523ڡˤˡī㡼ɶˤƺǯ٤2Ȥʤ륪饤ֺ¤ޤմΤΥȥϡ˾äȤԻĤʱñ졡츻õäƸűѸ졦Ѹ츶ʸءפǤϡagain õäѸ츶ʸءפꤷơʿޤʤ˭ˤȴߤñ again ޤŪѸ츶ʸȴФʸ̮ʤɤ߲Ȥǡδܸ褦ȤݤǤͤȤƥȤ³ԲϻϲͭˡظűѸ졦Ѹҿӡ١ʸҡ2026ǯǤ
ιֺ¤ǤޤܤΤϡѸ again ֻ against δطǤƱǤꡤξȤ졦ֻȤѤƤޤѸ°ʸ -es Ϳ졤1300ǯ -t źä뤳Ȥ against ޤ -t źäˤϡǾ -st Ȥbetwixtamongstamidst ʤɡˤʬ⤬ŦƤޤѸȡagain 졤against ֻȤʬ˻äɥޤܤޤ
츻ȤƤϡűѸ ongēan Ƭ on- + -ȝeȝnˤ̤ꡤϡ֤ޤäˡ̤ˡפǤ g ֻȯϸťΥɸαƶͳ褹ΤǡѸǤ onyen Τ褦 y ͥǤĤƤ gainsay ꤹˤʤɤΤ褦ƬȤƤƤޤǤϤ¿षƤޤäƤⶽ̣ȤǤ
ֺ¤νפǤϡѸ1λǤ⤢إԡХǯ嵭 (pchron) 1137ǯεҤꡤɤι䥷θʸ̣ɤޤľʬ "agænes him hēolden" ֲŨФơʾݻפȤɽܤñֻˡƤޤűѸζηϤĤĤαѸʷϵĤȻפޤ
ιֺ¤ϡ627ڡˤˡghost õäƸűѸ츶ʸءפꤷƳޤ³ظűѸ졦Ѹҿӡ٤űѸΥƥȤȤʤ顤̥ŪʸդˤҤȤƤޤؿΤϡīθڡꤪߤ
Բ ϲ ͭظűѸ졦Ѹҿӡ١ҡ2026ǯ
߷ ˧ͺԽ紴ˡرѸ츻ŵٿǡҡ2024ǯ
߷ ͧ ɹ δˡʡ 쵮 ءʹܶϡˡرѸ츻ϥɥ֥å١ҡ2025ǯ
Visser (§2148) ˤȡ'He has been crying' 'He had been crying' ΥפδλʹԷϡѸ Cursor Mundi ˽㤬ǧ롥
13.. Curs, M. 5256 he three dais had fastand bene. | Ibid. 10305, fastand had he lang noght bene. | Ibid. 14240, mari and martha had been wepand þar four dais. | Ibid. 26292, if þi parischen In sin lang has ligand bene. | Ibid. 28176, Oft haue i bene ouer mistrauand. | Ibid. 28941, þin almus agh þou for to bede, And namli til him þat has bene Hauand ..., And falles in-to state o nede plight-less.
θ Chaucer ޤѸΥƥȤ㤬³Ǥᤤ㤬ѸˤĤǧ뤫Ȥäơɬ⸽ѸοdzΩƤ褦1ĤλȤơǤˤѤƤȤȤǤϤʤºݡԤΤʤˤϡγΩ϶ѸʹߤǤ롤ˤäƤϸѸǤȽҤ٤ƤΤ⤢롥Visser ȤϾ嵭ƱˤơΤ褦⤤Ƥ롥
These types, traditionally called the 'perfect progressive' or 'expanded perfect' and the 'pluperfect progressive' or 'expanded pluperfect', are not represented in Old English. They appear for the first time on paper in the 14th century, and it took them about a century to develop into a well-established and not infrequently used idiom. In the subjoined list all the 14th, 15th, 16th and 17the century instances available are mentioned (and it is therefore not a selection like the rest), in order to show the erroneousness of various statements concerning date of earliest appearance and the incidence in earlier English (often called 'rare').. Thus Åkerlund (1911 p. 85) states: "These tenses do not occur in Old English, nor in the earlier part of the subsequent period. Later on, they creep slowly into existence---even as late as Shakespeare there are strikingly scarce; but they are not employed frequently enough." Kisbye (An Historical Outline of Eng. Syntax I 1971 p. 47) observes: "The expanded pluperfect was instance only once [italics added] in Northern ME ...---This compound tense ... being uncommon till the 19th century [italics added]." In Barbara Strang's The History of English (1970 pp. 207--8) it is averred that the periphrastic perfect did not become fully current till the 18th century, and that the periphrastic pluperfect showed its full maturity fro the time of the Restoration. (But see e.g. the quotations from Lord Berners below). As to her statement that a pluperfect progressive arose "a little earlier [than a perfect progressive] in the 14th century", see earliest examples of the perfect progressive is from Chaucer's Canterbury Tales (1386).
Դ֤ˤäªäȤȤϡ٤˺ꡤ¤ͭƤʤäȤȤǡλʹԷνиΤۤߴλʹԷΩäƤȤ¤϶̣
Visser, F. Th. An Historical Syntax of the English Language. 3 vols. Leiden: Brill, 1963--1973.
Ѹˤϡ§Ȥ괧 the դΤʤޤֻ of ޤ̾ۤȤɤʤǡ¾ΤĤΥ衼åѽȤϰۤʤä
ˤ֤ȡѸˤϡ̾ʤɤΰ̾ͳ褹ϰ̾ȤѤƤ괧줬դ⳧̵ǤϤʤäof ʤɤֻդ̾ʤɤ̤ˤäѸϡФХեδѤ˽äȤ⤢ꡤ̤ۤʿƤ櫓ǤʤäΤ
ȤѸפȾˤơϰ躹⤢褦괧ֻ줬ڤȤ褦ˤʤäƤȤFransson (25) ɤǤߤ褦
Surnames of occupation and nicknames are usually preceded by the definite article, le (masc.) or la (fem.); the two forms are regularly kept apart in the earlier rolls, but in the 15th century they are often confused. Those names in this book that are preceded by the have all been taken from rolls translated into English, and the has been inserted by the editor instead of le or la. The case is that the hardly ever occurs in the manuscripts; cf the following instances, which show the custom in reality: Rose the regratere 1377 (Langland: Piers Plowman 226). Lucia ye Aukereswoman 1275 1.RH 413 (L. la Aukereswomman ib. 426).
Sometimes de occurs instead of le; this is due to an error made either by the scribe or the editor. The case is that de has an extensive use in local surnames, e.g. Thom. de Selby. Other prepositions (in, atte, of etc.) are not so common, especially not in early rolls.
The article, however, is often left out; this is rare in the 12th and 13th centuries, but becomes common in the middle of the 14th century. There is an obvious difference between different parts of England: in the South the article precedes the surname almost regularly during the present period, while in the North it is very often omitted. The final disappearance of le takes place in the latter half of the 14th century; in most counties one rarely finds it after c1375, but in some cases, e.g. in Lancashire, le occurs fairly often as late as c1400. De is often retained some 50 years longer than le: in York it disappears in the early 15th century, in Lancashire it sometimes occurs c1450, while in the South it is regularly dropped at the end of the 14th century.
ŪʲǤʤ괧ֻ줬ڤȤ뤳ȤˤʤäΤˤϿƤʤƤ٤Ѥʵ䤬1̾ˤֻˤĤƤϡ#2366. ʤѸ̾νϡ̾פʤΤ ([2015-10-19-1]) Ǿ줿Ȥ롥⻲Ȥ줿
Fransson, G. Middle English Surnames of Occupation 1100--1350, with an Excursus on Toponymical Surnames. Lund Studies in English 3. Lund: Gleerup, 1935.
ε#5473. Ѹˤ뿦Ȥɽ魯 by-name μ갷 (2) --- ƥδġ ([2024-04-21-1]) ³ϱѸ by-name ФեδĤˤĤơFransson (24--25) Ѥ롥
Besides in English, surnames also occur very frequently in French; I have made a calculation and found that one third of the surnames of occupation treated in this book is of French origin. The reason for this is to be found in the predominating position that the French language had during this period. French was spoken by all educated people, and English by the lower classes. Those who spoke French had, of course, surnames in French, and probably also used the French forms of English names when speaking with each other. It is possible, too, that those people who spoke English were influenced by this and used the French forms of their names, which, of course, were finer. During this period a large number of French names came into the language, and a great many of these have survived to the present day, whereas the corresponding substantives have often died out.
There is also another reason, however, for the frequent occurrence of French names; the case is that the scribe often translated English names into French, especially in early rolls. These translations, which are most common in assize rolls, are principally due to the fact that the court proceedings were generally held in French. I have found some instances in which both the English and French forms occur of the same person's surname, e.g.: Humfrey le Syur 1270 Ass 144, H. le Sawyere ib. 139 (So). --- Ric. le Charpentir 1327 SR 211, R. le Wryth 1332 SR 96 (St).
Υɿͤ̾˴ŤΤǤꡤĤ줬ե˸츻ñä硤μ갷ϾʤȤ3ढ롥
(1) ñȤƼƤ餺ΥեñλǤ
(2) ñȤƼƤ뤬ǤϥեñλǤ
(3) ñȤƼƤꡤǤϱñλǤ
(1) ǤȳοäƽҤ٤뤿ˤϡαѸʸΤɤõƤ⡤ñȤƼޤƤפʤȤɬפ롥ĴˤäƱñȤƼޤƤפ1Ǥ⸫ĤСοɤ餰Ȥˤʤ
(2) (3) ΥǤϡñȤƼƤ뤳ȤϳǧǤȤƤ⡤սˤ뤽ñ줬եñȤƻѤƤΤ뤤ϱñȤƻѤƤΤȽ̤ΤȤΤϡθϥեθեͳ褹Ǥꡤˤ褭ƻƤ뤫Ǥ롥
̾˸¤餺ˡΧȽǶ˴ؤŪʸΤʤ˸եñ餷ΤˤĤƤϡˤ꤬뤳ȤդƤܤˤƤñϡեñʤΤ뤤ϥեͳ褹ñʤΤ뤤ϡξǤȤ⤢ΤǺޤǤ롥
Fransson, G. Middle English Surnames of Occupation 1100--1350, with an Excursus on Toponymical Surnames. Lund Studies in English 3. Lund: Gleerup, 1935.
#5470. Ѹˤ뿦Ȥɽ魯 by-name μ갷 ([2024-04-18-1]) ǡѸ by-name μ갷ϡƥե줫δĤˤ뤳ȤҲ𤷤ϥƥȤδؤˤĤơFransson (23--24) Ѥƻ⤷
The medieval rolls were written in Latin, and Christian names and surnames were also, when practicable, often translated into Latin. This was especially the case in the early Middle Ages (12--13th cent.), and surnames in English are therefore rarely met with so early. The surnames that appear in Latin are chiefly those names that are in common use, e.g. Carpentarius, Cissor, Cocus, Faber, Fullo, Marescallus, Medicus, Mercator, Molendinarius, Pelliparius, Pistor, Sutor, Tannator, Textor, Tinetor. The surnames, however, that were rare and difficult to translate, e.g. Wirdragher, Chesewright, Heyberare, Geldehirde, generally occur in English, even in early rolls.
In the 14th century these translations gradually pass out of use, and the native or French form becomes predominant. Thus, for instance, there is a considerable difference between SR [= Lay Subsidy Rolls] 1275 and SR 1327 (Wo); in the former there are a large number of names in Latin, but in the latter there are hardly any translations at all.
There surnames in Latin seem to have had some influence on the later development; the case is that some of them still exist as surnames, e.g. Faber, Pistor, Sutor.
ѸθŪ̾ʤɤϥƥǽ뤳Ȥ¿äˡϱѸθȤƤФХƥ줿ǵܤƤȤʣʻ𤬤롥ѸȤƤΤꤿΤ褦ʸԤˤȤäƤϡʤ虜虜ƥƤƤޤäƤΤȼ¤˻椤ޤƥǤʤȤˤΤߡ褯Ѹ߽̾ФƤɽ̲Ƥ롤ȤʤΤ
줬14ʹߡѸȡƥȤϱƤᡤظ˱ƤαѸ̾夷ƤΤΤ褦ʸԤˤȤäƤϡ˥˥䤻ʤȤʤ롥
¿ΤϤޤᤤƥδĤȤϲ褷ƤΤΡѸˤϤäȤ䤳եδĤȤ̤꤬ΤƬˤˤĤƤεǡ
Fransson, G. Middle English Surnames of Occupation 1100--1350, with an Excursus on Toponymical Surnames. Lund Studies in English 3. Lund: Gleerup, 1935.
ε#5470. Ѹˤ뿦Ȥɽ魯 by-name μ갷 ([2024-04-18-1]) ³ꡥѸο by-name ʬDZƶϤΤñФ Fransson ˤȡƱʬ椹յ¿ˤ錄 (18--19)
The value of an investigation such as the present one is manifold. Besides explaining modern surnames, as has already been mentioned, it gives us many new words not previously found and furthermore early and often numerous instances of other common or rare words. By means of these early examples new light is not seldom thrown on the etymology, and the signification may sometimes be altered. In contradistinction to the literature of this period, the time and the place of the occurrence of each instance of a surname are well fixed, and thus the material gives a contribution to Middle English phonology. This material has hitherto not been used by linguists, but it is of the greatest value for the determination of the extension of the different dialects, as the same word can be followed in the different parts of England; there is hardly any other material that can be compared with that of surnames in this respect. --- The distribution is also shown not only of surnames, but also of the various names that a trade may have; the case is that a trade often had different names in different parts of England. Last, but not least, the civilization of this period is elucidated; we are informed what trades existed, how common they were in relation to each other, in what parts of England they flourished, and how specialized they were.
ޤȤȼ7
by-name
ȯ뤤ϤǤΤƤʸȯ
̤ơ츻ޤ뤳Ȥ
λȾ꤬ʬäƤΤǡѸβ˴Ϳ
Ʊ̾ۤʤ˸ΤǡѸ˻
Ʊο̾ۤʤϰǰۤʤƤФΤǡϤѸ˹
οʸ餫ˤʤ
ƱʬθϡŪʴ˸¤äƤ⡤嵭Τۤ˷̣ܿ¿Ѿʤɤ˿ʸͿƤȴԤ롥
Fransson, G. Middle English Surnames of Occupation 1100--1350, with an Excursus on Toponymical Surnames. Lund Studies in English 3. Lund: Gleerup, 1935.
#5452. Ѹ̾ˤˤ by-name family name ΰ㤤 ([2024-03-31-1]) ʤɤǼ夲ƤѸ̾ by-name ˸ˤĤơѸ by-name դ봷ȯãƤȤŵŪ̾դΥѥ1Ĥ̾ (occupational terms) ѤΤä̤θϡԤƤϤʤΤΡʤθѤ롥Clark (294--95) ϡ٥ˤ by-name ĴʸΤʤǡʸڤ줿 by-name βˤޤĤ˿Ƥ롥ڵΤޤ뤳ȤɬǤʤͳ¿Ȥ
The simplest of these Canterbury surnames offer supplementary records, mainly antedatings, of straightforward occupational terms. Yet all is not wholly straightforward. To begin with, we cannot be sure whether the occupational terms used in administrative documents were in fact all current as surnames, that is, in daily use among neighbours, or whether some were supplied by the scribes as formal specifiers, just as occupations and addresses are in legal documents of the present day. Nor can we be sure in what form neighbours would have used such terms as they did. With those examples that are latinized --- a proportion varying in the present material from three-quarters to nine-tenths --- scribal intervention is patent, although sometimes reconstruction of the vernacular base seems easy (such forms, and other speculative cases, are cited in square brackets). With those given in a French form matters are more complex. On the one hand, scribes had a general bias away from English and towards French, as though the latter were, as has been said, 'a sort of ignoble substitute for Latin'; therefore, use of a French occupational term guarantees neither its currency in the English speech of the time nor, alternatively, any currency of French outside the scriptorium: in so far as such terms appear neither in literary sources nor as modern surnames MED is justified in excluding them. On the other hand, many 'French' terms were adopted into English very early; use of these would by no means imply currency of French as such, either in the community at large or in the scriptorium itself.
ڵǤطʤ¿ͤȤ櫓ƥե줬ؤäƤǤ롥λǶ̾ʤɤ˵Ƥ̾ϥƥ첽ƤΤ¿Ѹ̾Ϥα˱ƤޤäƤ롥ޤեǽƤ뤳Ȥ¿ο̾ΤΤեͳξ硤줬Ǥ˱ѸƱƤñʤΤȤեñΤޤޤʤΤȽǤ
Ȥɽ魯 by-name ϡ⤽ʸŪ˰ˤǺʤΤǤ롥ơϿȤɽ魯 by-name ˸¤餺Ѹθ̤ͭ̾˴ؤʻǤ⤢롥
Clark, Cecily. "Some Early Canterbury Surnames." English Studies 57.4 (1976): 204--309.
ѸΥڥᤰäơ#1238. Υޥ̻οá ([2012-09-16-1]) Ȥ꤬롥Ϥޤ夲ʤʤäʸǸڤ뤳ȤϤ롥ѸΥڥűѸεϤæƤ¤ؤơ̻ϱѸäʤΥޥͤ˰㤤ʤȲ᤹Ǥ롥
ˤ⸽ߤˤ⡤ѸüԤǤäƤѸݤ˥ڥߥȤȤӤνֳ꤬͡פǤȤϡñ˷ŤΤǤϤʤѸ̾ˤĤƤ Clark (548--49) ⡤ȽŸƤ롥
Orthography is, as always in historical linguistics, a basic problem, and one that must be faced not only squarely but in terms of the particular type of document concerned and its likely sociocultural background. Thus, to claim, in the context of fourteenth-century tax-rolls, that 'OE þ, ð are sometimes written t, d owing to the inability of the French scribes to pronounce these sounds' . . . involves at least two unproven assumptions: (a) that throughout the Middle English period scriptoria were staffed chiefly by non-native speakers; and (b) that the substitutions which such non-native speakers were likely to make for awkward English sounds can confidently be reconstructed (present-day substitutes for /θ/ and /ð/, for what they are worth, vary partly according to the speakers' backgrounds, often involving, not /t/ and /d/, but other sorts of spirant, e.g., /s/ and /z/, or /f/ and /v/) Of course, if --- as all the evidence suggests --- (a) can confidently be dismissed, then (b) becomes irrelevant. The orthographical question that nevertheless remains is best approached in documentary terms; and almost all medieval administrative documents, tax-rolls included, were, in intention, Latin documents . . . . A Latin-based orthography did not provide for distinction between /θ/ and /t/ or between /ð/ and /d/, and so spellings of the sorts mentioned may reasonably be taken as being, like the associated use of Latin inflections, matters of graphic decorum rather than in any sense connected with pronunciation.
Clark ΤǤ롥̾Υڥ˴ؤ¤ꡤ⤽ѸǤϤʤƥǡʤ뤤ϺˡȤƥƥˡ֤ΤäΤ顤ѸüԤȥΥޥüԤΤȯΥåפʤɤȤǤޤΤǤ롥
̾ʳΰ̸ΥڥˤĤƤɤΤ褦ʾäΤϡǤϤ롥
Clark, Cecily. "Onomastics." The Cambridge History of the English Language. Vol. 2. Ed. Olga Fischer. Cambridge: CUP, 1992. 542--606.
ѸϿ LAEME Ի Lass and Laing LAEME ȤĹȥϡΤȤѸκɤƳŪȤäƤ褤ɮԤΰ Roger Lass ȤȤΤسνäǤꡤΥȥˤƤ⡤Ͽޤ䥳ѥԻˡۤȸ¤顤ȯθѸϿ LALME γػŪյޤǽIJ̵ԤƤꡤǡΤ롥
"Interpreting Middle English" ꤹ2ǤϡѸֻܺ٤Ƥ롥ξϤϡѸΤߤʤ餺̤˱ѸֻŪȤʤäƤꡤ̤˴ؿΤˤɬɤǤ롥äȤСֻȤϲȤܼṲ̄鰷äƤΤǤ롥Lass and Laing (3--4) 1Ѥ롥
A spelling system is a mapping of some chosen set (or sets) of linguistic units into a set of visual signs.5 The standard inventory of linguistic units is the word, the morphophonemic representation, the syllable6 and the 'phoneme'. In relatively rare cases allophones of certain phonemes may be represented (e.g. the velar nasal in the elder Futhark, Gothic and Greek).
5 Just what kind of units is a complex matter. In the earlier part of this exposition we will be considering phonemes, allophones and other traditional kinds; later on we will adopt a more medieval and less anachronistic perspective. The mapping need not be one-to-one and in no case does it have to involve one level of unit only.
6 We will be concerned here only with segmental styles of representation, as syllabaries are not part of the Germanic tradition. Even the oldest Germanic writing, the runic inscriptions in the Elder Futhark, are in principle alphabetical, if often 'defectively' so.
ֻη ("spelling system") Ȥϲ嵭ʬɤǡͽۤʾʣʪǤ뤳Ȥ٤˸ŪʬϤפ롤1ĤνפΰǤ롥
Lass, Roger and Margaret Laing. "Interpreting Middle English." Chapter 2 of "A Linguistic Atlas of Early Middle English: Introduction." Available online at http://www.lel.ed.ac.uk/ihd/laeme2/laeme_intro_ch2.html .
#4902. eWAVE 3.0 ξҲ --- ѸθŪħǼǡ١ ([2022-09-28-1]) ǡ77ѼαѸ־Ѥǡ١ eWAVE 3.0 (= The Electronic World Atlas of Varieties of English) Ҳ𤷤ܤ˴ؤʬۤϿ˥ץåȤƤͥΤɤ봶Τ褦ʤΤƤ
ƻפäϽѸΥϿ LAEME LALME θѸǤǤϤʤȡդˤСLAEME/LALME eWAVE ѸǤȤߤ뤳ȤǤ롥ΤȤ˵Ťִ֡eWAVE LAEME/LALME αѸ˾ΰ֤ŤȰյǤ
eWAVE LAEME/LALME оݤȤŪʵϤۤʤäƤ뤬ȤƤƤ¿αѸθܤˤĤơϰѼ老Ȥ˥ץեޤȤƤ졤ϿʬۤץåȤƤ롥ơϤ줿̤᤹뤿ˤϹ٤ʱѸءѸˤμɬפǤȤƤ롥ɸѼפγǰԺߡ뤤ϾʤȤռƤʤȤΤⶦ
⤽ϢȤռ줿ץȤǤϤʤ櫓ǡʤۤʤ¿롥
eWAVE ΥåȤϸѸȤХʵϡLAEME/LALME ΥåȤϽѸ쥤ɤȤʵ
eWAVE ΥեޥȤϳѼ̤ȡLAEME/LALME ΥեޥȤϤޤ¸ƤܻeWAVE ˤ "fit-technique" Τ褦Ūʼˡס
eWAVE ֹܤòץեLAEME/LALME ϲֻ֡ܤòץեƤ
eWAVE Υϥǡ١LAEMEηŪǤϤʤ LALME ˤΥϥѥGloWbE Τ褦Ѹ쥳ѥ¸ߤ뤬eWAVE ȤΩƤ뤿ᡤLAEME Τ褦ϿޤȥѥȤΥ쥹ϢȤ˾ʤ
⤷ΤϡŪ eWAVE LAEME/LALME δ֤˰֤ѸˤĤơϿޤƤʤȤѸ鸽¸ȾɸѼǽƤꡤϰѼͻҤƤʤˡǡ١⥳ѥԻǤʤϰѼθȤ餹ȡ֤ƤѸȸѸΤۤषƤΤǤ롥
she θ츻ˤĤơϢ Laing and Lass ʸ夲Ƥcf. #4769. she θ츻 --- Laing and Lass ˤ "Yod Epenthesis" ξҲ ([2022-05-18-1])#4770. she θ츻 --- Laing and Lass ˤ "Yod Epenthesis" ɾ ([2022-05-19-1]))
Ʊʸμʴؿ3;ñ̾ʤη֤ˤĤƤгʤͿʤη֤ˤĤƤƤ롥űѸɸŪʥѥˤСгʤ hīeͿʤ hire η֤äˤߤ餫̤ꡤͿʷгʷ߹ǡŪ herפ뤳ȤˤʤäǤС¾3;̾ǤƱȤäƤ롥ñͿʤ him г hine ߹ߡʣͿʤ him г hīe ߹ʸˤ켫Ȥ them ִ줿ˡ
3;̾˴ؤͿʤгʤ߹ȤθݡͿؤгʤοʿˤϤޤܤ줺褽ĺΤȤäΤȵ䤬뤬ñ˴ؤƤ Laing and Lass (209) ˤǫä
By the time ME proper begins to emerge, and to survive in the written record in the mid to late twelfth century, the new 'she' type for the subject pronoun already begins to be found. For the object pronoun the levelling of the 'her/hir' type from the OE DAT/GEN variants is also already the majority for direct object function. For the fem sg personal pronoun used as direct object ($/P13OdF), LAEME CTT has 60 tokens of the 'heo/hi(e)' type across only 7 texts. If one includes hi(e) spellings for IT ($/P13OdI) showing survival of feminine grammatical gender in inanimates, the total rises to 77 tokens across 14 texts. Only 2 texts (with 3 tokens between them) have 'heo/hie' exclusively in direct object function for HER. The other 5 texts show 'her/hir' types beside 'heo/hie' types. Against this are 494 tokens of the 'her/hir' type for HER found across 51 texts. Or, if one includes 'her/hir' type spellings for IT showing the survival of grammatical gender, the total rises to 590 across 58 texts.
פˡгʤͿؤοʿϡճѸʳǤǤ˿ʤǤȤȤˤʤ롥餯ñʣǤ褦ʾä뤬ˤĤƤ̤ɬפ롥
ȴϢƴϢơ#155. űѸο;̾ζޡ ([2009-09-29-1])#975. 3;̾μгʷǤϤޤѤʤä۲ ([2011-12-28-1])#4080. ʤ she νͭʤŪʤ her ƱˤʤΤǤ ([2020-06-28-1]) ȡ
Ϣ <oo> ֻбȯꤢƤ (cf. #4223. ʤƱ <oo> ֻʤΤ book food Ǥ첻ۤʤΤǤ --- hellog 饸ǡ ([2020-11-18-1])#4224. blood, flood Ǥʤ soot ⡩ ([2020-11-19-1])) ϡïǤΤäƤ <oo> ޤñ room 夲ѲȤʣΰü
room ȤܸǤ֥롼פ /ruːm/ Ĺ첻ĤΤȻפ뤫⤷ʤ¤û첻 /rʊm/ 褷ƵǤϤʤLPD Preference polls ˤȡû첻ȯϡꥹѸǤ19%ۤɡꥫѸǤ7%ۤɳǧ롥

ʣ bedroom ˤĤƤСꥹѸǤ37%ޤǤû첻ȯȤۤˤ broom ˤĤƤ⡤ϤꥤꥹѸ8%û첻ޤgroom ˤû첻ȯ롥
room, bedroom, broom ˤĤƤϡ#1353. 첻Ĺû ([2013-01-09-1]) Ǥ夲ŪʲѲ /uː/ /ʊ/ ϡ#547. <oo> ֻб3ȯ ([2010-10-26-1]) ǿ줿̤ꡤŵŪˤ16--17ʽѸˤΤȤƤ롥ˤäƤϡƱѲ٤줿Ȥ褦䤯3ˤɤ夭ĤĤȤ⤤롥
ϤñǤϤʤUpton and Widdowson (39) ˤ room Υɽȯ˴ؤˤСʬۤˤܤȽƤ櫓ǤϤʤ
At this period [= as late as the seventeenth or even the eighteenth century] such words as BOOK, HOOD and SOOT, which had in the later Middle and early Modern English periods been pronounced with [uː], came to be pronounced with [u], and although ROOM was not properly part of this change it seems to have become connected with it for some speakers. Why the short sound in ROOM should have acquired the geographical distribution for the non-standard dialects which the map shows is quite unclear.
Although there is no firm evidence to support the claim, it is likely that the [u]- innovation in ROOM acquired some considerable popularity for a while in Received Pronunciation. Today it ranks as a quite acceptable minor variant in that accent, but not long ago its status was even higher. Daniel Jones (Outline of English Phonetics, para. 318) writes that 'In broom (for sweeping), groom, room, and soot both uː and u are heard, the u-forms brum, grum, rum, sut being perhaps more usual in Received English.'
Today one would not expect an RP speaker to use [uː] in SOOT. Conversely, although [u] is shown as an RP variant in pronouncing dictionaries of British English for use in several words with -oo- spellings, it is now somewhat unusual for such a speaker to be heard using it in BROOM, ROOM and (especially) GROOM. In a survey of a somewhat less-than-representative sample of British English speakers, Wells (Pronunciation Dictionary) discovered an eighty-two percent preference for [uː] in ROOM and a ninety-two percent preference for its use in BROOM.
RP ˤƤϡ嵭ñû첻Ǥȯषҿ (prestige) äƤǽȤäߤˤû첻ǤȯϡƤȤϤsoot ФޤǥޥʡȯȤ٤֤ŤФҲŪɾϡľ̤ɤƤȤˤ϶̣
ɴǯȤϤƤû첻ȤǤ롥¾ǡοδ֤Ĺû첻ѰۤμҲŪʰ֤ŤɤƤȤ롥2ĤŪʸ̮ѤĤġ room 2Ĥȯʻ¸Ƥ롤λ¤פǤ롥
ȤơUpton and Widdowson ꡤroom 2ĤȯʬۤƤ

Wells, J C. ed. Longman Pronunciation Dictionary. 3rd ed. Harlow: Pearson Education, 2008.
Upton, Clive and J. D. A. Widdowson. An Atlas of English Dialects. 2nd ed. Abingdon: Routledge, 2006.
ε#4085. Ѹ츦ˤ LALME ([2020-07-03-1]) ˰³LALME λǤǤѸϿ LAEME ˤĤƤ⡤˾νפʰ֤ŤҲ𤷤Ƥ
LAEME ϡȤƤ LALME ŤץȤȤƤϤΤθѤȤƳϤ줿ˡָȯפ褫ΩˤäȤϤԼԤ1 Laing ϡѸ褹ü椨˿ǺߤƤѸƥȤ̤äȾʤʬۤФäƤꡤ⤽ƱκǽߤȤʤ "anchor texts" ˤȤ櫓ΥƥȤϡűѸ West-Saxon Schriftsprache ˱ƶ줿Τ¿ΥڥƱΤѤ뤳ȤϤǤʤLaing ϥƥȻФ˹̻ǫʬɤμ̻δؤäɤʬΥڥμ̻νнƤǽ⤤θǴ궯ѤƤä̤ȤơȤ "anchor texts" 뤳ȤȤ LALME Ƥ "fit-technique" ŬѤơ¾ΥƥȤϿ˥ץåȤƤä --- ϥǥϤڤ --- ΤǤ롥
LAEME οϡLALME տ魯ǯä (questionnaire) ȤˤäáʸˡŪդʤƥȤŻҥѥ¨ʤμܤбǤ褦˽ΤǤ롥äȤ⡤оݤȤƥȤʸФƴʤ륿դԤʤä櫓ǤϤʤ˼̻ˤ˴ؤä椨ԴˤȤɤޤʤɺʷаޤ⤢ä褦ץȤλ־⤢ꡤǽŪˤϽѸŪʥѥȤϤʤʤäΤΡդ줿65줫ʤ롤Ʋ븦ġ˻ž夬äȤ櫓ƱαѸˡΤˤϡʤƤϤʤʤɬܥġǤ롥
ġȤƤ LAEME κĹϡƥȤŰƬŰ "diplomatic" Ǥ뤳ȤǥǤʤܤֻ˸¤ʤ¤ǤȤ롤θʸФ "diplomatic" ٤ϡ¾ǤϤۤȤФȤǤʤ伫ȤʸѤäˤʤä꤬ġǤ롥ʾ塤Lowe (1126) ˰͵Ƽɮ
Lowe, Kathryn A. "Resources: Early Textual Resources." Chapter 71 of English Historical Linguistics: An International Handbook. 2 vols. Ed. Alexander Bergs and Laurel J. Brinton. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2012. 1119--31.
ѸؤǤ褯ΤƤ֤첻ѰۤλȤơ <i> = [i(ː)] <u> = [y(ː)] <e> = [e(ː)] ȤΤ롥ϡűѸ쥦ȥˤŵŪ <y> ֤줿첻ʽˤ [y(ː)]ˤ [i(ː)] äȤˤѸνǤɤΤ褦бƤ뤫ŪΤǤ롥
ѸñǤ busy, merry ʤɤŵŪ˾嵭ʬۤȴϢƤ롥 ϢϰʲεǰäƤ
#562. busy ֻȯ ([2010-11-10-1])
#563. Chaucer merry ([2010-11-11-1])
#570. bury 첻ʬۡ ([2010-11-18-1])
#1341. Ѹʬ8ĤŪʷ֡ ([2012-12-28-1])
#1434. left hemlock Kentish ([2013-03-31-1])
#4048. much, shut, such, trust 첻Ѹء ([2020-05-27-1])
ϤȤ櫓 bury ˾ơѸνˤ1첻ʻˤѰۤ LAEME Dot Map ˤ꼨ϡ #562. busy ֻȯ ([2010-11-10-1]) #570. bury 첻ʬۡ ([2010-11-18-1]) ǤⰷäƤŪʥġѤƿڵȤ˽֤ʲ첻ʻˤȤ <i, y> Ѥʬۿޤ Dot Map ǽ˵³2ܤ <u>3ܤ <e> ˴ؤ Dot Map



ɸбϡǤϤ뤬ꥷμѸθƬˤƤߤ롥㤨 xenon, xenophobia, xerox, xylophone, Xanadu, Xanthippe, Xavier, Xenia, Xerxes /z/ ǻϤޤ롥εǡ<x> /z/ бϡ<x> /gz/ 1ҲæˤΤȹͤޤסʡ#3654. x ǻϤޤñ줬ʤΤϤʤǤ ([2019-04-29-1])ˤȽҤ٤̤ꡤǥեȤб <x> /ks/ ͭǤǤ <x> /gz/ ȤбꤹСΤȤǤ롥ƬҲ /gz/ 1Ҳ /z/ ȤʤäȹͤФ褤
⤽ʤεʥǤϥǥեȤ <x> /ks/ ǤϤʤ<x> /gz/ ꤵʤФʤʤΤʢ̾Ųؤ̾ϻꤤǤ꤬ȤޤˡˤĤƿͤƤߤȤʤäΤǡĴ٤ƤߤѸȯŰŪ˸椷 Dobson ȤȡΤ褦ʸڤĤä (II 359)
PresE initial [z] in Xerxes, &c. is usually (and rightly) regarded as a reduction of [gz], but as French also has this pronunciation the reduction presumably occurred in the medieval pronunciation of Latin rather than in English itself. Cooper says that x in Xenophon is pronounced z, gz (for [gz]), or ks.
Dobson ϰճʤȤ˸ФƤ롥αѸüԤեüԤθƥȤȯȤˡ̵ /ks/ ǤϤʤͭ /gz/ ȤƼ¸뷹äȤºݡեǤ Xerxès, xènon /gzɛrsɛs/, /gzenɔ̃/ Τ褦 /gz/ ʹ롥ѸǤ⡤17βؼ Christopher Cooper /z/, /gz/, /ks/ ΤȯˤڤƤ̤ꡤɤϤäΤȻפ뤬餯 /ks/ /gz/ ޤ졤1Ҳæ /z/ ǽŪɸȯȤ夯Ȥˤʤäȹͤ롥
嵭ǤɸΡ֤ʤפε˿̤줿櫓ǤϤʤüʼѸθƬȤĶ /gz/ Ф줿ͳ䡤Ѹȥեδ֤ꤵƤοˤΤʬʤ
̤˱Ѹ <x> /gz/ ΩĶϡ(1) x 첻˶ޤƤꡤ (2) Ԥ첻˶ʤʢ³첻˶˾Ǥ롥ϡֱѸˤ Verner's Lawפȸ٤Τǡ#858. Verner's Law ȻҲͭ ([2011-09-02-1])#2280. <x> á ([2015-07-25-1]) ǿ줿̤Ǥ롥Τ褦 x ǻϤޤϡ̩ˤ (1) (2) ξƤϤޤ櫓ǤϤʤΤ³첻˶ʴ x ǻϤޤ뤽θƬġˤȤ (2) ˤƤϤޤΤ¿Dobson ⤳δˤǰƬ֤ƾθҤ٤ȤȤ褯ʬʤ
ˤĤĴ٤Ƥ뤦ˡѸ <x> /gz/ бŪаޤˤĤơDobson ñʡֱѸˤ Verner's LawפäܤƤ뤳ȤˤⵤդϢʤΤεǼ夲
Dobson, E. J. English Pronunciation 1500--1700. 1st ed. 2 vols. Oxford: Clarendon, 1957.
ε ([2019-03-13-1]) ˰³ƤꡥѸˤ <u> <o> ʬۤ111ΥƥȤˤĴ Wełna (317) ϡȤưʲΤ褦˽Ҥ٤Ƥ롥
. . . the examination of the above corpus data has shown a lack of any consistent universal rule replacing <u> with <o> in the graphically obscure contexts of the postvocalic graphemes <m, n>. Even words with identical roots, like the forms of the lemmas SUN (OE sunne), SUMMER (OE sumor) and SON (OE sunu), SOME (OE sum) which showed a similar distribution of <u/o> spellings in most Middle English dialects, eventually (and unpredictably) have retained either the original spelling <u> (sun) or the modified spelling <o> (son). In brief, each word under discussion modified its spelling at a different time and in different regions in a development which closely resembles the circumstances of lexical diffusion.
Τ褦˱ʪޤä褦ʷʤΤWełna ϻδ鼡ηŦƤ롥
. . . o-spellings first emerged in the latter half of the 12th century in the (South-)West (honi "honey" . . .). Later, a tendency to use the new spelling <o> is best documented in London and in the North.
Wełna ܿͤҤ٤Ƥ褦ˡĴоݤȤޤ HUNDRED, HUNGER, HONEY, NUN, SOME, SUMMER, SUN, SON 8ĤˤŪʷФΤΤ⤷ʤʤ븦椬ɬפΤ褦
Wełna, Jerzy. "<U> or <O>: A Dilemma of the Middle English Scribal Practice." Contact, Variation, and Change in the History of English. Ed. Simone E. Pfenninger, Olga Timofeeva, Anne-Christine Gardner, Alpo Honkapohja, Marianne Hundt and Daniel Schreier. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins, 2014. 305--23.
ɸ˴Ϣϡ#2450. Ѹˤ <u> <o> ˤѡ ([2016-01-11-1])#2453. Ѹˤ <u> <o> ˤ (2) ([2016-01-14-1])#3513. come some ֻ ([2018-12-09-1])#3574. <o> ɽ蘆첻 --- donkey vs monkey ([2019-02-08-1]) Ǽ夲Ƥϡ<u> <o> ˤѡפȤֻѸʬۤ礵Ƥäаޤ˾Ƥ Wełna ʸ˰͵ĤġԸθҲ𤷤
Ѹ monk, son, tongue ʤɤˤߤ <o> ֻϡŪˤ <u> äΤѸʹߤ <o> ֤ʤ줿ΤǤ롥֤ʤͳϡ˥ĥäǤƤ褦ˡ̤ "minim avoidance" Ȥ롥[2016-01-11-1]εǽҤ٤褦ˡ첻ɽ <u> ϥåΤǤϽ (minim) 2ܤ¤٤ <<ıı>> Τ褦˽줿Ʊ鹽 <m>, <n>, <u>, <v>, <w> ʤɤʸ¤־ˤϡʸɤζ̤ʤ롥Ѥ路뤿ˡѸμ̻첻ɽ <u> <o> ִפȤȤ
Ѹ˸ˤƤϡ"minim avoidance" ʳβƤƤ碌4Ĥۤɤβ Wełna (306--07) ꡤñ˾Ҳ𤷤褦
(1) Υե䥢ΥޥǤߤ줿 <u> <o> ֻ (ex. baron ? barun) Ѹˤ⤿餵줿
(2) "minim avoidance"
(3) ΥޥΥե [o] [u] ؤȾ夲ФѲֻˤȿǤ줿
(4) եֻˤʤä /y(ː)/ <u> б̡/u/ бֻɬפȤʤä
Τ褦˽⤢ʤ (2) ͭϤȤʤäƤ櫓ºݤˤֻܤĴ٤Ƥ (2) βǤ٤Ƥλ㤬줤櫓ǤϤʤϤʤ꺮٤ȤƤ褦ΤʤǤѸξ˴ؤŪǤ¤ Morsbach ˴ŤƤޤȤСΤ褦ˤʤ (Wełna 306)
a. the 12th century English manuscripts employ the spelling <u>;
b. the first o-spellings emerge in the latter half of the 12th century;
c. <o> for <u> is still rare in the early 13th century and is absent in Ormulum, Katherine, Vices and Virtues, Proclamation, and several other texts;
d. from the latter half of the 13th century onwards the frequency of <o> grows, which results in both old <u> and new <o> spellings randomly used in texts composed even by the same scribe.
Ρ֥פʬۤѸˤޤDZ䡹³ƤȤˤʤ롥ꤴ襤Ǥ롥
Wełna, Jerzy. "<U> or <O>: A Dilemma of the Middle English Scribal Practice." Contact, Variation, and Change in the History of English. Ed. Simone E. Pfenninger, Olga Timofeeva, Anne-Christine Gardner, Alpo Honkapohja, Marianne Hundt and Daniel Schreier. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: Benjamins, 2014. 305--23.
Morsbach, Lorenz. Mittelenglische Grammatik. Halle: Max Niemayer, 1896.
ε#3397. Ѹ through Υֻ ([2018-08-15-1]) ˰³ such ΰֻˤĤơ#2520. Ѹ134 "such" ΰֻ ([2016-03-21-1])#2521. Ѹ113 "such" ΰֻ ([2016-03-22-1]) Ǹ褦ˡĴ٤¤ꡤѸΤǤ such ɽֻ212ۤɳǧ롥Τ208ˤĤơƱˡǸɸֻ such ˤɤƤ뤫ƤƤߤ
| Similarity | Spellings |
|---|---|
| 1.0000 | such |
| 0.8889 | sƿuch, shuch, succh, suche, sucht, suech, suich, sulch, suuch, suych, swuch |
| 0.8571 | suc |
| 0.8000 | sƿucch, sƿuche, schuch, scuche, shuche, souche, sucche, suchee, suchet, suchte, sueche, suiche, suilch, sulche, sutche, suuche, suuech, suyche, swuche, swulch |
| 0.7500 | sƿuc, scht, sech, shuc, sich, soch, sueh, suhc, suhe, suic, sulc, suth, suyc, swch, swuh, sych |
| 0.7273 | sƿucche, sƿuchne, sƿulche, schuche, suecche, suueche, suweche |
| 0.6667 | hsƿucche, sƿche, sƿich, sƿucches, sƿulc, schch, schuc, schut, seche, shich, shoch, shych, siche, soche, suicchne, suilc, svche, svich, swche, swech, swich, swlch, swulchen, swych, syche, zuich, zuych |
| 0.6154 | swulchere |
| 0.6000 | asoche, sƿiche, sƿilch, sƿlche, sƿuilc, sƿulce, schech, schute, scoche, scwche, secche, shiche, shoche, sowche, soyche, sqwych, suilce, sviche, sweche, swhych, swiche, swlche, swyche, zuiche, zuyche |
| 0.5714 | sec, sic, sug, swc, syc |
| 0.5455 | aswyche, sƿicche, sƿichne, sƿilche, sƿi~lch, scheche, schiche, schilke, schoche, sewyche, sqwyche, sswiche, swecche, swhiche, swhyche, swichee, swyeche, zuichen |
| 0.5333 | sucheȝ |
| 0.5000 | sƿic, sɩͨh, scli, secc, sick, silc, slic, solchere, sulk, swic, swlc, swlchere, swulcere |
| 0.4444 | sƿilc, sclik, sclyk, suilk, sulke, suylk, swics, swilc |
| 0.4000 | sƿillc, sclike, sclyke, squike, squilk, squylk, suilke, suwilk, suylke, swilce, swlcne, swulke, swulne |
| 0.3636 | sƿilcne, suilkin, swhilke |
| 0.3333 | swisɩͨhe |
| 0.2857 | sik, sli, slk, sly, syk |
| 0.2500 | selk, sike, silk, slik, slyk, swil, swlk, swyk, swyl, syge, syke, sylk |
| 0.2222 | sƿilk, selke, sliik, slike, slilk, slyke, swelk, swilk, swlke, swyke, swylk, sylke |
| 0.2000 | slieke, slkyke, swilke, swylke, swylle |
| 0.1818 | sƿillke, swilkee, swilkes |
#2869. ťΥɸ줫μѤϸűѸǤäƤ⡤ʸڤѸ ([2017-03-05-1]) Ǥ夲ƤˤĤƹͤƤߤ
ѸθäˤϸťΥɸ줫μѸ줬¿ޤޤƤ롥ŪطʤȤƤϡ9Ⱦʹߤ˸ťΥɸȤ꽻DZѸüԤȺäȤаޤ롥ǼѤ줿Ϥ¿θťΥɸ줫ñ줬ʸ˽ƸΤϡ꽻ʤűѸˤƤǤϤʤʤ̻֤ѸʹߡȤ櫓13ʹߤΤȤʤΤǤ롥ŪͽۤǯȼºݤʸڤǯȤδ֤˥åפȤϡѸˤǤ⤷Фм夲뤬ͳϰŪ˼Τ褦˹ͤƤBlake, p. 92 ˡ
It is a feature of the history of the English language that there are a considerable number of Old Norse loans in the language, but the appearance of these loans in writing occurs mainly from the thirteenth century onwards and not from the pre-Conquest period which is when the Viking invasions and settlements occurred. The usual explanation for this is as follows. Most Old English literature which has survived is written in the West Saxon dialect, and the dialect represents those areas of England which were least affected by the Scandinavian invasions and settlements. Hence Scandinavian influence in these areas cannot have been very significant. Even in those areas where the Danes had settled, they continued to live in their own communities and would only gradually have become absorbed among the Anglo-Saxon population. This implies that the new settlers were for a long time regarded as foreigners and no attempt was made to assimilate them. Consequently the introduction of Old Norse words into English was delayed in the Anglian dialects, and their southward drift would be even later than that. It is hardly surprising in this view that words of Scandinavian origin are not found in English in any numbers until the thirteenth century.
ĤޤꡤϳΤ˥ˤɬ⤹ˤ轻ΥͤȺä櫓ǤϤʤüѤޤŪͻϰƳ٤äȤ櫓ޤűѸʸȤƻĤäƤΤ¿ϥ West Saxon ǽƤ뤿ᡤθŪƶϸűѸˤʸڤˤΤȤ
Blake (93--94) ϤΰŪʸɤ˲ȤߤƤ롥
The continuity of West Saxon as Standard Old English would have discouraged the adoption of new words from other varieties and even from other languages. The tenth-century reforms were a continuation of the policies introduced by Alfred, and it is not surprising that the attitude towards standardisation and conservatism should have become more rigid as the standard grew in importance.
Blake ιͤϤäդΥ٥ǤϡŪаޤ鼫ͽۤȤꡤťΥɸ줫μѸ¿Ǥ˸űѸäƤɸŪݼŪ West Saxon νդˤƤϡŪάŪʶοȤ⤤٤ťΥɸѸѤ뤳ȤϤդ路ʤȹͤ졤ӽ줿ΤǤϤʤĤޤꡤ͡θȯƤʸϤˤȿǤʤäȤȤǤϤʤ
դݼϤ褯Τ줿¤ɸŪʽդȤʤФޤޤݼŪˤʤȤȤϡΤ˹ͤ롥
Blake, N. F. A History of the English Language. Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1996.
ε#2974. 2Ū칽ʸ to ʸء ([2017-06-18-1]) κǸ˿줿褦ˡޤοȸθ경ϡʸˡˤɽ㡼Ǥ롥˶ޤοबˤäƼ줿ʸˡǽŶ뤿˸夫礬경뤳ȤˤʤäΤ뤤˸礬경η̡פȤʤäޤ夫षϤΤ⤷ϡ3θˤȡξݤΰ̴طϰŪʤΤǤϤʤ줾줬ƶ礤ʤ饹ѥ˿ʹԤƤäΤȤ⤤롥ޤ˥˥ȥǤ롥
ϲ3θ¤ȻפäƤ뤬ϢȤƤ Allen ⤳ιͤǤ롥Allen ϡ2Ū칽ʸˤ2ĤŪθǤʤ°̾Ȥ˽Ȥΰִط˴ؤѸѲˤĤƤĴƤꡤޤοबθ경ͣװǤϤʤȤƳǧƤ롥Allen (220) ۩
The two case studies [= the fixing of the order of two nominal NP/DP objects and the genitives] examined here do not support the view that the fixing of word order in English was driven solely by the loss of case inflections or the assumption that at every stage of English, there was a simple correlation between less inflection and more fixed word order. This is not to say that deflexion did not play an important role in the disappearance of some previously possible word orders. It is reasonable to suggest that although it may have been pragmatic considerations which gave the initial impetus to making certain word orders more dominant than others, deflexion played a role in making these orders increasingly dominant. It seems likely that the two developments worked hand in hand; more fixed word order allowed for less overt case marking, which in turn increased the reliance on word order.
ΰ̴طֶޤοࢪθ경פäȤǽꤳƤʤդΡָθ경ޤοפΰ̴ط椫ƤɤΤȤξݤ˼äƿʹԤȹͤΤǤȷƤ롥ޤξԤδطפƤۤñʴطǤϤʤȤϡѸˤƤʤ˶ޤλĤäƤʤɤǤ⡤űѸθ礬Τޤ¸Ƥ櫓ǤϤʤդ˶ޤषƤƤűѸŪʸ礬¸Ƥ㤬뤳Ȥ⸫Ƽ뤳ȤǤ
Allen, Cynthia L. "Case Syncretism and Word Order Change." Chapter 9 of The Handbook of the History of English. Ed. Ans van Kemenade and Bettelou Los. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2006. 201--23.
Powered by WinChalow1.0rc4 based on chalow