.....lie.tW...QuL. y. A/lc...X.^'i%&t A-. 1^^117- illdi^y^.... THE PRIMITIVE TEUTONIC ORDER OF WORDS SUBMITTED TO THE F^CCJLTY OF CORNELL UNIVERSITY IN XJTDJLFILMENT OF'THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE , '" ; DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILDSOPIiY i" ~ GEORGE h: Mcknight REPRINTED FROM THi^;jqURNAL OF GEftliiANIC, PHILOLOGY : , The original of tiiis book is in tine Cornell University Library. There are no known copyright restrictions in the United States on the use of the text. http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924031428786 THE PRIiVimVE TEUTONIC' ORDER OF WORDS SUBMITTED; TO THE .T^GULTY OF CORlSnELL: UNIVERSITY IN FULlriLMENt OF TH"E.REQUIREMENTS FOR TMe • _ '; JDEGREE OF DOCJOR' OF PHILOSOPHY ■" , GEORGE^ H-.; McRNrGFrT:: REPRINTED FROM THE JOURNAL OF GERMANIC PHILOLOGY 1897 THE PRIMITIVE TEUTONIC ORDER OF WORDS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF CORNELL UNIVERSITY IN FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY BY GEORGE H. ^cKNIGHT REPRINTED FROM THE JOURNAL OF GERMANIC PHILOLOGY 1897 136 Mc Knight, [Vol.1 PRIMITIVE TEUTONIC ORDER OF WORDS. INTRODUCTION. IN striking contrast with our relatively precise knowledge of phonology is our ignorance of certain subjects in syntax, especially of the order of words. The phonology of primitive Teutonic we know with something like scientific accuracy ; the order of words is still a matter of doubt and uncertainty. This uncertainty is strikingly illustrated by the number of different opinions that have been offered on the subject. For example, note the different theories as to the original position of the verb. Erdmann^ and Tomanetz^ maintain that in primitive Teutonic the normal position of the verb was second in the clause. A greater number, in- cluding Ries* and Behaghel,* believe that the normal posi- tion of the verb was at the end of the clause. An opinion different from both of these is that recently advanced by Wackernagel,^ who maintains that the differentiation of principal and subordinate clauses in modern German is no specific modern development, but is the direct lineal repre- sentative of the original Indo-European order of words. Braune^ takes a still different view, and believes that the order of words in primitive Teutonic was free. Wunderlich,'' practically in agreement with Braune, has recently expressed ' Erdmann, Grundzuge der deutschen Syntax, Stuttg., 1886. ^ Tomanetz, Relativs'dtze bei den ahd. Ubersetzem des 8 u. 9 Jh., Wien, 1879. " Ries, Quellen und Forschungen, XLI. 4. * Behaghel, Germania, XXIII. 284. ^ Wackernagel, /. F., I. 333. " Braune, Forschungen zur deutschen Pkilologie. Festgabe zur R. Hildebrand, . Leipzig, 1894. ' Wunderlich, Der deutsche Satzbau, Stuttg., 1892. No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 137 the opinion that in primitive Teutonic the speech-element coming first in articulation was the one that stood in the foreground of consciousness at the moment of utterance. Such is the diversity of opinion on this subject. A final solution of the problem can be had only after a thorough investigation of the order of words in the oldest dialects of the Teutonic group. This field of investigation has been by no means neglected. Ries induces his theory, already mentioned, from the facts of word-order observed in the Heliand and in Beowjilf. Tomanetz's theory is based on facts observed in the OHG. translations of the eighth and ninth centuries. Other investigators have been at work : Lohner,^ Starker,^ Rannow,^ Ohly,* Erdmann,^ and Gering^ in OHG.; Friedrichs^ in Gothic; Kube,^ Todt,9 and Smith i" in Old English. But heretofore, if we except the passing consideration given the subject by Hermann,!^ no one has attempted to collate the results of these separate investiga- tions. It is my aim to take this further step, and from the results of the investigations mentioned above and of inde- pendent investigations of my own in Gothic, in Old Norse, and in Old English, to converge as many rays of light as possible on this obscure point and to determine whether the facts in the different dialects do not point to some one order of words in the primitive Teutonic speech. But before proceeding to cite statistics and draw conclu- sions, I shall attempt to define my method by clearing up an ambiguity which has misled many writers on this subject. This ambiguity arises frpm the twofold meaning attached to 1 Lohner, Zl. f. d. Phil. 14. 173 ff. ^ Starker, IVortstelluiig der Nachsatze in den ahd. Ubersetzungen des Matthaus- Evangeliums, des Isidor und des Tatian, Progr. Beuthed, 1883. ' Rannow, Der Satzbau des ahd,, Isidor, Berlin, 1888. ,; * Ohly, W.ortstellung bei O^^'i'rf, Diss. .Freiburg, 1888. ^ Erdniann, Syntax des SpracKe Oi/rids/KaXle, 1874-76. * Gering, Causalsatae bfi den ahd. tfbersetzern des 8 u. 9 Jh,, Halle,. 1876. ' Friedrichs, Stellung des pron. pers. im Gotischen, Diss. Tens '°"' ^ Kube, WortsUUung in der Sachsenchronik, ' Todt, AiigHa, 16. i" Smith, Mod. Lang. Assoc, of Amer., 1893. '1 Hermann, K. Z. 33. 138 McKnight, [Vol.1 the phrase order of words. Order of words may refer to a subjective movement, to the order in which the thought- elements receive expression. In this sense of the phrase, the order of words is, or tends to be, always the same, in all languages, ancient or modern ; or perhaps better expressed, the principles that determine the order of words, in this sense of the phrase, are universal, as valid for synthetic Latin as for analytic French or English, This general sub- jective order in the progression of ideas is from the known to the unknown. Of a thing known, something new, unknown, is predicated. That the new idea may be connected with ideas already in mind, the speaker begins with something known. This something known, from which the speaker sets out, called by WeiP the " initial notion," by von der Gabe- lentz^ the "psychological subject," naturally comes first, the "goal of discourse," or "psychological predicate," coming last. The goal of one proposition may form the initial notion of the proposition following, making a continuous thought- chain. Only in case of passion or excitement, when the new idea or feeling rushes with violence to the foreground of con- sciousness, does it come first in the proposition. This depart- ure from the rule, known as ' pathetic order,' is often made by persons in speaking of subjects with which they are very familiar or by persons under the influence of passion, as in poetry. The speaker in such cases is apt to jump from one point to another without giving the connecting thought. At the cost of a slight digression I shall attempt to expound some of the universal principles that determine word-order in this first acceptation of the phrase. In the first place, word- order is influenced by the nature of the clause. Imperative clauses are quite different in nature from affirmative clauses, and this difference has its influence directly on the accentua- tion, indirectly on the order of words. For instance, in imperative clauses the interest is centred in the verb, which, accordingly, should have the position of greatest emphasis. ^ Weil, Order of Words in the Ancient Languages, transl. by Super, Boston, 1887. 2 Von der Gabelentz, Zt. f. Volkerpsych., VIII. 1874-75. No. 2] Primitive Tattonic Order of Words 139 Further, clauses of command are usually isolated and are, therefore, free from the influence of context. Interrogative clauses differ from affirmative clauses in that a question has not in itself the completeness that belongs to a statement of fact, but waits for a reply. This peculiar incompleteness, expectancy, influences the accentuation and, directly or in- directly, the order of words. Wunderlich has pointed out the essential difference between principal and subordinate clauses. He says (p. 91): 'In the principal clause consciousness and language work almost simultaneously; in the subordinate clause consciousness precedes speech. The principal clause builds itself up before the hearer in individual elements ; the sub- ordinate clause, on the other hand, introduces complete ideas with which the principal clause deals as with a unity.' This difference between principal and subordinate clauses has its influence on the order of words. For the subordinate clause the most appropriate construction is the 'locked construction,' the governing word, usually the verb, standing at the end. Such internal forces undoubtedly influence word-order. An- other potent influence is the consideration of emphasis. This has usually been regarded as the most important influence in determining the order of words. It is usually assumed that the first place in the sentence is the position of emphasis. This is possibly true of isolated sentences ; but, as was explained in the introduction, in context, if there is any abso- lute position of emphasis in affirmative clauses, it is at the end of the clause. To form a more accurate notion of the influence of empha- sis in determining word-order, we must bear in mind that this influence is an indirect one. The desire to emphasize first influences the accentuation and only indirectly, through the accentuation, influences the order of words. The principle of emphasis, then, influences word-order only in this way, that a writer or speaker always endeavors to place the word to be emphasized in the position that naturally has the stress, the next most important word in the position that naturally has the secondary stress, and so on, thus placing the ideas in perspective. HO McKnight, [Vol. I To determine the principles of accentuation, then, is nec- essary before one can understand the influence of the prin- ciple of emphasis on word-order. This has not yet been satisfactorily done. In making such a determination, the unit of language considered must be, not the logical unit, the sentence, but the spoken unit, the breath group. At present we know only that the accentuation is different in different kinds of clause, the interrogative clause differing in this respect from the affirmative clause, and that different languages have peculiar modes of accentuation. For example, in French the accent seems to fall naturally at the end of the breath group ; in Irish it seems to fall naturally at the begin- ning. Note the peculiar influence of the different national modes of accentuation on the word order in the following sentences : 'At such a time as this I wouldn't tell you a lie.' ' It's not a lie that I'd be tellin' you now.' All that we can say at present about the influence of emphasis on word-order, is that the emphasis of any position is not an absolute one, but a relative one, depending on the language, on the kind of clause, and on the 'number of unemphatic words surrounding the position. The consideration of force has a great influence in deter- mining the order of words ; but in word-order, as in the more general subject of rhetoric, the first essential is clearness. This influence, which heretofore has been almost entirely over- looked, is the most potent influence in determining word-order. Clearness is promoted by putting next to each other words which are connected in thought, and accordingly upon con- nection as well as upon emphasis depends the order of words. The element that stands at the beginning of a clause is not necessarily the element to be emphasized : it is usually the element that is associated, by likeness or contrast, with the last element in the preceding clause. The arrangement of words and phrases in a clause is determined primarily by the nearness of their relation to each other. In addition to the above-mentioned principles determining word-order, must be mentioned the logical one, analogy. The tendencies which owe their origin to considerations of con- No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 141 nection or of emphasis have, by a levelling process, developed into fixed rules. The result is the fixed order characteristic of the modern analytic languages, in which different arrange- ments of words have different meanings. It must further be noted that the order of words in poetry is quite different from that in prose. The functions of the two kinds of writing are in many respects different. Poetry expresses states of feeling that cannot easily be expressed in prose. It does this because it throws off the restraints of logical arrangement, and jumps from idea to idea more in the natural manner of thought. In the older Teutonic litera- ture the usual arrangement of the essential elements of the clause is often departed from, the ' pathetic order ' appearing in the form of inversion. In the later literature the same order occurs, but the real inversion is concealed through the use of a deputy subject (e.g., es war . . . etc.). The order of words representing the order of ideas, as we said above, is governed by the same general principles in all languages, ancient and modern. Note the difference of mean- ing in the two following different arrangements of the same sentence : ^ ' To escape from his misery, he slew himself ; He slew himself to escape from his misery.' The choice between these two arrangements would be determined by the context. The principles of connection and emphasis would operate. The speaker would begin with the known, reserving the new element for the end. Note exactly the same effect of order in the two following Latin sentences : Quia natura mutari noil potest, idcirco verae amicitiae sempiternae sunt; Verae amicitiae sempiternae sunt, qida natura mutari non potest. We have another illustration in the stock example, Romulus Romam condidit. The order of words in this proposition will depend on the context, on the thread of the discourse. If the subject under discussion is the founding of cities, the 'initial notion,' or ' psychological subject,' will be the founding, and the order will be : Condidit Romam Romulus ; the founder of Rome was Romulus. If, on the other hand, the subject in hand is the founder, the order will be : Idem Romulus Romam 1 This and the following two examples are quoted from Weil. 142 McKnight, [Vol. I condidit ; The same Romulus founded Rome. If the subject is the cities founded, the order will be : Hanc iLrbem condidit Romulus ; This city was founded by Romulus. In each instance the principle of connection operates ; the idea con- necting with what precedes, comes first ; the new idea comes last. In other words, the progression is from the known to the unknown. Or, expressed in still different terms, the ' psychological subject ' comes first in each instance, the 'psy- chological predicate ' last. Order of words may, however, have a second, very differ- ent meaning. It may denote an objective movement. It may refer to the relative position of the essential terms of a proposition. As Bergaigne^ has maintained, there are but two essential relations between the terms of a proposition, — the predicative and the dependent. Consequently there are but three essential terms, — the subject, the predicate, and the object. The history of the proposition with three essen- tial terms is probably as follows : We express our thoughts by means of words grouped into sentences or propositions. Originally the groups most commonly occurring were those expressing action. For such expression, if complete, there are essential three fundamental terms : one to express the actor, another the action, a third that acted zipon. Though not all groups had actions to express, propositions expressing action occurred so frequently as to become the dominating type, so much so that to this model were conformed the less frequent expressions not describing action, so that in the end all propositions, whether expressing action or not, became con- stituted with three essential terms called subject, object, predi- cate. Though in many instances the subject is no longer the actor, as in passive constructions, this pattern is the one used in all propositions. The question as to the order of these terms, it will be readily seen, is quite different from the ques- tion as to the order of words representing the order of ideas. It is apparent that the order of words representing the order of ideas, since it is the same in all languages, ancient and modern, is not a subject for historical consideration. 1 Bergaigne, Mem. Soc. de Linguistique, III. No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 143 The matter of the relative position of the syntactical terms — subject, predicate, object — is different. In uninfliected languages the order of words is an important means of indi- cating syntactical relations. It shows not only the order in which the words presented themselves in the mind of the writer, but it serves to indicate the person or thing acting and the person or thing acted upon. Even in inflected lan- guages there will gradually establish itself a traditional order of words. Ideas become associated with forms of expression, and in consequence the order of words becomes fixed. Speech custom is developed. For example, in Malay, Polynesian, Siamese, Anamese, the attribute follows, by preference, the word modified ; in Teutonic, Chinese, Tartar, Japanese, it precedes. In modern English also, in principal clauses, idiom demands that the grammatical subject precede the grammati- cal predicate. Within these restraints the principles, above mentioned, of connection and emphasis must operate. When these principles demand that the person or thing acting stand at the end, there must be some way of evading the fixed law of order. This evasion is usually effected by the use of the passive, or by the use of a deputy subject. One instance must suffice. In the sentence, ' There came about a revulsion of public sentiment,' the principle of emphasis prescribes that revulsion of sentiment should come last. This desired order is obtained without violation of the fixed principle that the grammatical subject should come first, by the use of the deputy subject, there. Here, then, we see the psychological principle of emphasis operating within the restraints of a conventional order of grammatical terms, or order of words as we shall henceforth use the phrase. By making this distinction between the two different mean- ings of the phrase, order of words, we have accomplished two results. In the first place, we have eliminated certain theo- ries as to the primitive Teutonic order. When Wunderlich asserts that ' the order of words is determined by the order in which the different thought elements present themselves in consciousness,' he is probably right as far as he goes ; but he leaves still undetermined the order of the syntactical parts 144 Mc Knight, [Vol. I in a proposition. His theory, then, has no bearing on our dis- cussion. Braune's ' recent discussion of the subject is open to an objection of the same kind. In his paper he considers only the position of the verb, and considers practically only three possible positions. His discussion narrows itself to this : Did the verb occupy the first, the second, or the third position of stress in the clause t He concludes that the verb was free to occupy any one of these three positions. His conclusion is probably right. But was not this position subject to one of the general principles mentioned above .■■ Did not this freedom of position exist, as in modern German and in modern English, within the restraints of a fixed order of syntactical terms .'' This is what I shall try to determine in the following pages. The second result accomplished is the exact definition of our subject. I shall now proceed to discuss the relative position in primitive Teutonic of the grammatical terms, subject, predicate, object. As already mentioned, many different theories have been advanced. Wunderlich's we may leave out of consideration after the discussion above. The theory that the order of words in Indo-European was free, if it refers to the order of syntactical parts, cannot have been true for any long period; for besides the natural association of ideas with forms of expression, it seems probable, from the evidence of compounds, that the IE. parent speech in its earliest stages was uninflected, and therefore dependent on word- order for the indication of the syntactical relations between the terms, subject, object, predicate. One might infer on a priori grounds that in the case of a proposition with three simple terms, the natural order would be ; subject, object, predicate. This is the order followed in the language of the deaf and dumb ; but it is diificult in this matter entirely to eliminate the influence of custom and to say with certainty that the order subject, object, verb is, from intrinsic reasons, the natural one. We must, then, search for further evidence. ' Braune, Forschungen zur deutschen Philologie, " Festgabe fiir R. Hildebrand," Leipzig, 1894. No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 145 Some of this further evidence is supplied by compounds and by inflected forms of speech. From inflected verbal forms, in which the verbal root precedes the pronominal element of the ending, and from compounds in which quali- fier precedes qualified, we infer that in the primitive form of the IE. language the predicate preceded the subject. From compounds in which governed precedes governing, we infer that in primitive IE. the object preceded the predicate. The primitive norm of order, then, would be; object, predi- cate, subject. Further evidence on this subject is supplied by the earliest monuments of the different languages of the IE. family. This evidence seems to.point to the fact that in the parent language the predicate came last in the proposition. In Greek, in Russ., in Armen., and in Celtic, traces of this original order are relatively few. Also in early Teutonic it remains to demonstrate conclusively that this was the origi- nal order. But in Lith. and in Lat. the tendency is most noticeable. In Csesar's Commentaries on the Gallic war, 2d book, if we leave the verb be out of consideration, there are only fifteen instances in which the verb stands elsewhere than at the end of the clause. Further, in O.Pers. and in Skt. the verb at the end is the regular order. In the Brah- manas, even in the locative absolute, the most primitive form of the proposition, the verb stands last, though in this same text the qualifiers regularly precede the qualified. It is to be noted that the relation between an adjective and its sub- stantive is the same as that between subject and predicate ; the adjective and its substantive is equivalent to a subordi- nate clause. To adopt Bergaigne's conclusions, the order of subject and predicate seems to have been inverted in principal propositions in order to distinguish these from sub- ordinate ones, the original order being represented by the position of the attributive adjective before its substantive. The relative position of subject and object in Skt. prose and in oldest Lat. was evidently variable. But the tendency was to place the subject before the object, which in turn directly preceded the predicate. This was no doubt due to the logical 146 McKnight, [Vol. I dualism of the proposition, according to which the subject formed one part, the predicate and object a second. Natu- rally, then, when the primitive order was inverted, the subject placed itself first, forming the first part of the proposition, while the predicate, preceded by the object, formed the second part. To the type of order, then, object, subject, predicate, may be added a second type, probably used con- current with the first, and probably soon becoming dominant, subject, object, predicate. Further strong evidence in favor of this position of the verb at the end, is supplied by Delbriick.^ He shows that the regular position of the verb in Skt. was at the end, and that the enclitic accentuation of the Skt. verb was probably due to this position. He further shows that the accent of the Greek verb is that of the Skt. verb, only modified by the law of three morae. He concludes that this accent is pro- ethnic, and that consequently the final position of the verb, the cause of the accent, is proethnic. Evidence, both a priori and a posteriori, seems to indicate that originally in IE. the verb stood at the end of the clause. The question, then, arises, whether the order of words in Teutonic is descended directly from that of the parent speech or is a new development. The former sup- position seems much the more probable, since the Teutonic could hardly have been entirely independent of the parent language in this matter. External evidence, then, would lead us to expect that in primitive Teutonic the regular position of the verb was last in the clause. It remains to bring internal evidence to bear on the solu- tion of this problem. II. WORD-ORDER IN GOTHIC. In making an historical study of Teutonic word-order, we naturally direct our attention first to the oldest language in 1 Delbruck, Syntaktische Forschungen, IV. p. 148 ff. No. 2] Primitive Teittoiic Order of Words 147 the family, to the Gothic. Unfortunately there are preserved in Gothic only two works of sufficient length to be of any value in the study of word-order ; the translation of the Bible by Wulfila, and the so-called Skeireins, fragments of a commentary on the Gospel of John. For the study of word-order, Wulfila is of little value, owing to the slavish way in which he followed the Greek order. Friedrichs, in his investigation of the word-order in Wulfila, explains the exact correspondence of the Gothic order with that of the Greek original, as resulting not from slavish imitation on the part of the translator, but from the natural similarity of word-order in the two languages. But so exact a coincidence in every phrase is hardly to be ex- plained in this simple manner. Although many of the Greek idioms belong also to Teutonic, and actually do occur in other ancient Teutonic monuments, it is absurd to assume between any two languages a natural similarity in word-order as strik- ing as that between the Gothic translation of the Bible and the Greek original. Consequently the statistics gathered by Friedrichs show not the word-order of the Gothic of that period, but that of New Testament Greek, and the only evi- dence afforded by the translation of Wulfila is that offered by those passages i) in which the Gothic employs more words than the Greek does and, therefore, necessarily has an independent arrangement, or 2) in which the word-order of the translation differs from that of the original. Such passages are not numerous. In the fragmentary translation of Matthew, if we leave out of consideration differences in the position of the particles, we find less than a hundred. Of these passages three-fourths are, i) instances of Gothic circumlocution and only about one-fourth are, 2) in- stances of departure from the Greek order. The few general tendencies revealed in these passages I will point out. (a) The position of the Gothic particle usually corresponds to that of the Greek particle, e.g. : f>ugkei/> im auk = hoKovmv yap, vi. 7. 148 Mc Knight, [Vol.1 But frequently the Greek post-positive particle is represented in Gothic by a particle standing first in the clause, e.g. : If> huzdjaif) izwis = ©Tytravpi^cTc §€ vjtlv, vi. 20 ; unte jabai fijail> ainana = ^ yap tov %va. fito-jjo-at, vi. 24. (1^) The object pronoun follows the verb. 1 ) Independent of the Greek, e.g. : f>ugkeif> im auk = Sokovctiv yap, vi. 7 ; ' egei/> izwis ins = ^ojS-qQriTf. avrovs, x. 26 ; ; ataugidedun sik = evetJMvia-Orfo-av, xxvii. 53. 2) In disagreement with Greek order, e.g. : ibat fuan atgibai f>uk = ix-qTrori are. irapaS<3, iii. 25 ; Mi/>/>anei is rodida pata du itn = ravra airou \a\o5vros airoTs, ix. 18. Note. — There is one exception, due no doubt to counter-tendency (/"). ik in watin izwis daupja = 'Eyci pkv fiaTrri^io ip«.s iv ^Sart, iii. .1 1 . (c) The possessive adjective (pronominal) follows its sub- stantive. i) Independent of the Greek, e.g. : f>o giba fieina = to SSipov, iii. 24. 2) In disagreement with the Greek, e.g. : haubifi pein = o-ov Trjv K€a\rjv, vi. 17; •waurda meina ^= fwv toiis A,dyo«s, vii. 26. (d) On the other hand the demonstrative adjective precedes its substantive. i) Independent of the Greek. No instances. 2) In disagreement with the Greek, e.g. : in jainai hjeilai ^= ivr^ tupa eKccVj, viii. 13. Note. — In one instance a numeral follows its noun in disagreement with the Greek order, ii Iveila niundon = ircpl Si ttjv iwdTTjV mpav, xxvii. 46. (e) The dependent genitive precedes its substantive. I) Independent of the Greek. One instance, in Tyrejah Seidone londa = iv T'pm kol SeiSuiw, xi. 26. No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 149 2) In disagreement with Greek order. One instance, afstassais bokos ^ airoa-Taa-iov, ill. 31. {/) There is a tendency in the case of verbs to place the governed before the governing word. 1) Independent of the Greek. The past participle always precedes the finite verb, e.g. : gamelil> ist= ■^ytypdirTai, xi. 10 ; ■wrohips ist = KaTriyopelcrOai, xxvii. 1 2 ; />atei du stauai gatauhans ■war/>=oT(. KartKpiGrj, xxvii. 3. In a similar manner predicate nouns precede their verb, e.g: : ni skuld ist = ovk iitarnv, xxvii. 6 ; uskunp was = i<^a.vr}, ix. 2,7, ; hrain warp = iKaOapLo-drjn, viii. 3. Note. — This does not hold true of imperative clauses, e.g., wairp krams = Ka.6apLa67fi, viii. 3. The verb may stand at the end of the clause, i) Independent of the Greek, e.g.: sumaip pan lofam slohun = ot St ippaTricrav, xxvi. 67. 2) In disagreement with Greek order. ik in watin izwis daupja^= 'Eyco pkv /SairTi'^oi u^Ss iv vBan, iii. 11. The favorite position of the object pronoun, then, seems to be after the verb. It must be noted, however, that the pronouns occurring are mostly reflexives, and further that in none of the instances cited above does the pronoun have a direct reference to the preceding clause. Consequently in none of these instances was there any special motive for giving the pronoun a position early in the clause, and the instances may not represent the general tendency. The possessive adjectives follow the substantive, and since they are all pronominal, perhaps there is some connection between this position and that of the object pronoun. The fact that the Greek post-positive particle is frequently repre- sented in Gothic by a particle at the beginning of the clause ISO McKnight, [Vol.1 indicates that the initial place in the Gothic clause is not as much as in Greek a place of emphasis. But the most noticeable fact is the evident fondness for the synthetic order (governed preceding governing word). This construction is favored in the position of the demon- strative adjective before its substantive, in the position of the dependent genitive before its governing noun and in the position of the finite verb in relation to objects, to participles, and to predicate nouns. The evidence, then, afforded by Wulfila is not comprehen- sive enough. The value of the Skeireins for determining the word-order is diminished by the consideration that this work also may be a translation. That it is not a translation, at least not a slavish translation, from the Greek seems probable from the order of words. One feature of the Skeireins is the citation of biblical pas- sages upon which the comments are made. These ^ passages are probably taken from Wulfila, and the word-order is, of course, that of Wulfila. The statistics for the word-order in these passages cited agrees essentially with those gathered by Friedrichs from Wulfila direct, if we make allowance for the fact that Friedrichs considers only clauses with pronomi- nal subject. Friedrichs's statistics are as follows : Normal. Part. Transp. Tkansp. Principal Clauses 115 25 55 Subordinate Clauses 60 15 30 The statistics that I have gathered for the citations in the Skeireins are : Normal. Part. Tkansp. Transp Principal 19 3 10 Subordinate 24 o 5 Each of these sets of statistics represents Greek order. Note now the difference in the statistics for the independent part of the Skeireins : Normal. Part. Transp. Transp. Principal 12 II 39 Subordinate 16 16 23 1 Marold, Die Schriftcitate der Skeireins, Progr. Konigsberg, 1892. No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 1 5 1 The order of words, then, in the Skeireins proper, effectu- ally dispels any idea that the Skeireins is a slavish transla- tion, from the Greek at least. That the Skeireins is not a translation from the Latin is by no means certain. In certain peculiar features the word-order resembles that of Latin. For instance note the frequent separation of adjective and substantive by verb, e.g. : pa ahmeinon anafilhands daupeins, III. b ; pana laist skeiris bruk- jands waurdis, V. b ; f>osei ustauhana habaida wairpan fram fraujin garehsn, I. b. But in other respects the work shows idioms which seem to be peculiar to itself. For a list, vid. Bernhardt, Wtdfila, p. 612. On the whole, in default of any further evidence to the contrary, we will assume that word-order in the Skeireins proper represents the Gothic word-order of that time (proba- bly the fifth century). A. Principal Clauses. I. Affirmative Clauses. I. Relative Position of Subject and Finite Verb. It is a difficult matter to determine with any degree of accuracy the frequency of inversion or the laws governing its occurrence, owing to the fact that in 47 instances oiit of ^6, the total number of principal affirmative clauses, the grammatical subject is unexpressed. The favored order, however, seems to be the 'direct' In the 29 clauses with grammatical subject expressed, the order is 'direct' in 20, e.g. : patuh west wipra f>ata gadob, I. c ; />o nu insakana wesun fram lohanne, IV. d. Furthermore, in many of the clauses with long transposition, the order could hardly have been inverted if the subject had been expressed, e.g. : at allamma waurstwe ainaizos anabusnais beidip, V. a ; jah swa managai ganohjands . . . ni patainei ganauhan paurftais im fragaf, ak filaus maizo, VII. b. 152 Mc Knight, [Vol.1 Even in clauses with introductory adverbial phrases, the order is not always inverted. Three instances of ' irregular- direct ' ^ order occur : Inuh f>is . . . nasjands . . . anastodjands, ustaiknada f>ana . . ., II. a ; patuh f>an gipands aiwaggelista ataugida ei . . ., III. a ; />ata nu gasaihiands, Johannes />osei . . ., mip sunjai qa/>, I. b. In this same category are to be placed other clauses with introductory phrases, in which the subject is not expressed but in which the order corresponds to the ' direct ' order, e.g. : inuh f>is nujah leik mans andnam, I. d ; inuh pis bairhtaba uns laiseip gipands, III. d. Usually, however, in clauses with introductory phrases, when the subject is expressed, the order is inverted; when the subject is not expressed, the verb stands next to the intro- ductory phrase, as it would stand in an inverted clause, e.g. : inuh pis gam gamains allaize nasjands, I. a ; swaei sijai daupeins Johannes, III. d ; gadob nu was mats pans . . ., I. c ; patuh pan insok kunnands, V. a. In all, there occur 9 instances of inversion, some in clauses with introductory phrases, like those quoted above, others with the verb at the beginning of the clause. Two instances of the latter occur : skulum nu allai weis, V. c ; wasuh pan jah frauja . . ., III. b. There are not enough instances of clauses in the apodosis, to enable one to determine what is the regular order in such clauses. There is one instance of inversion : bigitan was pize hlaibe ib. tainjons fuUos, VII. c. We conclude, then, that the usual order is the direct, but that the inverted order also occurs, especially after introduc- tory phrases. The following table will show the frequency of the different arrangements : Direct. Inverted. Subject NOT Expressed, With Introd. Without Introd. With Introd. Without Introd. 47 3 17 72 1 Direct order after an introd. word or phrase other than subject or verb. No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 153 2. Position of Verb with Relation to Dependencies. There is a marked tendency to place the verb, if not last in the clause, at least after one or more of the adverbial dependencies. An instance of partial transposition is : jah swa managai ganohjands . . . ni />atainei ganauhan paurftais im fragaf, ak Jilaus maizo, VII. b. An instance of especially long transposition is : unte pata qipano ei . . ., ni ibnon ak gakika swerif>a usgiban uns laiseip, V. d. But though the tendency is to place the verb after other members of the clause, there is everywhere evident a great freedom of arrangement. This freedom was noticed in the position of the verb with relation to the subject; it is also manifest in the verb's position with relation to its depend- encies. For instance, in the same page, in Balg's edition, in expressing similar ideas the writer employs different arrange- ments of words, e.g. : inuh pis bairhtaba uns laiseip qipands, III. d ; inuh pis laiseip uns qipands, IV. a. Words to be emphasized are free to stand first in the clause, e.g.: mahtedi swepauh jah im . . . I. b; gadob nu was mais pans ... I. c ; naudipaurfts auk was jah gadob wistai, II. d. The following table will show the relative frequency of the different positions of the verb with relation to its de- pendencies : Neutral. Normal. Part. Transp. Teansp. 5 12 " 39 II. Imperative and Interrogative Clauses. There are no instances of independent imperative clauses, and only two of direct questions. In one of these latter the 154 McKnight, [Vol.1 verb stands first, although with no subject expressed. In the other the transposed order occurs : nei auk puhtedi Pau in garaihteins gaagwein u/argaggan Po /aura ju us anastodeinai garaidon garehsn, I. c ; Jvaiwa stojan jah ni stojan sa sama mahtedi, V. b. B. Subordinate Clauses. I. Relative Position of Subject and Verb. The regular order in subordinate clauses is the direct. Only four instances of inversion occur. Afar patei matida so managei, VII. c (Temporal) ; in pizei ju jah leikis hraineino inmaidif>s was sidus jah . . . III. b (Causal) ; hardizo pize ungalaubjandane warp hairto, VI. c (Causal) ; swaei sijai daupeins fohannes, III. d (Result). 2. Position of Verb with Relation to its Dependencies. There is to be noted in subordinate clauses the same tendency as in principal clauses to place the verb after its dependencies. For subordinate clauses the statistics are : a. Purpose Clauses. Neutral. Normal. Part. Transp. Transp. 1657 e.g. : jah ni missaqipaina, V. a (Neutral). ei galaisjaina sik bi pamma twa, V. a (Normal) ; ei, . . . pizos manasedais gawaurhtedi uslunein, I. a (Part. Transp.) ; ei fraujins mikilein gakannidedi, IV. d (Transp.). b. SuBSTANxrvE Clauses. Neutral. Normal. Part. Transp. Transp. ° 3 5 7 e.g: * ' patei is was sa sama, VII. d (Normal) ; ataugida ei so garehsns bi ina neha andja was pairh Herodes birunain. III. a (Part. Transp.) ; patei swakikamma waldufnja mahtais naups ustaiknida wesi, I. b (Transp.). No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 15S c. Indirect Questions. Neutral. Normal. Part. Transp. Transp. O I o o ni kunnandins kia/>ar skuldedi maiza, III. a. d. Clauses of Manner. Neutral. Normal. Part. Transp. Transp. 1200 e.g. : swe silba is qipip, VI. a (Neutral) ; analeiko swe Fillippus gasakada . . ., VII. a (Normal). e. Causal Clauses. Neutral. Normal. Part. Transp. Transp. 0132 e.g.: in pizei ni attauhun ina, VIII. b (Normal) ; in />is ei mi/>/>an frumist hausida fram laisarja, II. b (Part. Transp.) ; in pizei wistai manna was, IV. c (Transp.). /. Result Clauses. Neutral. Normal. Part. Transp. Transp. 0012 e.g.: ei/>an garaihtein warp bi swiknein sokeins gawagida, III. b (Part. Transp.) ; eipan waila ins tnaudeip, VI. a (Transp.). g. Relative Clauses. Neutral. Normal. Part. Transp. Transp. 2313 e.g. : patei aflifnoda, VII. c (Neutral) ; swe wilda andniman ize, VII. c (Normal) ; saei in aupida •m- jere attans izefodida, VII. d (Transp.). h. Concessive Clauses. Neutral. Normal. Part. Transp. Transp. O O O I pauhjabai us himina ana airpai in manne garehsnais qam, IV. d. IS6 Mc Knight, [Vol.1 i. Conditional Clauses. Neutral. Normal. Part. Transp. Transp. O O I I {/> nu ains jah sama west bi Sabaillaus insahtai, V. b (Part. Transp.) ; jabai in leikai wisan puhta, IV. c (Transp.). j. Temporal Clauses. Only one temporal clause occurs; that one is inverted. afar fiatei matida so managei, VII. c. Summing up, we have for subordinate clauses the following statistics : Neutral. Normal. Part. Transp. Tkansp. 4 i6 i6 23 It will be noted that the order, as in Wulfila, is substan- tially the same in principal and in subordinate clauses. In both kinds of clauses the favorite order is the transposed. A particularly striking instance of transposition is the fol- lowing : ei, swesamma wiljin jah swesai mahtai galeikonds pamma faurpis gaqiujandin daupans, (silba, gaqiujan daupans) gahaitands pize ungalaubjandane prasabalpein andbeitands gasoki, V. b. C. Participial and Infinitive Phrases. In participial and infinitive phrases there is manifest the same tendency as in principal and subordinate clauses, to place the verbal form at the end, or at least after one or more of the other members of the clause. Classifying these phrases according to the position of the verbal element, we obtain for the Skeireins proper the following statistics : I. Participles stand. Neutral. First. Middle. Last. 12 27 IS 44 No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 157 2. Infinitives stand. Neutral, First. Middle. Last. 6 8 4 15 Under ' First ' are included those clauses in which the participle (or infinitive) precedes all its dependencies, e.g. : gasaljands sik four uns hunsl jas saup guf>a, I. a. du afargaggan anabusn gu/>s, I. c. Under ' Middle ' are included those clauses in which the verbal element follows some of its grammatical dependencies, but precedes others, e.g. : anduh f>ana laist skeiris brukjands waurdis, V. b ; skulum . . . weis . . . andsatjan bauranana, V. c. Under ' Last ' are included those phrases in which the verbal element stands at the end, after all its dependen- cies, e.g.: ni ibna nih galeiks unsarai garaihtein ak silba garaihtei wisands, I. a ; nu du Uitilai heilai galaubjan, VI. a. Under ' Neutral ' are included those phrases consisting of verbal element (participle or infinitive) alone, e.g. : eifrauja qimands mahtai, \. c; Pana anawairpan dom, II. c. For the sake of convenience the present and past par- ticiples have been considered together. But among the instances considered, the present participle occurs most fre- quently (ninety-three out of ninety-eight). In fact, the fre- quent use of the present participle, which is used but sparingly in the other dialects, is a very noticeable feature of the Skeireins. A still more remarkable feature is the use of the present participle for the present indicative, e.g. : afaruh pan po in wato wairpandans hrain jah hyssopon jah wuUai raudai ufartrausnjandans, III. c. IS8 Mc Knight, [Vol. I The past participles that occur are usually combined with auxiliaries to make compound verbs. In Wulfila it was noted that in compound verbs the participle preceded the finite verb. The same is true in the Skeireins. In the Skeireins proper, among eleven compound verbs there is but one instance in which the participle follows the auxiliary, and in that instance the reason is self-evident. eipan garaihtaba warp bi swiknein sokeins gawagida, II. b. In the same way a predicate noun or adjective precedes the copula, e.g. : silba garaihtei wisands, I. a ; in pizei wistai manna was, IV. c ; ainsjah sa sama wesi, V. b ; gup wisandin, V. d. Exceptions occur, but only three out of twenty, e.g. : at ni wisandein aljai waihtai, VII. b. The personal pronoun object in the Skeireins is an un- stressed word, and like the particles, is free in its position, with the exception that it usually stands next to the verb. That is to say, it may follow or precede the verb. It was noted that in Wulfila the object pronoun preferred the posi- tion after the verb. This preference may be discerned also in the Skeireins. But usually the position of the pronoun object is determined by the context ; it is used, like the Greek particle, to separate two successive words which are to be emphasized, e.g. : ei laisareis uns wairpai pizos . . ., I. d ; inuh pis bairhtaba uns laiseip qipands . . ., III. d ; eipan waila ins maudeip qipands, VI. a. When the clause is transposed, the unstressed pronoun never follows^ but precedes, thus adding to the emphasis of the verb in the final position, e.g. : unte pata qipano . . . uns laiseip, V. d ; ganohjands ins wailawiznai . . . im /ragqf, Vll. h ; swa filu auk gamanwida ins wairpan, VII. c. No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 1 59 Reflexives, also, are usually unstressed, and are put im- mediately after the verb, e.g. : gasaljands sik, I. a ; afwandida sik, II. a. Only in case of inversion or of transposition, when the position after the verb is one of too great emphasis, does the reflexive precede the verb, e.g. : mip sis misso sik andrunnun sumai, III. a. faur mel sik gahaban, VIII. a. First place in the sentence does not seem to have been a position of as great emphasis in Gothic as in Greek. In fact, the author of the Skeireins frequently places an un- stressed particle in this position. With the Gothic the final position seems to have been the position of emphasis. In fact, the most noticeable feature of word-order in the Skeireins is the tendency to place the governing word after the word or words governed, ' Ascending Construction ' or synthetic order. This construction is illustrated by the following striking examples : pizos du guf>a garaihteins, I. d ; pana iupa briggandin in piudangardjai gups wig, II. a. po leikeinon us wambai munands gabaurp, II. b ; leikis hraineino inmaidips was sidusjah so bi gup hrainei, III. b. posei ustauhana habaida wairpan fram fraujin garehsn, I. b; Pofauraju us anas to deinai gar aidon garehsn, I. c. Instances of the opposite or ' Descending Construction ' also occur, e.g.: afleta frawaurhte jah fragift weihis ahmins, III. c. Another striking feature is the rhetorical separation of words, e.g. : ak himinakunda anafilhands fulhsnja, IV. d ; missaleikaim bandwips namnam, V. b ; anduh pana laist skeiris brukjands waurdis, V. a. On the whole we must conclude that the Gothic order of words was by no means rigidly fixed. This fact is proved l6o McKnight, [Vol. I for the Skeireins by the number of exceptions to any law that we may formulate, and by the rhetorical arrangements for emphasis ; for the Bible translation by the license which permitted Wulfila to follow the Greek order so exactly, and yet to produce a work which is not only intelligible, but seem- ingly not unnatural. On the other hand, in both works there is manifest a fondness for the synthetic order. The govern- ing word, noun or verb, usually comes after the governed word, thus binding the parts of the expression into a closely united whole. III. OLD HIGH GERMAN WORD-ORDEH. The subject of word-order has been examined more care- fully in OHG. than in any of the other Teutonic dialects. I shall content myself, therefore, with the results of the investi- gations of others, and shall only attempt to bring these results into a form convenient for reference and for comparison with the results of my own investigation in Gothic and in Old English. I shall take up the prose monuments in their chronological order, considering : first, the translations of the eighth and ninth centuries, including the Monsee-Wiener fragments of a translation of Matthew, the translation of Isidor's ' Contra Judaeos ' and that of Tatian's Gospel Har- mony ; second, Notker's translation of Boethius ; third. Middle High German prose. Otfrid, since his work cannot illustrate the development of prose order, will be considered separately. A. OHG. Translators of the Eighth and Ninth Centuries. I. Principal Clauses. Rannow, in his work on Isidor, says: "Was also erstens die Hauptsatze angeht, so sucht er [IsidorJ den in der Ent- No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words i6i wicklung des Deutschen immer mehr zur Geltung gelangen- den Grundsatz zu befolgen, das finite Verb moglichst voran zu stellen." In the use of this order Isidor follows the Latin order in 71 instances, departs from the Latin order in 43 instances. Opposed to these are only 28 instances in which the translator, 23 times in agreement with the Latin, 5 times in disagreement, puts the verb at the end. Tomanetz, who has examined the order in all three of the principal translations of the eighth and ninth centuries, reaches substantially the same conclusion. He asserts : " Ftir die ahd. selbstandigen Hauptsatze, lasst sich wol als allge- meine Regel hinstellen, dass das Pradicat von dem betonten Wort angezogen wird, also zweite Stelle einnimmt, ausser es ist selbst betont, in welchen Fall es den Satz eroffnet." The following table ^ will show the relative frequency of the differ- ent arrangements, s.v. . . . and s. . . . v. s.v. noun. In disagrgement with Latin 116 Independent of Latin 3 s.v. pron. " " 61 " " 232 s.v. adv. " " 30 " " 50 Total (s.v. . .) 207 + 285=492 On the other hand : s. nounv. In disagreement with Latin 3 Independent of Latin i s. pron. V. " " 6 " " 23 s. part. adv. v. " " 2 " "9 Total (s. ... V.) II + 33 = 44 Further evidence to the same effect is supplied by clauses consisting of predicate word and copula. The order is : copula, pred. word. In disagreement with Latin 68 times. pred. word, copula. Independent of Latin 6 times. pred. word, copula. In disagreement with Latin o times. The order of words, then, in principal clauses, when inde- pendent of the Latin, and even when in disagreement with the Latin, is most frequently the same as in modern High German principal clauses. 1 This table is borrowed from Hermann. K.Z., 33. ■ i62 McKnight, [Vol. I II. Subordinate Clauses. In Isidor Rannow notes the tendency of the finite verb in subordinate clauses, more and more to seek the end position. This it does, In agreement with the Latin original 41 times In disagreement with the Latin original 34 times This phenomenon is made more strilcing by the small number of instances in which the finite verb was moved to the initial position. In agreement with the Latin original 6 times In disagreement with the Latin original 8 times Counter to this tendency to place the verb last, Rannow notices a tendency to put last the word or phrase to be emphasized. For example, the translator reserves the last place for prepositional phrases : In agreement with the Latin original 70 times In disagreement with the Latin original 32 times This counter-tendency in part explains the number of clauses not completely transposed. In the relative clauses of the three works under considera- tion, Tomanetz has made the following observations : The order of words is, Like the Without In Disagreement In Spite of Other Latin. Latin Original. with the Latin. ChAnge from Latin Order. S.V. . . . 251 59 21 21 s. . . . V. 430 438 235 165 Total S.V. . . . 352. Total s. . . . v. 1268. Tomanetz further shoAvs by statistics that among the words preceding the verb, the number of pronouns is relatively greater than of any other kind of word. He infers that from the order s.v. . . . which, he believes, was original, the dis- tinctive order of the subordinate clause has been developed through the influence of subordinate clauses with pronominal No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 163 objects. Further, from the fact that the order, s. . . . v., is much less frequent in the second of two co-ordinate relative clauses, than in the first, in which this order is needed as a mark of distinction from principal clauses, he infers that the transposed order had its ultimate origin in the desire to differ- entiate subordinate from principal clauses. We have no general statistics for inversion in these monu- ments of OHG. We have, however, the assertion of Gering regarding causal adverbs in the apodosis : "Von diesen Worten miissen die jenigen, welche am Satzanfange stehen, nach den Gesetzen der Germanischen Wortstellung, Inversion bewirken, d. h. das Pradicatsverbum unmittelbar an sich heranziehen." Starker makes the same assumption and upon it bases his explanation of the origin of inversion in the apodosis. The other features of word-order in these works, it is hard to describe. Rannow has noted in Isidor the position of the genitive before its governing substantive. The genitive pre- cedes in all instances except in that of two nouns both of which have the article. The arrangement occurs so often as to be characteristic of this work. It is further to be noted that in the translation of Tatian, which usually follows the original very closely, the adjectives and possessive genitives precede their substantives, even when in disagreement with the order in the original. B. Notker's Boethius [end of loth, begin, of nth cent.]. Lohner believes that in Notker we have the pure expres- sion of German speech feeling, and that from this work we may derive the laws of German Syntax. He bases this belief on the fact that the German of the translation in the main is like the Latin original only where the syntax in the two languages is the same, and especially on the fact that paren- thetical expressions, independent of the Latin, agree in syn- tax with the translated parts, thus proving the independence of the latter. This freedom, as compared with the slavish- ness of the earlier translations, seems to show that the form of the High German language had at length become fixed, 1 64 Mc Knight, [Vol. I and that the translator in consequence was not at liberty to follow his original slavishly. The results of Lohner's investigations in Notker are as follows : 1. Relative and conjunctional clauses have the same con- struction as regards the order of words. , 2. This work has a developed order of words in the dependent clauses, which expresses itself especially by the separation of the finite verb from the introductory word and by the final position of the verb wherever possible. The verb occupies the final position in about two-thirds of all conjunctional, and in about three-fourths of all relative clauses. 3. Where the verb has a medial position, and therefore other elements stand at the end, there may be perceived some special motive, rhetorical or euphonic, which occasions the older order. 4. From this freedom to stand at the end are excluded all simple pronouns and most pronominal phrases, also other words and phrases with weak stress, such as adverbs. In relative clauses, the frequency with which the various ele- ments follow the verb is shown by the following statistics. There follow the verb : i) Of prepositional phrases 30% 2) Of the different noun objects 23 % 3) Of infinitives 20% 4) Oi predicative nonas 12% 5) Of nominate predicate (incl. past part.) 9% 6) Of noun subjects 2% 5. Pronouns and particles usually take second or third place. 6. Even in the other classes of words there is recognizable a regular grammatical arrangement, which, however, may be specially modified for the emphasis of an element or in the interest of a smoother, more rhythmical flow. In the period, then, between Notker and the earlier trans- lators, a great development has taken place in the direction of uniformity in language. Traces, however, of the older No. 2] Primitive Teitionic Ordei' of Words 165 order of words appear here and there. In the apodosis, the modern German rule that the verb shall stand first is not regarded ; and the earlier freedom to place the verb last, even in principal clauses, appears here and there. C. Middle High German. In the Middle High German period the norms of word- order which we note in their incipiency in the translators of the eighth and ninth centuries, and in their middle stage in Notker, have become fixed, so that the order of words in the prose of the period is essentially that of modern German prose. Only in poetry do we see traces of the original freer arrangement. This freedom manifests itself in various ways. 1. Transposition may occur in principal clauses.^ 2. The direct order may occur after an introductory ad- verbial phrase. 3. Transposition may occur after an introductory adverbial phrase. 4. Several adverbial modifiers may stand first. 5. The attributive adjective may follow the noun. 6. The genitive may stand between the article and the substantive. 7. The substantive may be followed by the article with the dependent genitive. 8. The dependencies of an infinitive do not precede as often as in modern German. This holds true even of the Middle High German prose. D. Otfrid. In poetry grammatical rules are not so rigidly observed as in prose, and in consequence poetry is not as valuable as prose in the historic study of word-order. For this reason, in the sequence followed thus far, all poetry has been unregarded. On the other hand, in poetry the expression, ' Paul, Mhd. Grammatik. 1 66 McKnight, ' [Vol. I less hampered by grammatical restraints, is more natural, and, therefore, perhaps' reflects the speech feeling better than prose does. Otfrid's Evangelienbuch, written about 800 a.d., is one of the most considerable monuments of OHG. literature. The word-order in this poem has been investigated by Ohly ; from the mass of statistics that he presents I have selected the following : I. Independent Affirmative Clauses. I . Relative Position of Subject and Finite Verb. Side by side seem to stand two normal arrangements of words, the direct and the indirect. Leaving the apodosis out of consideration, the order is as follows : Without Introductory Word. With Introductory Word. Direct 1342 (neg. 86) 161 Indirect 714 (neg. 222) 129s In the apodosis the direct order is the more frequent, though the indirect order occurs very frequently, both with and without introductory word or phrase. 2. Position of Verb in Relation to its Dependencies. In clavises with direct order the statistics are as follows : Normal. Part. Transp. Transp. i) Without introductory word 1051 (neg. 39) 60 221 (neg. 40) 2) With introductory word 9 8 62 3) In apodosis 11 o 34 4) Introd. by particles, ioh, etc. 17 3 18 Total, 1088 71 335 In inverted clauses the order is as follows : Total. V. and S. together. V. and S. separated. 495 348 147 The predicate noun follows the copula 320 : 8 The infinitive follows the auxiliary 86 : 7 The infinitive follows the dependencies 39 : 49 ■No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 167 II. Subordinate Clauses. I . Relative Position of Subject and Finite Verb. All instances of inversion are to be regarded as exceptions to the rule, and due to metre. Direct. Indirect. 2539 100 (approx.) 2. Position of Verb zvith Relation to its Dependencies. The total number of subordinate clauses containing ele- ments besides subject and verb is 2539. Normal and Part. Transp. Transp. 774 1765 The subject is preceded by some other member of the clause in 127 of the above instances. III. Clauses of Command. When the subjunctive is used, the rules of word-order are the same as for affirmative clauses. i) With introductory word 2) Without introductory word When the imperative is used, the subject is usually left unexpressed (579 instances). When the subject is expressed the order is, Direct. Indirect. 9 69 4 31 Direct. Indirect. i) With introductory word 32 2) Without introductory word S II IV. Independent Questions. In interrogative clauses a) without interrogative word and b) with interrogative word serving as object, the order is, nearly without exception, inverted. When c~) the interroga- tive pronoun is subject of the clause, the order is direct. The instances occurring are «) 27, b') 45, c) 29. 1 68 McKnight, [Vol. I V. General Remarks. 1. The attributive adjective may be placed after its sub- stantive. When two adjectives qualify the same noun, three different arrangements are possible: i) both before, 2) both after, 3) one after, the other before. 2. The genitive, if it has no article, may be placed between the article or adjective and the substantive. 3. The dependencies of the infinitive are not placed before as regularly as in modern German. From the above statistics we see that the difference between principal and subordinate clauses was much more marked in Otfrid than in the prose translations of the eighth and ninth centuries. In Otfrid the modern German rule of order is observed in four-fifths of all instances in both kinds of clause, principal and subordinate. Another noticeable fea- ture is the frequent use of inversion. This, as Ohly shows, cannot be attributed wholly to the demands of metre, but must, in many instances, be explained as ' pathetic order.' E. General Conclusions. From the evidence of the statistics quoted from the differ- ent OHG. monuments, we must infer that at the time when the earliest works that have descended to us, were composed, there already existed a feeling for the difference between principal and subordinate clauses, which expressed itself by a difference in word-order. In this belief we are confirmed after a hasty consideration of the Hildebrandslied. In this, the oldest monument of OHG. literature, the regular order in subordinate clauses is the transposed. The statistics, hastily gathered, are as follows : Inverted. Direct. Verb First. Verb not First. Normal. Transp. Principal clauses 3 12 18 ^ 2 Subordinate clauses o 2 i 24^ 1 Six consisting of subject and verb alone. ^ In one instance the verb has the medial position (Part. Transp.). Not 2] Primitive Tcnt07iic Order of Words 169 The infinitive, used in connection with a finite verb, follows its dependencies in ten instances, preceding only once, and that due to the chiastic arrangement. As in Otfrid, exam- ples of inversion are numerous, probably owing to the live- lier emotions of poetry, which demand for their expression the ' pathetic order.' OHG., then, does not afford us much direct evidence as to the order of words in primitive Teutonic. We notice only that just as the phonology and inflections of OHG. have differentiated themselves from those of the cognate dialects, so the word-order has already adopted that peculiar differen- tiation, which, rigidly carried out, is characteristic of modern German. IV. OLD NORSE WORD-ORDER. The subject of Old Norse word-order has, unfortunately, received but little attention. The only available treatment of the subject is that contained in Lund's Oldnordisk Ord- f6jningsl(2re, Kj^benhavn, 1862, and this is very indefinite and unsatisfactory. Consequently, since the scope of the present work will not permit of a separate, detailed investi- gation in this dialect, the treatment in this chapter will necessarily be inadequate. The materials for study are not entirely satisfactory. There are, first, the monuments of Old Icelandic and Old Norwegian literature, which, at the earliest, date back only to the end of the eleventh century, and which, therefore, can- not fairly be compared with the monuments in OHG., in Goth., and in OE. ; second, the oldest Runic inscriptions, which are of too fragmentary a character to be of great value for the study of word-order. I. Old Icelandic. The earliest Icelandic literary monuments, as we said above, date back only to the end of the eleventh century; and the Younger Edda, which is the most available work for I/O Mc Knight, [VoJ. I our purpose, appears in a manuscript of about 1300 a.d. The results, then, of an investigation of word-order in these monuments cannot be taken as representative of primitive word-order in Old Norse. On the contrary, the aptness of the idiom and the directness of the style in the Yoimger Edda are such as characterize only languages in an advanced stage of development. We are interested, then, in the word- order of Old Icelandic only because it shows one of the different developments from the primitive Teutonic. Lund affirms that the simplest order is: i) subject (with its qualifiers); 2) predicate (with its qualifiers); 3) indirect object {hensynet); 4) direct object. There seems to be no fixed position for the other elements except that qualifica- tions usually follow the main conception. There are, however, nearly as many exceptions as there are instances falling under the rule. 1. The sentence often begins with a verb, not only when the verb is conceived as prominent, but in general in past narrative, and even in present, if the sentence is closely con- nected with the preceding and the subject is the same, so that the grammatical predicate has the greater weight. 2. The verb stands first in the apodosis, often with />a at the beginning. 3. If the sentence begins with an adverb or conjunction, or with a phrase, the verb precedes the subject. 4. In clauses of command, entreaty, and exclamation, the verb is placed first, also in interrogative clauses not begin- ning with a pronoun. 5. Phrases like "said he," etc., as in English, are inverted. 6. An interrogative clause begins with the interrogative particle, if it has one; a relative clause with the nearest word, even if this is governed by a preposition, which then preferably follows. Conjunctional subordinate clauses also usually begin with the conjunction. But each of these kinds of sentence may have a conjunction or connecting adverb first. 7. There are also certain exceptions for the sake of euphony. If a noun has two adjectives, one is put before No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 171 the verb, the other after. The auxihary is often separated from the participle, the verb from the dependent infinitive. There are also many instances of departure from the regu- lar order for the sake of emphasis. A word which would otherwise follow, for the sake of emphasis is placed before. If by reason of contrast, or for any other reason, a word is the most important one for the meaning of the whole sen- tence, it is put at the beginning without regard to the kind of word or its regular position. This great freedom promotes a shorter, more vigorous mode of expression. Circumlocu- tions are avoided. The attributive adjective usually precedes its noun. The genitive case dependent on a substantive usually follows, but may precede if one wishes to make prominent the idea con- tained in the dependent word. But in case of two adjectives, one may precede the noun, the other follow with ok (and). In case of two nouns, each with an adjective, the order is,* adjective, noun, noun, adjective. When used with the definite article, the adjective may be placed either before or after the noun. Prepositional adverbs modifying verbs, instead of being fused with the verb as in modern German, remain separate and follow the verb. Another feature, so striking as to deserve special attention, is the separation of words for the sake of emphasis ; e.g. : Harald's saga kins harfagra Harold's sagas the fair-haired Hann haf^i hjalm a h'dfSi gullrocfum . . . , He had a helmet on his head, gold red and ... Svd var hann kappsar . . . at . . . So was he impetuous . . . that . . . Poetic order differs from prose order in greater freedom. Words are arranged not only with reference to meaning and to emphasis, but also with reference to rhythm. Further- more, words belonging together may be separated. Even a word may be divided, and the parts separated ; e.g. : Ha- reid a bak baru bor'8 herti -kon vestan (Hakon). 172 McKnight, [Vol.1 Lund's remarks, quoted above, in the main hold true. If, however, one look at the Younger Edda, he will notice some striking features not mentioned by Lund. Perhaps the most noticeable is the frequency of inversion ; this is so frequent, both in principal and subordinate clauses, that it may be called the regular order. It is further a noticeable fact that there are no instances of long transposition. The order in principal and in subordinate clauses is the same, either inverted or 'normal.' Nearly the only instances of synthetic order in any form are due to the past participle or the depen- dent infinitive, which occasionally stand at the end of the clause, preceded by their dependencies. A striking illustra- tion of the favored analytic order is afforded by the definite article, which regularly follows its noun. In general, it may be said that the order of words in the Younger Edda is much like that in modern English, except iFor the frequent inversion, the occasional transposition of the infinitive or past participle to the end of the clause, and the irregular position of some particular word which for emphasis is put at the beginning or at the end of the clause. The order is remarkably free, and consequently the language is very flexible, more so than modern English. The important word is. free to stand in the natural position of emphasis, and that, too, without unnatural inversion or awkward circum- locution. II. Old Runic Inscriptions. More significant in its bearing on primitive Teutonic word- order is the evidence afforded by the old Runic inscriptions. Among these are included the oldest^ monuments in any Teutonic dialect. Unfortunately they are very fragmentary. Hermann makes the assertion that in the Runic inscrip- tions of Old Norse the order of words in principal clauses is s. . . . V. y{?) or 6 times, s. v. ... 4 times ; that two instances of subordinate clause are found, and that in both of these the verb is' at the end. This assertion is somewhat sweeping. A more accurate notion may be formed by examining some 1 Unless we consider the Finnic loan words. No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 173 of the principal inscriptions. These I shall arrange in the order of age, at the same time using Noreen's numbering. Third century: 39. owlpupewaR in wane mariR = Ollther in Vang (?) renowned. Fourth century: 48. talino Zi^aion wiliR . . . tif>is hleuno — . . . see will . . . ( ? ) 13. ek hlewaZastiR holtinar horna tawido = 1, Hlegestr, (from) wood the horn made. 20. ek erilar ansW^isalas muha haite'^a '^ax^a'^inu "^ahelpu, salt jah haZ,ala wiZju bi 3=1, earl Asgisl, Moe am called, help, fortune, and prosperity consecrate . . . 8. 'Qa-^ar l>ar runo faihi'So = Thagr these runes scratched. Fifth century: 33. izinon halaR = Iginga's stone. Sixth century: 1 9. ubaR kite hardbanaR wit iah ek erilar runor wariiu = Over Hitr, Hrafu, we two, and I, earl, runes writ. 38. />rawinan haitinaR was = Thraenge's called was. 24. ana hahaisla iniR frawaraSaR = over Haisl, Inr, Frarathr. 22. ek erilar sa wila^ar hateka . . . = I, earl, who Wilagr am called. 6. hrawdas hlaiwa = Hrauth's grave. 25. . . ? . swestar minu liudu meR waZe= sister mine dear (to) me, Wagr. 35. hadulaikaR ek haZustaWar hlaaiwido ma^u minino = Hoth- laikr (lies here). I, Hogstaldr, buried son mine. 42. ek wiwaR after wo'Suri'de witatSahalaiban worahto runor ..?.. = I, Yr, after Othrithr, wrought (the) runes . . ? . . 44. ek haZustal&ar f>ewaR ZodaZas = I, Hogstaldr, servant of Gothag. Seventh century: 26. iuf>inZaR ik wakraR unnam wraifa = Yt\\engT (rests here). I, Wacker, undertook the writing. 5. eirilar hroRaR hroReR arte j!>a:t aR'da . . . = Earl Hror (of) Hror, made this . . . 174 Mc Knight, [Vol.1 Seventh-eighth century : 1 6. afatr hariwulafa hapuwulqfK haeruwulqfiR — wqrait runaR paiaR = After Herewulf, Hathewulf (of) Holf cut runes these. 34. niuha dorumR niuhq. ZestumR ha/>uwolqfR Zcf hariwolafR maiiu snuheka he'Sera l,inoronoR . . ? . = New (monu- ment) (to the) sons, new (to the) guests, Holfr gave, Herolfr (to the) son. Turn (I) here with runes 3. saR pat darutR uti aR welaSaude haeramalausR '^inarunaR ara'^eu falahak hadera'^ hai'dRruno ronu^ He (who) this breaks, before (him) is baleful death. Harmless (I) big runes of witchcraft conceal here (of) honor runes sow. I have quoted above, all the -intelligible primitive Norse inscriptions that are long enough to be signiiicant for word- order. It will at once be noted that there is a difference between inscriptions of different periods. In the six inscrip- tions of the third, fourth, and fifth centuries (39, 48, 13, 20, 8, 33) the order is, without exception, synthetic. The same is true of the first four (19, 38, 22, 6) of the sixth century. The last four (25, 35, 42, 44) of the sixth century have the analytic order. The two (26, 5) of the seventh and the first two (16, 34) of the eighth also have analytic order; and the last one of the eighth century has an arrangement of words quite like that characteristic of the classic Old Icelandic prose. There is discernible, then, a gradual development from the synthetic to the analytic order. This is illustrated by the position of the demonstrative adjective. It occurs in but three of the above inscriptions. In the fourth century (8) and in the seventh (s) it precedes its noun; in the eighth century (16) it follows. The verb stands at the end in each of the three subordi- nate clauses (22, 20, 3), though at least two of these are paratactic. Inversion does not occur in the inscriptions until the eighth century, when it occurs (34, 3) as in Old Icelandic literature. The evidence, then, of the old Runic inscriptions, though slender, is very valuable, because so early and because it No. 2] Primitive Tejitonic Order of Words 175 shows that the synthetic order was the earliest and that the order of words characteristic of literary Icelandic does not belong to primitive Teutonic, but is the result of a gradual special development. V. OLD SAXON WORD-ORDER. For the facts of OS. word-order, we are indebted to Ries, who has made an exhaustive study of the word-order in the Heliand. From this work of Ries, a model in its kind, I have taken the most general statistics. A. Principal Clauses. I. Affirmative Clauses. I. Relative Position of Subject and Finite Verb. The fundamental type of word-order is the direct. The indirect (inverted) order is to be regarded, not as an excep- tion to the rule, but as a means of expressing certain shades of meaning. a. Indirect Order in Free Use. I. From Logical Relation to the Context. Ries assumes that the first place in the sentence is the position of emphasis, and says that at times the verb bears the principal accent, and accordingly stands first. 2. Stylistic-Rhetorical-Syntactical Motives. For animation of style the chiastic order may be used. 3. Rhythmical-Metrical Motives. The indirect order regularly occurs when some later mem- ber of the clause is placed first. Exceptions to this rule are to be explained mainly on rhythmical grounds. Indirect order with initial position of object 88 " " adverbial expression 749 " " predicate noun 6 1/6 McKnight, [Vol.1 {with initial position of object ii " " adverbial expression 96 " " predicate noun i This use of indirect order may be known as 'regular- indirect' order, as distinguished from 'indirect order in free use,' when inversion occurs without introductory word. The use of direct order after an introductory word or phrase is known as ' irregular-direct,' as distinguished from ' regular^ direct,' without such introduction. It is to be noticed that the ' regular-indirect ' order is relatively more frequent with predicate nouns; the 'irregular-direct,' with object at the beginning. The general statistics for inversion in principal-affirmative clauses are as follows : Total 1023 ' Regular-direct ' 330 ' Irregular-direct ' 59 ' Indirect in free use ' 188 ' Regular-indirect ' 446 In the first three thousand lines of the Heliand 2. Position of Verb with Relation to its Dependencies. For Heliand {i-'},ooo) the statistics are as follows : a. 'Regular-direct' Total 330 Neutral (only subj. and verb) 34 Transposed (j. . . v.) 69 b. ' Irregular-direct ' Total 59 Neutral S Transposed 42 In about 32% of all clauses consisting of more than mere subject and verb, the order is transposed. II. Clauses of Command. I. Relative Position of Subject and Finite Verb, a. Imperative, with Pronoun Subject. Indirect. Direct. With introductory particle 20 7 Without introductory particle 32 ± Total 52 10 No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 177 b. Subjunctive. Indirect. Direct. With introductory particle 5 2 Without introductory particle 10 5 Total 15 7 2. Position of Verb ivith Relation to its Dependencies. Of the 7 imperative clauses with ' irregular-direct ' order, all are transposed (j. . . . z^.). III. Interrogative Clauses. I. Relative Position of Subject and Finite Verb. Indirect. Direct. With introductory word 39 II Without introductory word 7 2. Position of Verb with Relation to its Dependencies. Of the 8 interrogative clauses with ' irregular-direct ' order, 7 are transposed (or partially transposed). B. Subordinate Clauses. I. Relative Position of Subject and Finite Verb. In principal clauses the indirect order, as we have seen, is nearly as frequent as the direct. In subordinate clauses the indirect order occurs but rarely, 158 : 19S7 (7-8%). Clauses with pronoun subjects, for metrical and logical reasons, employ the direct order exclusively. In clauses with noun subjects, 158 out of 528 have indirect order. Direct. Indirect. With auxiliary verbs 105 (28 %) 104 (65 %) Negative clauses 49 (13%) 30(19%) With negative-auxiliary verbs 20 (5%) 27(17%) When a later member of the clause is put first, as in prin- cipal clauses, the verb is attracted forward on account of a 1/8 McKnight, [Vol. I feeling for the unity of the verb and the later members of the clause. It may be noted also, that, as in principal clauses, the attracting power is different with different words, the predicate word having the greatest, the object having the least ; that is to say, the feeling for the unity of verb and predicate is stronger than for that of verb and object. In the instances of ' regular-indirect ' order the word at the beginning was: object (14%), adverbial expression (40%), predicate noun (45%). In the instances of 'irregular-direct' order, the word at the beginning was : object (40%), adverbial expression (S3%), predicate word (6%). 2. Position of Verb with Relation to its Dependencies. For Heliand {i-^ood) the statistics are as follows : Total (subordinate clauses) 350 Neutral 33 Verb at end 145 Verb in middle position 78 In subordinate clauses consisting of more than mere sub- ject, and verb, the verb is separated from the subject in 70% of all instances, as against 32% in principal clauses. VI. OLD ENGLISH WORD-ORDER. The subject of Old English word-order has already received some attention. The word-order of Beowulf has been exam- ined by Ries and Todt, that of the A S. Chronicle by Kube, that of Alfred's Orosius and .iElfric's Homilies by Smith. I shall first summarize the results of these investigations, and then in succeeding chapters give more in detail the results of my study of the word-order in the AS. laws. No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 179 A. Beowulf. From Ries's work I have derived the following table : I. Independent Affirmative Clauses. {Beowulf, i-iooo.) 1. 'Regular-direct,' Total 152 Neutral 33 S. and V. separated 76 (Transp. 36, Part. Transp. 40) 2. ' Irregular-direct,' Total 91 Neutral 9 S. and V. separated 66 Ind. Affirm. Clauses (direct order) Total 243 Neutral 42 201 S. and V. separated. Total 142 (70 %) II. Subordinate Clauses. {Beowulf, 1-500.) Total 125 Neutral 23 Verb at end (transposed) 51 (50%) Note. — In 67% of the instances in which the verb is not at the end, it occupies a medial position, so that in subordinate clauses the verb is separated from the subject in about 83% of all instances, as opposed to 70% in principal clauses. The arbitrary system that Todt has adopted makes it diffi- cult for us to utilize the results of his investigation in Beowulf. The verb, according to his scheme, may stand, a) at the beginning, b) after the first word, c) after several members, d) at the end. Todt renders this scheme still more compli- cated by making the following qualifications : When there is no object, the position d) is not conceivable, for whether or not an unimportant expression follows a verb already pre- ceded by several independent members is unessential, the clause is to be classed as d). If, on the other hand, both subject and object precede the verb, the clause is classed d\ no matter if a modifier follows. For purposes of comparison, the only way of utilizing Todt's results is by grouping classes c) and d) into one class in which are included all clauses with direct order which have words interposed between subject and predicate. l8o Mc Knight, [Vol. I I. Independent Affirmative Clauses. I. Simple Verbs, a) 98 b) 204 c) 213 (/) 3SS 2. Auxiliary Verbs, a) 17 (5) 45 c) 15 rf) 4 3. The Copula, a) 81 b) 166 c) 29 rf) 7 4. Modal Verbs, a) 31 *) 36 S4 d) 19 5. Verbs with the Infinitive, a) 29 *) 30 c) 43 rf) 8 Total. a) 256 /5) 481 c) 354 rf) 393 From these statistics it is impossible to determine anything concerning the relative position of subject and finite verb. But the frequency with which the verb is separated from the subject is very noticeable. This separation (transposition or partial transposition) occurs in 50% of all clauses. The discrepancy between this percentage and that obtained by Ries is to be explained by the fact that while Ries excepts all ' neutral ' clauses (only subject and predicate), Todt counts all such clauses as untransposed. It is further to be noted that the simple verb is separated from the subject much more frequently than are the other verbs, auxiliary, etc. II. Subordinate Clauses. I. Simple Verb, b) 9 c) 297 rf) 332 In the clauses with fully stressed subject the verb stands at the end 47 times, not at the end 27 times. The corre- sponding ratio in principal clauses is 86 : 73. No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 18 1 2. Auxiliary Verbs, b) 2 c) 14 d) 8 The inclination to stand at the end is very strong, as is shown by the position of the participle, which precedes 18 times, follows 6 times. The corresponding ratio for princi- pal clauses is 8 : 73. 3. Copula. b) 8 c) 43 d) 47 4. Modal Verb, b) 5 c) 74 d) 59 The infinitive precedes 92 times, follows 46 times. The corresponding ratio for principal clauses is 37 : 103. Total. b) 26 c) 428 d) 346 The verb is separated from the subject in 96% of all instances. We notice, then, both in principal and in subordinate clauses a marked tendency to place the verb at the end, or at least after several of its dependencies. This tendency is stronger in subordinate than in principal clauses, and in the case of simple verbs than in that of auxiliaries, etc. B. AS. Chronicle. The results of Kube's examination of word-order in the Chronicle are somewhat indefinite. In but few instances has he given any exact statistics. His principal conclusions are as follows : I. Principal Clauses. I. Relative Position of Subject and Finite Verb, a. Direct Order. i) Interrogative clauses Not at all. 2) Imperative clauses Rarely. 3) AfBrmative clauses Under most diverse circumstances. 1 82 Mc Knight, [Vol. I b. Indirect Order (Inversion). After introductory adverbs and adverbial phrases the order is : t^. ^ ^^^ Direct 220 Indirect 310 After her the order is : Direct 175 Indirect 106 After M the order in the apodosis is always indirect; in affirmative clauses: Direct 6 Indirect 99 After adverbial expressions of time : Direct 39 Indirect 81 In case of two clauses connected by ond, the first of which has indirect order, the order in the second is direct. 2. Position of Verb with Relation to its Dependencies. A substantive in the accusative case usually follows the verb, but may precede. The personal pronoun in the accusa- tive invariably precedes the verb. In case of indirect order, the arrangement may be either v. s. a. or v. 0. s. In case of compound verbs, the object is usually one of the separating elements. Except in the case of pronouns, which sometimes precede the verb, the dative object comes third, whatever may be the relative position of subject and verb. The predicate noun follows the verb. Phrases of time and place not very frequently stand between subject and verb. II. Subordinate Clauses. I. Relative Clauses. The verb usually stands at the end except in the case of an object in the form of a clause. The second of two place- expressions sometimes follows the verb. Inversion is in- frequent. No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 183 2. Temporal Clauses. Verb usually last. Inversion only three times. 3. Causal Clauses. Proportion of verbs at end, 1:1. Inversion only twice. 4. Conditional Clauses. Only two instances. Both direct, transposed. The infini- tive precedes the finite form. 5. Concessive Clauses. Direct; transposed. 6. Indirect Questions. Direct; verb stands at the end more often than within the clause. 7. Object Clauses. Direct ; usually transposed. 8. Final Clauses. Direct ; verb equally often at end and in medial position. 9. Consecutive Clauses. Usually direct ; verb more frequently in the medial position. 10. Comparative Clauses. The few clauses that occur have direct order and the verb at the end. III. Position of Elements in Word-Groups. The genitive, subjective and objective, nearly always precedes. The attributive adjective, with rare exceptions, precedes its substantive. Numerals usually precede. Possessives and indefinite pronouns (^«//, ilea, etc.) precede. 1 84 Mc Knight, [Vol. I C} Alfred's Orosius and .^lfric's Homilies. I. Independent Clauses. The usual order is the ' normal.' In case of a compound verb, the auxiliary follows the subject immediately, medially, or finally. When modifiers are few, the final position is more usual. The pronoun in the dative regularly precedes the verb. There are only 9 exceptions in the Orosius. In a portion of the Homilies equal to the Orosius, 64 precede, 22 follow (3:1). The pronominal direct object also precedes. There are in Orosius 4 exceptions to this rule. In ^Ifric, 88 precede, 20 follow. This preference of the pronoun for the initial position is due to the tendency to follow the ante- cedent as closely as possible. Transposition also occurs occasionally in independent clauses. Smith gives us no statistics concerning the fre- quency. When a word, phrase, or clause, other than the subject, or a co-ordinating conjunction begins the clause, the verb may be drawn forward and the subject made to follow. There are two different aspects of inversion : i) as a means of more closely uniting the inverted clause with the preced- ing (by l>a, />onne, etc.) ; 2) as a means of indicating relative stress {e.g., when direct object begins). Orosius uses inver- sion for the first purpose more often, .^Ifric more often for the second. Inversion caused by an initial dependent clause is not frequent in OE., unless the apodosis is begun by a word like f>onne. II. Dependent Clauses. There are no instances in Orosius of inversion used to express condition, concession, or interrogation ; only two of inversion to express command or persuasion. The Homilies, however, use inversion for all these purposes. The order in dependent clauses is much varied. ^ Smith, Publ. Mod. Lang.. Assoc, 1893. No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 185 Total. 328 I . Orosiits. a. Simple Tenses. Normal Transp. 46 259 Part. Transp. 23 Part. Transp. 28 h. Compound Tenses. Total. Normal. Transp. 188 47 III Note. — Usually some form of the verb stands at the end. Either principal or auxiliary stands at the end in 162 instances. 2. Homilies, a. Simple Tenses. Total. Normal. Transp. 314 139 155 Part. Transp. 20 b. Compound Tenses. Total. Normal. Transp. Part. Transp. 186 6g 53 64 Note. — Either principal or auxiliary verb stands at the end in 126 instances. The order of words in Oratio Obliqua is more like that in independent clauses, than is the order in subordinate clauses. I . Orosius. a. Simple Tenses. Normal. Transp. 23 21 6. Compound Tenses. Total. 46 Total. 44 Normal. 28 Transpv 10 Part. Transp. 2 Part. Transp. 6 Note. — Either principal or auxiliary verb stands at the end in 40 instances. 2. JSlfric. a. Simple Tenses. Total. Normal. Transp. Part. Transp. 50 30 13 7 Total. 46 b. Compound Tenses. Normal. Transp. IS 9 Part. Transp. 22 1 86 McKnight, [Vol. I The comparative study by Smith of the word-order in these two works seems, then, to show that the difference be- tween principal and subordinate clauses was being levelled, that the normal order in modern English is the product of a gradual development, not, as asserted by Fiedler and Sachs, due to French influence. Further evidence will be brought to bear in the two following chapters. VII. WORD-ORDER IN ALFRED'S LAWS. Old English word-order has been investigated in Beowulf, in the Chronicle, in Alfred's Orosius, and in .(Elfric's Homi- lies. The results of these investigations, given in the pre- ceding chapter, are most important; but there are not yet available a sufficient array of facts, for any absolutely satis- factory generalization. Beowulf does not truly represent OE. word-order, on account of the restraints of metre ; the Orosius is open to suspicion, though slight, on the ground that it is a translation ; .^Elfric's Homilies represent the language at a later stage of its development ; and the results of Kube's investigation of the Chronicle are unfortunately not in statistical form, and are hence not to any great extent available for our purpose. For further investigation the Anglo-Saxon laws seem to be peculiarly fitted. They are evidently independent and are written in prose. They may, therefore, be taken as repre- sentative of the OE. speech feeling. They were also formu- lated at different times, some very early and continuing through the whole OE. period, and, therefore, afford an opportunity for study of the development of the language. As representatives of different periods, I have selected the code of Alfred and the code of Cnut. I have made a study of each, and have arranged the results in statistical form so as to exhibit the word-order current in each period, and by comparison to mark thp lines of development. No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 187 LAWS OF ALFRED. A. Independent Clauses. I. Aflarmative Clauses. As explained in the introduction, in the matter of word- order, our subject for study is the relative position of the essential elements of a clause; the grammatical subject, grammatical predicate (finite verb), and grammatical object. The relative position of qualifier and qualified is included here, because such combinations of words are, at bottom, subordinate clauses; the qualifier being the predicate, the thing qualified being the subject. The relative position of the various coordinate dependencies is usually arbitrary, and is determined by the consideration of emphasis or of con- nection. I. Relative Position of Subject and Finite Verb. In Alfred's laws there occur 154 independent affirmative clauses. Total. Direct. Indirect (Inverted). 154 119 35 Note. — The direct order is that in which the subject precedes the verb ; the indirect (inverted), that in which the object precedes the subject. Under 'direct' are included clauses in which the subject is not expressed. Under ' indirect ' are included only the in- stances in which the subject (expressed) is preceded by the verb. Consequently the relative number of instances of in- version is not as small as might at first sight appear. Inversion does not seem to follow any invariable rules, except that after the introductory particles ; 'Sonne, tfa, 'deer, the order is always inverted. The High German rule accord- ing to which a later member of the clause (object or adverb), when standing at the beginning, attracts the verb forward, thus causing inversion, does not hold good in OE. To be sure, of the thirty-five inverted clauses that occur, twenty-three have an introductory word. But it will be l88 Ah Knight, [Vol.1 noticed that this is merely a formal sign, and instead of being the cause of inversion, is perhaps the result. The introductory words occurring are: {f>omie i6 times), />a (3), Zeo (i), nu (i), eac {i), "Sar {i); e.g.: f>onne sceal he be, .LX. hida . . .,* 1 24, 2 ; pa sendon hie cerend- ■z,ewrit to him, 78, 26 ; 'da '^esomnodon we us ymb '6 at, 80, 7 ; Zeo wees Zold'Seofe . . . maran donne dSrti, 88, 15 ; Nu sint ealZelic . . ., 88, 16 ; eac is ciepe monnum Zereht, 96, 11. That inversion requires a particle as formal sign, is seem- ingly proved by the fact that inversion occurs without such sign only in negative clauses in which the negative particle stands first ( 1 2 times), e.g. : Nelle ic from minum hlaforde . . ., 70, 4 ; ne bi'8 he ealles swa scyldiZ, 72, 5 ; ne bitf se dS na 'Sy mara, 124, 5 ; ne mot hine mon tieman . . ., 124, 8. That is to say, the verb never stands directly at the beginning. When, however, the object or a prepositional phrase, or an adverbial expression more definite than 'Sonne, etc., stands first, the order is, without exception, direct ; twenty-seven in- stances of such ' irregular-direct ' order occur. In these clauses the introductory word or phrase is: the object (12 times), a prepositional phrase (9), eac {^, swa (i), cerest {\\ .X., zvintra (i); e.g.: 7 eddmodnesse he Icerde, 78, 20 ; mid him we sendon iudam . . ., 80, II ; Ofdissum anum dome mon mag ZeSencean . . ., 80, 19 ; Eac we settdd . . ., 86, i ; Aat he mot, 92, 8 ; ./Erest we bebeoddS pcBtte . . ., no, 5 ; .X., wintra cnihtmaZ bion diefSe Zewifa 112, 13. It must be noted that in many instances the subject is not formally expressed, so that there is no distinction between direct and inverted order. For the clauses in which the sub- ject is formally expressed, and which are begun by some word or phrase other than the subject, the statistics are : Inverted. Direct. 23 (such words as ^onne, etc.) 27 (objects, prep, phrases, etc.) * The references are to page and line in " The Legal Code of Alfred the Great." Ed. by M. H. Turk, Halle, 1893. No. 2] Primitive Teuton. c Order of Words 189 Manifestly, then, the HG. rule is not valid in OE. The occurrence of inversion in independent clauses is con- fined almost exclusively to the apodosis, perhaps owing to the fact that in the laws most of the principal clauses are in the apodosis. Out of 35 instances of inversion 29 are in the apodosis, e.g. : Zif he ne wille his wmpeiiu sellan, />onne mot he feohtan on hine, 102, 7 ; yf he hit 'Sonne (Heme's, Sonne rymeS he Sam deadan . . ., 116, 2; ne />earf he Mora md leldan, wcere Mora swa fela swa Mora ware, 122, 17. But clauses in the apodosis are by no means always inverted. As against the 29 instances of inversion in the apodosis, there are 24 instances of direct order ; e.g. : Zif Ze Ponne elles doS, hie deopiaS to me 7 ic Zehiere hie ^ ic eow ponne slea mid minum sweorde, 7 ic Zedd f>ret . . ., 76, 11 ; Zif he hine triewan wille . . ., pcet be mot, 92, 7 ; Gif feorcund mon oSSe fremde buton we^ie Zeond wudu ZonZe . . ., for peof he biS to profianne . . ., 114, 19. To sum up, then, inversion occurs : In Apodosis. Not in Apodosis. Vith Formal Introd. Without Introd. With Introd. Without Introd. 19 10 (all neg.) 4 2 (both neg.) The direct order occurs : In Apodosis. With Object OR Adverb First in Clause. 24 27 2. Position of the Verb with Relation to its Dependencies. In independent affirmative clauses the position of the verb with relation to its modifiers is in the main the same as in modern English. This order we will call the ' normal,' defin- ing normal order more exactly as the order in which the finite verb follows immediately the grammatical subject. But this order, though general, is not universal. If we call 'trans- posed ' those clauses in which the finite verb stands at the end after all its dependencies, and 'partially transposed' (Part. I go McKnight, [Vol. I Transp.) those clauses in which the finite verb has a medial position after part of its dependencies, and ' neutral ' those clauses consisting of verb alone, or of subject and verb- alone, then the statistics for independent affirmative clauses are : Total. Normal. Transp. Part. Transp. Neutral. Invertep. 154 84 17 IS 3 35 Examples of clauses with normal order need hardly be cited, e.g. : Ic eom dryhten din i^od., 68, 2 ; f>is syndan 'da domas f>e se celmih- teZ,(i ■ ■ ., 78, 14; ce/c mon mot onsacan frynide 7 . . ., 124, 6. Examples of transposed clauses are : 7 f>us cwalS, 68, 2 ; 7 ic hine "^ehiere, 76, 20 ; Jc da alfred westseaxna cyning eallum minum witum f>as 2>eeowde, 82, 20. Examples of partially transposed (Part. Transp.) clauses are : 7 on moneZa senod bee hie writan hwcer anne dom hwcer oderne, 82, 1 ; 1 on odrum wisan bebead to healdanne, 82, 12. Examples of neutral clauses are : 7 hie f>a cwmdon f>a.t . . ., 82, 21 ; Eac we bebeodad, 100, 19. It will at once be seen that the normal order predominates. Many of the clauses classed as transposed or partially trans- posed have an order that would be quite possible in modern English. As in modern English, an object or adverbial modi- fier may, for rhetorical purpose, be placed first. Such clauses ('irregular-direct'), whether the subject is expressed or not, are here classed as transposed or as partially transposed, according as the verb stands at the end or not. The pronoun-object does not occur frequently enough to materially affect the result, but the pronoun-object precedes the verb relatively more often than other dependencies do. Pronoun-Object. Alone before Verb. Before Verb, not Alone. After Verb. 4 4 12 (Inv. 8) No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 191 E.g. : 7 ic /line ZeAiere, 76, 20 ; j we Sow cyddS. 7 pa eldran brodor halo cow wyscdS, 80, 2 ; «^ mot hine mon tieman to 'Seowum men, 124, 8 ; l>onne betyh'S hine mon eft o'Sre si'Se, 128, 24. Participle. The past participle as part of a compound verb occurs only 1 7 times in principal clauses (including clauses of command). It stands at the end of the clause 13 times, the other 4 times following the finite verb directly, or separated only by the subject, e.g. : sie he mid stanum ofworpod, 72, 17 ; ne sie his flcesc eten, 72, 17 ; Eallum frioum monnum das da'^as sien forZifene . . ., 102, 22. , The present participle occurs only twice. In these two instances it follows the finite verb immediately. Dryhten wees specende das word to Moyse, 68, i ; 7 eac micelre Zesomnunge Zodes deowa wees smeaZende be dcere halo urra sawla, 108, 30. Infinitive. The infinitive occurs 50 times in principal clauses. It stands at the end of the clause 28 times ; followed only by finite verb once. It follows the finite verb directly 27 times, e.g. : NaZe he hie At on eldeodizfolc to bebycZZetnne, 70, \o; se sceal deade sweltan, 70, 25 ; .X. wintra cnihtmceZ bion diefde Zewita, 112, 13; Mon sceal simle to hereZafole aZifan at anum wyrhtan, .VI., wceZa, 128, II. II. Clauses of Command. The regular position of the verb is first in the clause (intro- ductory particles being left out of consideration). When the subject is expressed, the order is regularly inverted. All exceptions may be explained on some special ground, rhetori- cal or other. Note. — It is so often impossible to distinguish between optative and imperative that no discrimination has been made in the treatment. But from observations made, I feel justified in saying that the order is the same in the two kinds of clause. 1 92 Mc Knight, [Vol. I Narrowmg^ our attention, to inversion, we obtain the follow- ing results : In ApodOsis (105). Not in Apodosis (38). With Introd. Without Introd With Introd. Without Introd. 12 95 (7 neg.) 18 18 (12 neg.) e.g. . Zif hwa ZfiycZZe cristene />eow, .VI. 3ra/- 'deowiZe he, 'Sy siofoSan beo he frioh drceapunZd, 68, 19, 20; Mid swelce hrmZle he ineode, mid swelce 3a«3^ he at, 70, i ; Ne minne noman ne ciz du on idelnesse, 68, 5 ; Utancumene 7 eldeodiZe ne Ztswenc du no, 76, 8 ; Dem 'du swi'Se emne, 78, 3. Those clauses of command in which the order is not inverted, and in which the verb does not stand first, demand special consideration. Such exceptions to the rule are usu- ally due to the desire to emphasize some word or phrase, which accordingly is given the initial position, e.g. : iBrcebiscepes borZes bryce ocFSe his mund byrd Zebete mid "drim pun- dum, 84, 20 ; Gif hund mon ioslite dS^e abite, mt forman misdcBde Zeselle .VI. scill, 92, 23 ; Zif syxhundum pissa hwaSer Z^limpe, driefealdlice arise be 'Sare cleriscan bote, 100, i. Another consideration, which perhaps more often than the consideration of emphasis determines what shall stand first in the clause, is that of connection. There is a tendency to place first the word or phrase which links with the idea expressed in the preceding sentence, e.g.: wyrcedS eow .VI. daZas 7 on pam siofoVan restdd eow, 68, 8 ; Zif hie sien bu ZtHc, ord 7 hindeweard sceaft, pat sie butan pleo, 98, 7. The instances of transposition and partial transposition, and also of normal order, occur most frequently in a last clause of a series. In some instances this is due to one of the motives mentioned above ; in others it seems to be for rhetorical effect — chiasmus, e.g. : Zif 'Seowmon wyrce on sunnandceZ b' his hlafordes hmse, sie he frioh 7 se hlaford Zeselle .XXX. scill. to wite, no, 11; Zif he medren mceZas naZe, Zidden Pa ZeZHdan healfne, for healfne he No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 193 flea, 94, 24 ; 3«/ /j//^ beam mon ofslea, ZiMe cyninZe l>ara medren tnceyt dkl, fczdren malum Mora dcel mon aZife, 88, 7. For clauses of command, the general statistics are : Subject Expressed (^83). Subject not Expressed (203). Inv. Normal Part. Transp. Transp. First. Not First. Neutr. 143 16 7 17 158 43 2 B. Subordinate Clauses. I. Relative Position of Subject and Finite Verb. In subordinate clauses the finite verb regularly follows the subject. Inversion occurs only in isolated instances. In 429 conditional clauses there are only 9 instances of inversion : 8 times in clauses with Zif, once where the inversion serves to indicate the conditional nature of the clause, e.g. : Gif in feaxe bid wund, 104, 4 ; ware Mora swa fela swa Mora ware, 122, 18. There is one inverted relative clause, . . . Pcet mceze .XXX. swina understandan, 122, 20; one substantive clause (really an instance of parataxis), "Sara Z^hwelc ive willatS, sy twy bote ., 86, 18; one temporal clause, domie hcefd he l>cBt wite afylled mid l>y dde . ., 126,9; one purpose clause, >^if A«W moton his m.cez<^s unsynzian, 1 16, 3. 2. Position of the Verb with Relation to its Dependencies, a. Relative Clauses. Total. Normal. Transp. Part. Transp. Inverted. Neutral. 158 20 103 17 I 18 e.g.: se 'de staldd on sunnan niht o'd'de on Zehhol, 86, 16 ; se 'das wapnes onlah, 92, 6 ; f>e arestfuUuhte onfenZ on anZelcynne, 82, 18. With relative clauses are included clauses of manner intro- duced by swa, e.g. : swa he ar sceolde, 84, 4. 194 Mc Knight, [Vol. I b. Substantive Clauses. Total. Normal. Transp. Part. Transp. Inverted. Neutral. e.g.: 82 18 50 12 I 3 leinyne pcet "du ZehalZiZe fione rmste dmZ, 68, 7 ; l>at he ce'^hwelcne onryht Zedeme'd, 80, 20 ; ficet he him nan o^er ne sealde buton pcet ike, 132, 24. c. Clauses of Comparison. Total. Normal. Transi'. Part. Transp. Inverted. Neutral 402 I 01 e.g. : . . . tSonne hie mon be pam were ZeeahtiZe, 96, 6 ; />onne him mon aceorfe />a tunZon df, 96, 4. d. Temporal Clauses. Total. Normal. Transp. Part. Transp. Inverted. Neutral. 20 6 16 4 I 2 e.g. : sitfSan se dncenneda dryhtnes sunu . . . on middanZeard cwom, 78, 15; dd 'Scet anZylde arise to .XXX. scilL, 88, 13; i f>onne him tSearf sie ma manna Ap mid him to habbanne on Mora fore, 96, 15. Under this head are inchided quite different kinds of clauses, introduced by the conjunctions f>onne, si'ddan, and oS. e. Purpose Clauses. Total. Normal. Transp. Part Transp. Inverted. Neutral, 024 2 10 e.g : f>cet 'Su sie fiy lenZ libbende on eorpan, 68, 13 ; pat he mon mid ofslea, 92, 3 ; pcette nceniz ealdormonna . . . cefter pam ware awendende 'das ure domas, no, 2. /. Indirect Question. Total. Normal. Transp. Part. Transp. Inverted. Neutral. 505 O 00 e.g.: hwmt pas "dam Rcian wolde . . ., 82, 15. g. Conditional Clauses. Total. Normal. Transp. Past. Transp. Inverted. Neutral. 429 112 228 S3 9 27 No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 195 Of the 9 instances of inversion, 4 are included under other heads (130, i ; io6, 24; 104, 4; 78, 2), e.g. : Gif hifdonne bi'S wilisc onstal, 124, 5 ; lif hio dead sie, 72, 9 ; Gt/ mon forstolene man befo cet o'Srum, 126, 4. h. Result Clauses. Total, Normal. Transp. Part. Transp. Inverted. Neutral. 12 8 3 O 1 e.g.: fiizt hie beod forode, 104, 18; f^cet hie dead sien, 72, 16. /. Causal Clauses. Total. Normal. Transp. Part. Transp, Inverted. Neutral. e.g.: '^934 00 forpon pe hit wcbs his aZen fioh, 72, 6 ; forpam 'Se Zod celmihUZ />am nane ne Zedemde, 82, 3 ; forpam on .VI. daZum crist Zeworhte hiofonas 7 eordan . . ., 68, 9. J. Concessive Clauses. Total. Normal. Transp. Part. Transp. Inverted. Neutral. e.g : 6 4 I I Deah hwa ZebycZZe his dphtor on peowenne, 70, 8 ; 'Seah he scyldiz sie, 112, 25 ; peak hine mon befd ymb niht, 132, 5. Position of the Pronoun-Object in Subordinate Clauses. The pronoun-object occurs with such great frequency in subordinate clauses that it must be taken into special account in the consideration of word-order. In principal clauses the pronoun-object occurs only in 20 instances, and is not of much importance in the consideration of word-order. In subordinate clauses it occurs in 183 instances, and, since it nearly always precedes the verb, accounts in part for the frequency of transposition in subordinate clauses. Perhaps the feeling that the transposed order is the natural one for the subordinate clause is in part due to the frequent occur- rence of the pronoun before the verb. In the following statistics, the 91 instances in which the pronoun-object stands 196 McKnight, [Vol. I alone before the verb are to be classed as transposed or partially transposed, and this transposition is due in these instances entirely to the position of the pronoun. Pronoun. Alone before Verb. Before Verb, not Alone. After Verb, 91 88 4 Subordinate Clauses. Summary. Total Normal. Transp. Part. Transp. Inverted. Neutral. 752 179 41S 95 13 52 Participle. The past participle as part of a compound verb occurs 64 times in subordinate clauses. Here, as in principal clauses,, there is manifest a tendency to place the participle at the end of the clause. It stands at the end of the clause 39 times. It must be noted, however, that in 18 of these instances the clause consists only of subject, finite verb, and participle. The tendency to place the participle last is even stronger than that to put the finite verb last, for the order, ■ ^. V. participle, occurs 21 times, as against . . . participle v., 1 5 times. The exact statistics for the position of the participle are as follows : a. ... part. 18 (v. s. part, once) b. ... V. part. 21 (s. v. part. 19 times) c. ... part. V. 15 (s. part. v. 6 times) d. part. ... V. o e. V. part. ... 5 f. part. V. . . . I g. ... part. ... 2 h. ... part. V. . . . I The verb, it will be seen, directly precedes the participle 27 times. The participle directly precedes the verb 16 times. Examples of the different arrangements are : a. 7 he weorde f>mr ofsUgen, 74, 12. b. Gif mid him cwicum sie funden pcet, . . . 74,16. c. 7 hit onbestmled sie. e. Giffyr sie ontended ryt to barnanne, 74, 19. No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 197 /. cBr />am f>e his apostolas tofarene wmron, . . . 78,21. g. &e ware to cewum wife forgifen his feeder, 102, 20. h. se '3e oft betyZen ware 'SiefSe, 120, 12. The present participle with finite verb occurs in subordinate clauses only twice : piBtte naniz ealdormonna ne us underZe'Seodedra after Mm ware awendende Vas ure domas, no, 4 ; l>e . . . Zod self sprecende was to moyse, 78, 14. The past participle, then, seems to have a claim on last place even stronger than that of the finite verb. Infinitive. The infinitive occurs 82 times in subordinate clauses. Its position is : 26 e. V. infin. ... i II f. infin. V. . . . I 39 g- ■ ■ ■ infin. ... 4 It will be seen from the above table that the infinitive usu- ally stands either last, or next to the last, followed by the finite verb. It may also be noted that the finite verb follows the infinitive (40 : 1 1 ) more often than the past participle does (16 : 27). The infinitive is evidently more dependent on the finite verb than the participle is. Examples of the different arrangements are : a. Gif he 'donne alefe his suna mid to hamanne, 70, 13. b. 7 him bebead to healdanne, 78, 15. c. l>at he hine bereccean ne maZe, 70, 26. e. Da famnan f>e ZewutiidS onfon Zealdor craftiZan 7 . . . 76, 5. /. 7 he f>eah utZonZan maZe bi stafe, 72, i. g. 1 ponne him 'dearf sie ma manna up mid him habanne on Mora fore, 96, 16. Similar to the tendency to place the participle and infinitive at the end of the clause is the tendency to place the predicate adjective after its dependencies, last in the clause. As in the a. . . . infin. b. ... V. infin. c. . . . infin. V. d. infin. . . . V. 198 McKnight, [Vol. I case of the infinitive and participle, this is only a tendency, by no means an invariable rule. Examples are : Ne sie he na mansleZes scyldiz, 74, 12 ; oxan eaZe bi'8 .V. pceninZa weord, 128, 10. The favorite position above referred to, of the participle, infinitive, and predicate adjective, may be taken as an illus- tration of a more general tendency, — that to place the gov- erning word after the word governed, or otherwise expressed, to place the most important word last, thus producing what has been variously called ' ascending construction ' and ' syn- thetic order.' As further illustration of this general tendency may be cited the following passages : fiat he sie mfre siS^an peow, 70, 8 ; 7 he ne sie idcBZes dead, 72, 4 ; hosbbe hi si'S'San him to wife, 76, 2 ; his 'done nehstan, 70, 28 ; us underZe'Seodedra, no, 3; eac we cweddd />(et mon mote mid his hlaforde feohtan orwiZe, 102, 12; si'S'San hit to 'Sam arise ficet anZylde, 88, 14. As further illustration of this same general tendency may be cited the usual position of the dependent genitive before its governing word. This position, though by no means the invariable one, occurs in a great majority of instances, e.g. : eZipta londe, 68, 3 ; Mora 'Seowdome, 68, 3 ; pines nehstan ierfes, 68, 16 ; btitan 'Sees muneces hlafordes lefnesse, 92, 14 ; Scbs Zewin- tredan monnes bot, 94, 20 ; Sas ure domas, 1 10, 4 ; Sees deadan mmZas, 120, 2. A remarkable illustration of the freedom in the arrange- ment and of the peculiar value of the first and last places for emphasis is seen in the following passage : Seofas we hataS oS .VII. men, from .VII. hloS to .XXXV. siSSan biS here, 1 14, 2, 3. It is to be noted that there are no long transpositions, clause within clause, like those in modern German. The only instances of clause included within clause are subject clauses like the following : Zielde se Sees wcepnes onlah pees meres Sriddan dcel, 92, 5 ; ponne sceal se Se hine ah weorpan hine to honda hlaforde, 132, 11, etc. No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 199 The object clause follows the verb upon which it depends, without exception, whether the governing clause be inde- pendent or subordinate. In the later manuscripts of Alfred's laws are to be found many variations in order from that in the oldest manuscript, E, which we have followed. But the variations are so hetero- geneous that it is difficult to make any generalization con- cerning them. If in the later manuscripts there seems to be no greater fondness for the synthetic order, on the other hand, it may be said with certainty that writers of later manuscripts show no greater fondness for the analytic order. There occur variations in both directions. The tendency, if any, seems to be toward greater regularity. In principal clauses of the later manuscripts the order is 'nor- mal ' more often than in Ms. E. On the other hand, in subordinate clauses the transposed order occurs in later manuscripts where Ms. E has the normal order. In com- mands, likewise, the changes in the later manuscripts are usually in the direction of greater regularity, e.g. : f monega hceSena 'Seoda hie to Zode Zecerdon. E. ' ' ^ I. mone'^a hadena Zeoda hie lecerdon to gode. H. I Gif man wille of bold Zetal. E., B. ' I. Gif man of bold Zetcek wille. H. f hit sie tivybote. E. ' i si hit twybote. From margin of B. ( Gif monnes ceacan mon forsUKd . E. i Gif man monnes ceacan forslea. B. ( Gif hwa on ealdormonnes huse Zefeohto od'de on o'Sres 112, I •( ZetfunZenes witan. E., B. I Gif hwa on . . . huse o'd'Se on . . . Ze/>unZenan Zefeohte. H. r Gif Z^si'dcund mon landaZende forsitte fierd. E. ^^4. 27 ,^ Qj^j: gg sidcunde man landaZende fyrde forsitte. B. In the laws of Alfred, then, the rule seems to be that the verb stands first in imperative clauses, second in principal- affirmative clauses, and last in subordinate clauses. Further- more, there is manifest a tendency toward the synthetic order; that is, for governing word, whether finite verb, participle, infinitive, noun, or adjective, to follow the gover- 200 McKnight, [Vol. I ing word. This tendency is not manifest in every instance because of the operation of counter tendencies. In principal- affirmative clauses, for example, the favorite position of the verb is second. But even in such clauses, traces of the more general tendency are manifest in some instances ; and we must assume that its operation originally was more general, and that in course of time, in special instances, for example in affirmative clauses, imperative clauses, etc., its influence was overcome by stronger special tendencies. viir. WORD-ORDER IN THE LAWS OF CNUT. A. Principal Clauses. I. Affirmative Clauses. I. Relative Position of Subject and Finite Verb. In Cnut's code there occur 115 principal clauses. Total. Direct. Neutral. 115 88 27 » Note. — In two clauses included under ' direct,' the subject is unex- pressed. It will be seen from the above statistics that the direct order predominates. If one studies the instances further, he will find that, as in Alfred's code, inversion follows no invari- able rules. The tendencies seem to be the same in the two codes. Inversion occurs after an introductory word or phrase, 20 times, in clauses without such introduction, 7 times, so that evidently an introductory word or phrase is not a neces- sary condition for inversion. But that such an introduction favors inversion is shown by the greater relative frequency of inversion in clauses thus introduced. In the clauses with direct order the subject is preceded by words other than a conjunction only 18 times, about 20% of all instances. The inverted clauses have such introduction in 20 instances out of 27, more than 80% of all instances. No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 201 But, as in Alfred's code, it is to be noted that the intro- ductory words are of different nature in the two kinds of clauses. In the inverted clauses the introductory words are as follows: ponne (i), predicate adjective and adverb (4), prepositional phrase (2), eac (i), swa (i), nu (i), e.g.: Donne is swide rihtlic /> . . ., 2, 7 ;* Micel is 7 mcere /> sacerd ah to donne, 4, 4 ; To ciric-bote sceal call folc fylstan mid ryhte, LXVI., 5 ; 7 eac ah hlaforda Z^hwylc, 20, 6 ; swa sceal he . . ., XXXVIII. , 4 ; Nu bidde ic Z^orne . . ., LXXXV., i. In the clauses with ' irregular-direct ' order the introductory words are : object direct or indirect (including dative of in- terest), 9; pred. noun or adject., 4; adverb, S ; prep, phrases, 2; e.g.: Eallum Cristenum mannum Z^byrad swi'Se rihte, 4, 1 ; ^ syndan bisceopas 7 masse-preostas, 26, 9; 7 siva hi doS symle, 4, 11; And on Myrcean he ah . . ., XIV., i. It will be seen from the above that the introductory words in inverted clauses are in a majority of instances words serv- ing merely a formal purpose, Ponne, swa, etc., pred. words and prep, phrases occurring only 6 times. Quite the reverse is true of clauses with ' irregular-direct ' order in which, in 9 instances, the object stands first. As in Alfred's code it is to be noted that, without excep- tion, the inverted clauses without introductory words are negative. It is further to be noted that in Cnut's code there . is but one instance of a negative clause with direct order. It cannot with certainty be asserted that in the apodosis inversion is the rule. There are only 8 instances of inver- sion in the apodosis as against 19 instances in independent clauses. On the other hand, it is to be noted that in Cnut's code there is but one instance of direct order in the apodosis, and that in a relative apodosis. * The references are to Cnut's Laws in Thorpe's Ancient Laws of England, Vol. I, Arabic numerals refer to the ecclesiastical division, Roman to secular division. 202 McK flight, [Vol. I The general statistics, then, for inversion are : ApoDOSls. Independent Clause. Introd. Not Introd. Introd. Not introd. 7 ■ I (neg.) 13 6 (neg.) 2. Position of the Verb with the Relation to its Dependencies. Here again the order of words in Cnut's code agrees in the main with that in Alfred's. Leaving out of considera- tion the inverted clauses, the statistics are as follows : Noun. Transp. Part. Transp. Neutral. 50 II 12 15 Instances of ' irregular-direct ' order are classed as trans- posed or partially transposed, according as the verb stands at the end or not. But particles like, fieah, fii, etc., are not counted as producing this transposition. Seven doubtful instances of /xet is . . ., are classed as normal. Examples are : £>ts is sea l^mdnys Pe Cnut . . . Introd. 1. i (Normal) ; 7 Aa/i'e enZtas f>arabutan hweatfidS 7 f>a dteda bewedrdiad 7 Jmrh Godes mihta pam sacerdan fylstdd, 4, 9, 10 (Transposed) ; Eallum Cristenum mannum ZebyrdS swide rihte . . ., 4, i (Part, transp.) ; And we IcBrdd 7 bidddS />..., 1, \ (Neutral) . An examination of the passages cited above will show that with but few exceptions (8), in the clauses classed as transposed or part, transp., the order is the ' irregular-direct,' in which the subject immediately precedes the verb, but is itself preceded by some later member of the clause. The jther instances are either crystallized phrases, e.g.: And us ne fiinctf, XXIV., 10; or are instances such as mi^ht occur in modern English, e.g. : Husbryce 7 bcemet 7 . . cefter woruld- laZe is botleas, LXV., 2. That is to say, the normal order in principal clauses has become nearly as rigidly fixed as in modern English, or in any of the modern analytic lan- guages. No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 203 The pronoun-object does not occur in principal clauses fre- quently enough to appreciably affect the above result. It may be noted, however, that the object pronoun precedes the verb relatively more frequently than the other dependencies do. Before Verb, Alone. Befo"e Verb, Not Alone. After Verb. 303 ponne wurSe us eallum Godes miltse pe Ifaruwre, 19, 8; Ac ic hit forbeode heonon-ford , LXXVII., 11 ; And us ne pine's nan ryht P . . ., XXIV., 10 ; /le dereS him sylfum . . ., XXXV., 6 ; ponne seeal him cyninZc beon, XL., 2. It is to be noted that the simple prpnoun stands as near the beginning as it can without interfering with the general rules of order; also that the more natural position for it seems to be that ,after the verb. Participles and Infinitives. The favorite position of the past participle in all principal :lauses, including clauses of command, is at the end. In 10 out of 1 1 instances, the total number occurring, the participle occupies this position, e.g.: A si Godes nama ecelice Ifibletsod, 26, 14. The only instance of other order is, ponne sy he aworpen of Zehadodra Zenianan, 5, 25. The present participle occurs only once ; in that instance it has the position at the end. Donne moton pa hyrdas beon swiSe wacore 7 Z^ornlice clypiZende, 26, 8. The favorite position of the infinitive also is at the end. It stands at the end in 2 1 out of 36 instances, e.g. : 7 nepeat/^niZ mynster-munuc ahivcer mid rihte fcehS-bote biddan, 5,21; 1 pi man scealfor Godes eZe mcede on hade Zecndwan mid Zesceade, 4, 14. 204 Mc Knight, [Vol. I Total. 12 Total. 36 Participles. Last. Not Last. II I Infinitives. Last. Not Last. 2{ 15 II. Clauses of CommaDd. I . Relative Position of Subject and Finite Verb. As in Alfred's code, if we leave adverbs and particles out of consideration, the regular position of the verb is first in the clause; when the subject is expressed, the order is inverted. Subject Expressed. Subject not Expressed. Inverted. Not Inverted. First. Not First. Neutral. 133 40 no 13 4 ^'S' ■ f>onne siZ A botleds, 2,12; habbe he Godes miltse, 6, 11 . Of the 133 instances of inversion it is to be noted that a relatively greater number is without introductory word, and a relatively smaller number is in the apodosis, than in principal affirmative clauses. In Apodosis. Not in Apodosis. Total. With Introd. Without Introd. With Introd Without Introd. 134 20 60 (7 neg.) 15 39 (s neg.) e.g.. And Zif ^fre aniz mann heonon-forS Godes ciric-Znd swa abrecef> . . ., />onne «^ f>cet botleds, 2, 12 ; 7 ehte his celc para pe Godes freond siZ, 2,12; And Zd ^^Ic cyric-sceat into pam ealdan mynstre, II, 5 ; And ealle Godes Zerihta fyrdriZe man Zeome, 14, i. Instances in which the order is other than ' First ' (verb first, subj. unexpr.) or inverted may usually be explained on some special ground. The most frequent causes of order other than the regular are : i) Chiasmus. The second, third, etc., clauses in a series frequently reverse the order of the first clause, apparently for euphony or for some other rhetorical effect, e.g. : panne bete man p ciric-Zri'S into pare cirican be cynincZes fuUan nund- bryce 7 pa mynster-clmnsunZe beZite swa pcerto ZebyriZe, 2, 18. No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 205 2) Special transposed clauses introduced by Pczt, e.g. : And P man mlc beboden fasten healde, 16, i. 3) Special emphasis to be thrown on the subject, which is accordingly placed first, or on the verb, which is accordingly put last, e.g. : Ac aZhwilc cristen man do swa him pearfis, 19, i ; And CR^hwylc cristen tnann eac for his Drihtnes eZe unriht hamed Zeorne forbuZe 6, 14. 4) The object or an adverbial phrase is thrown first for em- phasis or for connection, and the subject is not expressed, where, if it were expressed, we should expect inversion, e.g. : 7 hednan-ford Icete manna Zehwylcne . . . folc-sihtes wyrSe, I., 5. 5) Influence of preceding clauses, e.g. : Ac uton swi'de Zeorne fram synnum Zecyrran . . ., 7 cefre Zeswican 7 Zeornlice betan 7 lire celc dSrum beode f> . . ., 18, 10. 6) A relative clause serves as subject, and the order is equivalent to ' First,' e.g. : 7 sepe ofer pcBre daZ hit healde, aZife />am bisceope /^cere peniz, 9, 2. 2. Position of the Verb with Relation to its Dependencies. ' From the statistics given above, it is evident that the clauses having order other than ' First ' or inverted, are the exceptions. Some of the causes of these exceptions have been enumerated above. It remains only to give the statis- tics for transposition, partial transposition, and normal order. Clauses, not ' First,' not Inverted. Subject Expressed. Subject not Expressed. Total. Normal. Part. Transp, Transp. Not * First * Neutral. ^67 17 8 25 13 4 Ac aZhwilc cristen man do swa him />eatf is, 19, i ; 7 weorc freonda Zehwylc fadiZe mid rihte, 19, 5 ; 7 ceZ'Ser 3^ maZ-bote Ze maZ-bote fullice Zebete, 2, 20; i />(Br ponne cet Zefdrepfi Gode wylle, 5, 14. 2o6 McKnight, [Vol. I It must be noted that, with one or two exceptions, all the commands are in the third person. In consequence the verb is nearly always subjunctive. III. Interrogative Clauses. There is but one instance of direct question in Cnut's code ; in that one, as is to be expected, the order is inverted. Ac hu mcB'l, Ponne afre leniz mann hine inweardlice to Gode "^ebiddan, 2 2, lO. B. Subordinate Clauses. I. Relative Position of Subject and Finite Verb. Inversion in subordinate clauses is rare. There are eigh- teen instances occurring in conditional clauses, but these con- sist of the repetition of one fixed formula, sy hit, or sy he, e.g. : sy hit />urh reafldc, sy hit f>urh feohtldc . . ., 3, 3, 4. There is one instance in a substantive clause, ponne Z'fadiZe man f>a sieore . . ., II., 2. four in causal clauses, e.g. : for/>am />am by'S witodlice God hoM, 20, 5. and one in a relative clause, swa is deofol sylf, 26, 6. With the exception of the instances mentioned, all of which, it will be noted, occur either in conditional, in substantive, in relative, or in causal clauses, which partake largely of the nature of principal clauses, the order in subordinate clauses- is invariably direct. 2. Position of the Finite Verb with Relation to its Depend encies. a. Relative Clauses. Total. Normal. Tbansp. Part. Transp. Inverted. Neutral. 219 20 129 23 I 46 No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 207 With relative clauses are included swa clauses of manner and of comparison, also f>cBr clauses of place, e.g. : 7 wiff />one weallendan br'yne pe weallaS on helle, 6, ^ ; 1 se fie pees Zeswican wide, 6, 11; swa oft swa hiZ Z^ornlice- inweardre heortan dypidd to criste, 4,11. b. Substantive Clauses. Total. Normal. Transp. Part. Transp. Inverted. Neutral. 116 24 66 2-} 12 e.g. : 7 secz,e P he ware d&d-bana oppe rad-bana, 5, 16 ; And p is panne cerest, P he his a^enne wer Criste 7 pam cyninZce Z^sylle 1 mid pam hine sylfne inlaZie to bote, 2, 15, 16. c. Conditional Clauses. Total. Normal. Transp. Part. Transp. Inverted. Neutral. 21^ 10 n,c, 22 18 28 eg : buton he ne mote beon nanes 7-ihtes wyrSe innan his hundrede, XVII., 2 ; Zyf hine hwa afylle ofer .XII. wintre, XX., 3 ; Gif he at pam priddan cyrre nan ryhtnizbbe, XIX., 4 ; yf hit swa ZeweortSe'S on EnZlalaZe, XV., 15. d. Concessive Clauses. Total. Normal. Transp. Part. Transp. Inverted. Neutral. 704 2 01 e.g : peah hit nafre metes ne abite, LXXVIL, 10 ; Peah hwa his aZen spere sette to otfres monnes huses dura 7 he pi'der-inn arende hcebbe, LXXVL, I, 2. e. Result Clauses. Total. Normal. Transp. Part. Transp. Inverted. Neutral. % T, X 2 00 e.g.: P he huru cunne rihtne Z^i^dfan ariht understandan, 22, 2 ; p he binnon ciric-waZttne mann-slaZa weortfe, 2, m ; P se cyninZc him purh P feores Z^unne witf fulne bote, 2, 14. /. Indirect Questions. Total. Normal. Transp. Part. Transp. Inverted. Neutral. e.g.- 7 ■(?) 13 02 swa hwceder swa man mceZe swa cucne swa deadne, XXV., 5 ; hu he on manna sdulum m&st Zesceddian mcsZe, 26, 7 ; hu man fyrmest mcbZe reed aredian peode to pearfe, XI., 2. 2o8 McKnight, [Vol. I g. Temporal Clauses. ToTAU Normal. Teansp. Paht. Transp. Inverted. Neutral. i6 6 6 3 o 1 Under the head of temporal clauses are included several quite different kinds of clause, introduced respectively by the conjunctions; Ponne, syPPan, cefter, cer, and dS. In all these clauses the tendency is toward transposition, but in no instance does more than a single one of the adverbial dependencies (usually a pronoun or an adverb) precede the verb, e.g. : ponne God demeS manna Zehwilcum be cerran 1,ewyrhtan, LXXXV., 7 ; ponne he pus cwede, II., 5 ; ponne us ware leofre, 18, 3. h. Causal Clauses. Total. Normal. Transp. Part. Transp. Inverted. Neutral. IS 5 3 3 4 e.g. forpam hi sceolan us ladan forS cet pam dome, LXXXV., 6 ; pe he for neode dyde P p he dyde, LXIX., 13 ; forpam eall P we mfre for riht hlaford-helde doS, eall we hit dod us sylfum to micelre pearfe, 20,4. i. Purpose Clauses. Total. Normal. Transp. Part. Transp. Inverted. Neltral. 621 4 00 e.g. : P he mote hentan after his aZenan, XIX., i ; p se wod-freca were- ' wulf to swyde ne slite, 26, 12 ; ne to fela ne abite of Zodctindre heorde, 26, 12. Position of Pronominal Objects. The pronominal object occurs in subordinate clauses much more frequently than in principal clauses. Consequently the pronoun-object becomes an important object of consideration in subordinate clauses. It occurs as follows : Total. Alone before Verb. Before Verb, not Alone. After Verb. "S 54 S2 9 It will be noted, then, that 54 of the instances of transpo- sition and partial transposition in subordinate clauses are due entirely to the position of the pronoun, which, because it No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 209 refers back to the preceding sentence, always prefers a position at the beginning of the clause. Since the pronoun occurs with greater frequency in subordinate clauses, the greater frequency of transposition in subordinate clauses is in part to be attributed to the pronouns. The position of the pronoun-oTDJect in the various kinds of clause is shown in the following tables. Conditional. a. 16 b. 18 t. 2 Causal. a. 2 b. I c. 2 Relative. a. 15 b. 20 c. I Substantive. a. 6 b. II c. s Concessive. a. o b. I CO Temporal. a. 2 b. o CO Result. a. o b. I c. I Purpose. a. o b. I <;• o a. 3 Indirect Question. b. o c. o Note. — a. = alone before verb ; b. = before verb, not alone ; c = after verb. Subordinate Clauses. Total. Normal. Tkansp. Paet. Traksp. Inverted. Neutral. 607 71 347 85 24 J80 ;iO McKnight, [Vol.1 Participle. The statistics for the position of the past participle in subordinate clauses are as follows : a. . . . part. 3 b. ... V. part. I c. . . part. V. 19 d. part. ... V. o e. V. part. ... i f. part. V. . . . o g. ... part. ... o h. ... V. part. ... _2 Total 26 A Study of these figures reveals some interesting facts. In the first place, as in Alfred's code, there is a tendency to put the participle at the end of the clause. It stands either last or next to the last, followed only by the finite verb, in 23 instances out of a total of 26. This tendency to place the participle last is counteracted by the tendency to throw the verb last in subordinate clauses. As a consequence, in 18 instances the participle precedes the finite verb (order c), whereas the finite verb precedes the final participle in only 4 instances, directly precedes (order b) only once. In principal clauses, where this tendency to transpose does not exist, the participle follows the finite verb in every instance. Further, comparison with the corresponding figures for Alfred's code shows that the differentiation between principal and subordinate clauses has increased markedly in the period between Alfred and Cnut. In Alfred's code there is the same tendency to throw the participle to the end. In prin- cipal clauses the participle follows the finite verb in 18 instances out of 19. In subordinate clauses even the tendency to transpose is not strong enough to effectually oppose the tendency to put the participle at the end, so that in only 17 instances does the verb follow the participle as against the 48 instances in which the participle follows the verb. This shows that the claim of the finite verb on last place in sub- No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 2 1 1 ordinate clauses was not nearly so strong in Alfred's code as in Cnut's. Examples of past participle in Cnut's code are : a. p alcfreoman beo on hundrede ion teo'SunZe Zebroht, XX., 2 ; /'. yf wiccan of>l>e . . . ahwar on lande wurdan agyiene, IV.. 4 ; c. And y.f elles be civicum mannum ciricZrid abrocen sy, 3, i ; e. for/>am wac bid se byr'Se funden to beorde, 26, 3. Infinitive. The infinitive occurs 83 times in subordinate clauses. a. . . . infin. 24 b. . . V. infin. lo c. ... infin. V. 31 d. infin. ... v. o e. V. infin. ... 3 f. infin. V. . . . 2 g. . . . infin. ... 13 It will be noted that the tendency is to place the infinitive at the end of the clause. In subordinate clauses there exists also a counter-tendency to place the finite verb last. Owing to this latter tendency the infinitive is obliged in many in- stances to stand next to the last (order c, 41 times). In this feature Cnut's code agrees almost exactly with that of Alfred. But the infinitive is not displaced by the finite verb nearly so uniformly as the past participle was. We must infer from this that the claim of the infinitive on the final position was much stronger than that of the past participle, e.g. : a. Ac hu mceZ f>onne afre aniZ niann hine inweardlice to Gode Zebiddan, 22, 11. b. tenne God cefre woldan lufian 7 wurdian, i, 2. c. buton he on husle Zeladian wylle, 5,15. e. ac f>onne we sceolan habban anweald lean . . ., 18,5. /. / man freolsian sceal ofer eall EnZlalond on .XV. kl. April., 17, 6. g. 7 Cnut cinZc liifian mid rihtan Z^trywdan, i, 3. III. General Features. This tendency to put the participle and infinitive at the end of the clause seems to be but one phase of a more general 212 McKnight, [Vol.1 tendency to put the governing word after the word governed. Further illustration of this synthetic order is supplied by predicate words, which, like the participle and the infinitive, both in subordinate and in principal clauses, seem to have a claim on last place in the clause, e.g. : Ne sind ealle cyricean na Z^licre mcede 7veoruldlice wurSscipes wyrde, 3, 6 ; beo se wiS Pone cyninZc hundtwelfti'S scyldiZ, XV., 6 ; And ne beo ceniz man anises teames wyrde, XXIII., i ; u/on beon a urum hlaforde holde 7 Zelriewe, 20, 2. Still further illustration of the synthetic order is supplied by the relative position of noun and dependent genitive. With but few exceptions the governing noun follows the governed genitive. A striking instance is the phrase, o'dres mannes krises dura, LXXV., 2. Further instances of synthetic order are phrases like the following : sawlum to h&le 7 us sylfum to pearfe, 2,2; Gode to lofe 1 him syl/um to cynescipe, Introd. 3, 4 ; />am cyninZe to handa, LXXVIII., 6. Further note the position of the governing preposition. ke leZer-stop on siz, 11, 3 ; />e he p fals mid worhte, VIII., 6 ; nime him fif Zestryne men to, XXX., 31 ; 7 tdcan him to Pam niZodan dale, 8, 9. Interesting, because indicating the original order of words, are stereotyped forms of expression like /«?;« fdndS. It will be noted that in the two centuries between Alfred and Cnut there has been no breaking down of the old rules of word-order. On the contrary, the differentiation between principal and subordinate clauses is more marked in Cnut's code than in Alfred's. The tendency also to put the past participle at the end is more marked in Cnut's code. It will be noted further that the sentence structure has become more complex. The relative clause frequently serves as subject of another clause, especially of clauses of com- mand, e.g.: And sef>e on Zemote mid wid er-tihtlan hine sylfne of>pe his man ■weriZe, habbe p eall forwrecen, XXVII., 2. No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 213 Such constructions occur, though rarely, in Alfred's code. Further, there are numerous instances in which a whole clause is introduced parenthetically within another clause, e.g. : And Z^laste ale wuduwe pa hereZeata binnan twelf-motiSum buton hire mr to onhaZiZ^, witeleas, LXXIV., 12. Frequently a clause is interposed after the finite verb and before the dependent past participle, e.g.: f>e nek pa heorde pe he healdan sceal mid hredme bewerian, 26, 4. In one instance a subordinate clause is interposed within a subordinate clause between the finite verb and the past participle. And Zif ^e bonda cer he dead wmre beclypod ware, LXXIIL, 3. In conclusion we must remark that the results of the investigation both in Cnut's code and in Alfred's, are in a measure vitiated by the frequent recurrence of stereotyped phrases which must be counted, but which, as indicative of the speech feeling, cannot compare in value with independent forms of expression. IX. CONCLUSION. From what has been said in the preceding pages, it may be seen that at the time of the earliest written monuments of the Teutonic group of languages, the dialectal differences were already well established. Each dialect differed from the others, not only in phonology and inflections, but also in word-order. In early Old English, in Beowulf, the differ- entiation between principal and subordinate clauses was not strongly marked, and in the later (prose) works is barely holding its own. In Old High German, on the other hand, even in the Hildebrandslied, principal clauses are distinguished from subordinate. In Old Norse a peculiar tendency to invert is discernible even in the primitive inscriptions of the eighth century, and is firmly established by the time of the Icelandic prose works of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. 214 McKnight, [Vol.1 A. Relative Position of Subject and Finite Verb. The original order of words in affirmative clauses of primitive Teutonic seems to have been the direct as distin- guished from the inverted. That the indirect (inverted) order was not the original, seems probable from the follow- ing considerations: i) Questions and commands employ in- direct order, while affirmative clauses employ most frequently the direct, and employ the indirect order only for the sake of the peculiar emphasis to be obtained by a departure from the rule. The difference in the nature of the clauses seems to have demanded a difference in the order of words. 2) With the possible exception of Celtic, all IE. languages in their oldest known form, employ the direct order in affirmative clauses. The phenomenon of inversion is difficult of explanation. The explanation is complicated in the first place by the cir- cumstance that the accent of the first place in the clause varies with the context, so that it cannot be said with cer- tainty that the first place in the clause is the position of emphasis. Again, clauses differ in nature. What is true of an affirmative clause does not hold true of an interrogative or an imperative clause. Again, the verb varies in im- portance. At one time it expresses the principal thought- element ; at another time it accomplishes a purely formal function as auxiliary or as copula. Consequently, since the verb is at one time an important element, at another, unim- portant, and since the initial place is at one time emphatic, at another time, unemphatic, obviously it is impossible to lay down any definite rule determining when inversion shall occur. All that we can assert about inversion is that it is an order of words occurring side by side with the direct order in all the early Teutonic dialects. Except under certain circumstances, however, in affirmative clauses inversion is the exception rather than the rule. We must conclude that in all these early dialects, especially in the poetic monuments, the order is less rigidly fixed than in the corresponding modem Ian- No. 2] Primitive Tc:iioii'.c Order of Words 215 guages. The old laws are breaking down, and new speech- feeling is developing. In many instances probably the word-order is determined by the nature of the clause, or by considerations of emphasis or of connection entirely independent of the restraints of a fixed arrangement of the syntactical elements. When, after a later member of the clause in the initial position, the verb precedes the subject, the inversion is due to the principle of connection. The verb is closely con- nected in thought with the initial word or phrase, and is accordingl^placed next to it. That such connection is the determining principle is proved by the statistics which Ries has gathered, showing that inversion is relatively more fre- quent after an initial predicate word than after an object. This is true because the verb is more closely connected in thought with the predicate word than with the object, and consequently is attracted to the former more frequently. The consideration of emphasis causes the inversion in clauses of command. Such clauses are usually isolated, and consequently the first place is the position of emphasis. In commands the verbal element is the most important one. Hence the verb stands at the beginning. In questions answered by yes or no, the verb is usually not the principal element, but occupies the first place, which — owing to the ascending accentuation peculiar to the question — is not the position of emphasis. In the same way are to be explained clauses of wishing. In the enclitic expressions, such as 'said he,' 'quad er,' which in all the old Teutonic dialects are inverted, the verbal element is the least important one, and therefore stands first, i.e. in the least emphatic position, next after the word bearing the principal stress. In like manner is to be explained the greater frequency of inversion in the case of negative verbs and of auxiliaries, and the less fre- quent occurrence in clauses with pronoun-object. The origin of the use of inversion in the apodosis is the subject of dispute. Ries, supported by Ohly, believes that the inversion is explained by the nature of the clause, — that inversion is used to indicate hypotaxis. Starker, on the 2(6 McKnight, [Vol.1 other hand, asserts that the apodosis was originally para- tactic, and that hypotaxis gradually developed from para- taxis. In apodosis-clauses independent of the Latin, the proportion of paratactic clauses to hypotactic was : i ) in the OHG. Matthew translation, 8:0 (7:2!"); 2) in Isidor, 13:4; 3) in Tatian, 26:25. Starker attributes the inver- sion to the anaphoric particle, which was more and more frequently inserted to indicate hypotaxis, and which, when not the subject of the clause, caused inversion on account of its initial position. Unfortunately we have not data enough at hand to decide the question. We have not enough statistics to trace the development of inversion. But we can see that the development was different in the different dialects. In High German the rules for inversion were fixed even in Middle High German, except for apodosis clauses, and in Middle High German inversion has become under certain conditions the regular order. In the AS. laws we may detect a slight decay of the feeling for inversion. In Cnut's code inversion occurs somewhat more frequently than in Alfred's code, but in the apodosis it is less frequent and the total number of instances is smaller. In English, inversion has become almost extinct. In Norse, on the other hand, it has become almost the rule. B. Position of the Verb with Relation to its Dependencies. From the statistics in the preceding chapter it may be seen that in all the Teutonic dialects the verb may be sep- arated from the subject, not only in subordinate but in prin- cipal clauses. Further, in principal clauses we find the verb separated from the subject more frequently the farther back we go in time ; for example, in Beowulf, in the Gothic Skei- reins, and in the primitive Norse inscriptions. Further, in all the dialects there is manifest a fondness for the synthetic order. This is illustrated by the position of the genitive before its substantive and of the infinitive and participle after the words governed. Behaghel infers, from the evi- No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 217 dence of verbs with inseparable prefixes, that in primitive Teutonic the verb was at the end, and the evidence that we have cited above leads us to adopt his conclusion. In this belief we are confirmed by the evidence afforded by the cognate IE. languages, in most of which the primitive position of the verb seems to have been at the end. This evidence of the cognate IE. languages also controverts Tomanetz's theory, that in primitive Teutonic the verb fol- lowed the subject immediately. For it is hardly probable that Teutonic had an order of words peculiar to itself. Wackernagel's hypothesis, that the differentiation in word- order between principal and subordinate clauses was original, is controverted by the same evidence. Further reason for disbelieving Wackernagel's hypothesis is the extreme proba- bility (established by Hermann) that in primitive IE. there was no subordinate clause. It seems probable that hypotaxis is a development from parataxis. It remains to establish motives which might have caused the gradual adoption of the analytic order. This is not a difficult matter. The gradual developrnent of any language from its primitive form is attended by the tendency to crowd more and more into a single sentence, more and more to qualify the main assertion by the mention of accompanying details. The sentence, beginning as a very simple element in language, grows to a great complexity. With this increase in complexity, in many instances it becomes impossible for the primitive man, unskilled in handling complex sentences, to grasp at one time all the details. Accordingly, to the apparently finished sentence are added a number of explana- tory details, afterthoughts ; or some element, by reason of close connection with the following clause, may be put after the verb. To motives like these the analytic order probably owes its origin. Moreover, the verb, which in primitive lan- guage usually contained the new idea to be affirmed, and which, therefore, belonged at the end of the clause, in the course of development, lost more and more of its original fulness of meaning. Verbal nouns and adjectives became the bearers of the principal thought, and the verb became 2i8 Mc Knight, [Vol.1 more and more colorless, in many instances becoming a mere formal auxiliary or copula. For example, note the evolution of the verb have in all languages, and especially in French. With this loss of fulness of meaning, the verb also lost its natural claim to its position of emphasis at the end of the clause. The sentence gradually took the form of a judgment, and the verb came to be regarded as a merely formal syn- tactical element used to connect the terms of this judgment. This theory may be substantiated by facts cited by Ries from Beowulf zx^di the He Hand. In Beowulf, in clauses with ■ regular-direct ' order, 63 to 64 % of the verbs do not imme- diately follow the subject, as against 23 to 24% in the Heli- and. In ' irregular-direct ' order the proportion is about the same ; the instances in which the verb does not immediately follow the subject are about 4I times as frequent in Beowulf. The transposed order occurs in Beowulf in 50% of all sub- ordinate clauses ; 45 to 46 % in the Heliand. In the case of the clauses not completely transposed, partial transposition occurs ; in Beowulf, 67 % ; in the Heliand, S3 to 54 %. That is to say, the movement of the verb from the end of the clause is farther advanced in the Heliand than in Beowulf. But this progress is less in the case of subordinate clauses. Hence we infer that the differentiation between the two kinds of clause, which is little felt in Beowulf, is already established in the Heliand. There are many exceptions, but nevertheless a feeling that the difference in the nature of the clauses should be indicated by a difference in the structure. Further, the use of the transposed order in subordinate clauses was favored by the enclitic pronominal objects, which preceded the verb by preference, and which occurred more frequently in subordinate clauses. The year 800, according to Ries, marks approximately the time at which the differentiation was established. From the beginning of the ninth century the development of subordinate clauses is in the opposite direc- tion toward transposition. In Anglo-Saxon, Smith's statistics go to show that in the period between Alfred and .^Ifric there had been some levelling of the difference between principal and subordi- No. 2] Primitive Teutonic Order of Words 2\<^ nate clauses, the order in both instances approaching toward the normal. A comparative study of the laws of Alfred and the laws of Cnut shows that in Cnut's code the difference was even more marked than in Alfred's. The cause of the development of the analytical order in subordinate clauses of modern English can be finally determined only by a study of Middle English prose with regard to French influence. My general conclusions are as follows : In none of the existing early Teutonic languages does the order of words represent that of the primitive Teutonic. They have differ- entiated from the parent speech as much in word-order as in phonology. But from the evidence of the cognate IE. lan- guages, from the general direction of the development within Teutonic, and from the tendencies common to all the early Teutonic languages ; i ) the position of elements in com- pounds, especially the position of the inseparable prefix, 2) the frequent end-position of the verb even in principal clauses, more frequent the farther back we go, and 3) the fondness for synthetic order ; — from all this evidence I con- clude that in primitive Teutonic, in affirmative clauses, which were probably of the very simplest nature, the normal posi- tion of the verb was after its dependencies. George H. McKnight. Cornell UnlversHy Library olin,anx 3 1924 031 428 786