have a conditional form. In Examples (184), (187), (188), (189) and (190), the context allows us to say these forms are conditionals.

Concerning Example (191), the structure pattern is reversed since the “conditional” form is introduced by if. Again, the context tells us we are dealing with conditionals.

Let us now focus on the rest of the examples where the conditional forms are not introduced by if and see if these verbal forms are indeed morphologically past with a conditional meaning.

(193)

and

we

sceolon

his

gesetnyssum

gehyrsumian,

ðeah ðe

he

gyt

wolde

þas

niwan

gecyðnysse

eft

awendan,

ac

we

witon

þæt

he

nele.

and

we-NOM

should-IND.PRES

his-DAT

instructions-DAT

obey,

although

he-NOM

yet

would-PRET

this-ACC

newly-ACC

testimony-ACC

again

change,

but

we-NOM

know-IND.PRES

that

he-NOM

NEG+will-PRES.

and we shall obey his instructions, although he would like to change his newly testimony, but we know he will not. (cocathom2, ÆCHom_II,_12.2:123.458.2703)

(194)

ac

we

woldon

ærest

eow

gereccan

ymbe

ðas

gerynu

and

siððan

hu

hit

man

ðicgan

sceal.

but

we-NOM

would-IND.PRET

first

to you

explain

about

this-ACC

mystery-ACC

and

then

how

it-ACC

one-NOM

accept

shall-IND.PRES.

but we first would explain this whole mystery to you, and how to accept it. (cocathom2,ÆCHom_II,_15:157.255.3503)

(195)

Ic	mæg	fromlicor	fleogan	þonne	pernex	oþþe	earn	oþþe	hafoc	æfre	meahte;
I-NOM	can-IND.PRES	faster	fly	than	bird-NOM	either	eagle-NOM	or	hawk-NOM	ever	could-PRET;

I can fly faster than the bird, even faster than an eagle or an awk could; (coriddle,202.66.604)

(196)

Ne

eft

ða

gelæredan,

ðe

sua

nyllað

libban

sua

hie

on

bocum

leornedon,

ðæt

hie

sceoldon

ne

underfon

ða

are

ðæs

lariowdomes.

nor

often

the-NOM

learnings-NOM,

that

so

will-IND.PRES

exist

so

they-NOM

inbooks-DAT

learnt-IND.PRET,

that

they-NOM

should-IND.PRET

NEG

accept

the-ACC

help-ACC

the-GEN

ecclesiastical authorities-GEN.

nor the learned who will not live as they have been taught in books, and who should not accept the help from the ecclesiastical authorities. (cocura,CPHead:9.2.3)

(197)

...

ðæt

se

sacerd

beran

sceolde

ðæs

domes

racu,

forðam

se

sacerd

scolde

&

git

sceal

simle

smealice

geðencean

ðæt

he

cunne

god

&

yfel

tosceadan,

...

...

that

the-NOM

priest-NOM

produce

should-PRET

these-GEN

judgments-GEN

explanation-NOM,

because

the-NOM

priest-NOM

should-PRET

&

yet

shall-IND.PRES

always

subtlely

attempt

that

he-NOM

can-SUBJ.PRES

good-ACC

&

evil-ACC

distinghish,

...

... so that the priest has to always attempt to explain these laws subtly to be able to distinguish good from evil,... (cocura,CP:13.77.22.515)

(198)

Forðam

bebiet

sio

halige

æ

ðæt

se

sacerd

scyle

onfon

ðone

suiðran

bogh

æt

ðære

offrunge,

&

se

sceolde

bion

asyndred

from

ðæm

odrum

flæsce.

Because

commands-IND.PRES

the-NOM

holy-NOM

rite-NOM

that

the-NOM

priest-NOM

shall-SUBJ.PRES

accept

the-ACC

more-ACC

offspring-ACC

from

the-DAT

sacrifice-DAT,

&

he-NOM

should-PRET

be

separated-P.PASSE

from

the-DAT

other-DAT

bodies-DAT.

For the holy rite bids the priest to accept more offsprings from the sacrificeand that he should be separated from other bodies. (cocura,CP:14.81.18.533)

(199)

...

ðæt

he

ne

mæge

ðurhteon

his

niehstum

ðæt

he

him

utan

don

scolde.

...

that

he-NOM

NEG

can-SUBJ.PRES

undergo

his

neighbours-DAT

that

he-NOM

them-DAT

out

cause

should-PRET.

... qu´il ne puisse plus supporter ses voisins de sorte qu´il devrait les mettre dehors. (cocura,CP:18.127.14.862)

(200)

Monige

ðeah

nyllað

na

geðencean

ðæt

hi

beoð

oðrum

broðrum

ofergesett,

&

him

fore

bion

scoldon

on

godcundum

ðingum;

Many-NOM

however

NEG+will-IND.PRES

not at all

think

that

they-NOM

are-IND.PRES

other-DAT

brothers-DAT

set over-P.PASSE,

&

them-DAT

for

be

should-IND.PRET

about

divine-DAT

things-DAT;

However, many will not think that are set over by other brothers, and that thay should be part of divine things; (cocura,CP:18.127.16.863)

(201)

Oððe

eft

(...)

se ðe

wile

forgiefan

ðæt

he

wrecan

sceolde,

to

ecum

witum

geteo

his

hieremenn.

And

often

(...)

who-NOM

will-PRES

forgive

that-ACC

he-NOM

banish

should-PRET,

to

eternal-DAT

knowledge-DAT

educate-SUBJ.PRES

his

disciples-ACC.

And often, the one who will forgive what he should banish educates his disciples to eternal knowledge. (cocura,CP:20.149.21.1022)

(202)

Forðæm

hit

ær

hit

nolde

behealdan

wið

unnyt

word,

hit

sceal

ðonne

niedinga

afeallan

for

ðæm

slide.

Because

it-NOM

soon

it-ACC

NEG+would-PRET

observe

with

useless-ACC

speech-ACC,

it-NOM

shall-IND.PRES

then

necessarily

demolish

for

this-DAT

fall-DAT.

Because, soon, it will not be observe with groundless speech, for it shall fall into decline. (cocura,CP:38.279.4.1810)

(203)

...

him

hwæthwugu

wiðstent

ðæt

hi

ne

magon

swa

hrædlice

forðbrengan

ðæt

hi

tiohhiað

swa

hi

woldon.

...

them-DAT

something-NOM

resist-IND.PRES

that

they-NOM

NEG

can-IND.PRES

so

soon

bring forth

that-ACC

they-NOM

determine-IND.PRES

that

they-NOM

would-IND.PRET.

... and something resist them so that they may not set it forth so soon, which they would be determine to do. (cocura,CP:61.455.15.3278)

(204)

ne

we

nellað

forberan

an

bysmorlic

word

for

ures

Drihtnes

naman,

swa

swa

we

don

sceoldon,

...

nor

we-NOM

NEG+will-IND.PRES

tolerate

one-ACC

shameful-ACC

word-ACC

for

our-GEN

Lord-GEN

name,

so

that

we-NOM

do

should-IND.PRET,

...

nor shall we tolerate one shameful word against our Lord, as we should, ... (coaelive,ÆLS_[Maurice]:132.5758)

(205)

forðam	we	nellað	Godes	lage	healdan	swa	swa	we	scoldan...
because	we-NOM	NEG+will-IND.PRES	God-GEN	rule	control	so	that	we-NOM	should-IND.PRET...

because we will not control over the law of God as we should ... (cowulf, WHom_3:29.68)

(206)

Ðonne

mæg

gecnawan

se

þe

ær

nolde

soðes

gelyfan

þæt

Crist

þurh

his

mægenþrym

þonne

geleanað

manna

gehwylcum

ærran

gewyrhta.

Then

can-IND.PRES

know

the

one-NOM who

before that

NEG+would-PRET

justice-GEN

grant

that

Christ-NOM

through

his

glory-ACC

then

rewards-IND.PRES

man-GEN

every-DAT.

Then the one who can know would not first have accepted from the justice that Jesus Christ should reward every man with his glory. (cowulf,WHom_3:63.84)

(207)

&

nan

þing

gecnawað

mid

ænigean

gerade

þæs

ðe

eow

þearf

sy,

nu

ge

riht

nellað

habban

ne

healdan

on

eowran

heortan

swa

swa

ge

scoldan.

&

no-ACC

thing-ACC

know-IND

by

any-DAT

reckoning-DAT

this-GEN

that

you-DAT

necessity-NOM

is-SUBJ.PRES,

now

you-NOM

truth-ACC

NEG+will-IND.PRES

have

nor

possess

on

your

heart

so

as

you-NOM

should-IND.PRET.

and he does not know anything about this reckoning you need, now you shall not have nor possess truth in your heart as you should. (cowulf,WHom_11:163.1084)