Ingressive biginnen in Middle English the development of a textual function Peter Petré 2 June 2012 ICAME 33 ∙ Leuven .

Ingressive biginnen in Middle English

the development of a textual function

Peter Petré2 June 2012

ICAME 33 ∙ Leuven

http://tiny.cc/p529ew

INTRODUCTIONHYPOTHESIS

METHODOLOGYANALYSIS AND RESULTS

ONLY THE BEGINNING

2

Topic Narrative construal∙

• Broad shift in the way narratives are structured in English• Related to language-thought debate (Carroll et al. 2004)

– Multi-dimensional experience <> two-dimensional language– Language users are not free in their coding choices– Grammars differ in the ease with which such choices are made

• Old English grammar strongly favours bounded construal • Present-Day English grammar mixes bounded and

unbounded construal• What has changed? When? How can we tell?

Introduction 3

Bounded construal

• Old English grammar strongly favours bounded construal• Encodes experience as a discrete chronology of events

– each event is encoded as completed/reaching its terminal point – each event is marked off from other events

• Like a protagonist experiencing events one after another • Typically has

– adverbials meaning ‘then’ at the head of a clause – inversion of the subject (1) After the battle looked they for Henry’s killer. Then found they

him, and forced him to surrender.

4Introduction

Unbounded construal

• Present-Day English grammar has incorporated unbounded construal as part of its grammar

• Encodes events as open-ended to emphasize overlap• Like a camera overlooking the scene• Events are hooked up to a single time frame • Typically has

– Progressives– ???(2) Water was dripping down. The man started to dig around … the

sand is caving in.

5Introduction

Experiment

English speakers German speakers

6

(Carroll, Natale & Starren 2008; Flecken 2010)

Introduction

Current view on timing

• Unbounded construal was established 1500-1710 when progressive [be Ving] became a basic part of English grammar (Kemenade et al. 2008)

• Strictly bounded construal breaks down in early Middle English (e.g. Kemenade & Westergaard 2008)

Þ What happened in between?• Assumption: lack of early attestation of progressive due

to poor documentation of real-time narration Þ The conclusions drawn on timing are premature if solely

based on evidence from the progressive

7Introduction

INTRODUCTION

HYPOTHESISMETHODOLOGY

ANALYSIS AND RESULTSONLY THE BEGINNING

8

The role of ingressive verbs

• Unbounded construal makes more use of ingressives (Carroll et al. 2004: 206)

• This holds in particular for past time retellings• Relating everything to an on-going now is not possible• Use of ingressives may be a conciliatory strategy

– Encoding of onset provides a temporal anchor (bounded)– Open-endedness of new situation may emphasize overlap with

events expressed in subsequent clauses (unbounded)

9Hypothesis

• Most frequent Early English ingressive auxiliaries share the root GIN: Onginnan, aginnen, ginnen, biginnen(3) He wente that his lemman had layne in that bed, and so he

leyde hym adowne by sir Launcelot and toke hym in his armys and began to kysse hym. And when sir Launcelot felte a rough berde kyssyng hym he sterte oute of the bedde lyghtly, and the othir knyght after hym. (1485(a1470). Malory Wks.: 185.2618)

(4) Ryght anon the wympel gan she fynde. ‘Right away she found (*began to find) the wimple.’ (c1386)

English ingressive auxiliaries

10Hypothesis

Los (2000) and Brinton (1988)

• GIN-verbs could express various aspectual values• Old English (c1000) (Los 2000)

– [GIN Inf] expresses completion of an event (no overlap)– [GIN TO Inf] is ingressive (potential interruption/overlap)

Þ Distinction depends on infinitive• Middle English (c1400) (Brinton 1988, 1996)

– Biginnen is mostly used ingressively– Ginnen marks (perfectively) salient events in the narrative

Þ Distinction depends on GIN-verb

11Hypothesis

Evaluation

• Valuable observations, not mutually exclusive(5)Þe reue … bigon to rowen swiftliche efter. … & arisen stormes se

sterke & se stronge. þt te bordes of þis bat bursten & tobreken. & te sea sencte him. ‘The prefect … began to row after (her body) … and storms arose so strong that the planks of this boat burst, and the sea drowned him.’ (c1225(?c1200). St.Juliana (Bod 34): 126)

(6)Ryght anon the wympel gan she fynde. ‘Right away she found (*began to find) the wimple.’ (c1386)

• Focus on perfectivity at the expense of ingressive uses• Ingressive use mainly expressed by biginnen

12Hypothesis

Hypothesis

• If unbounded language use already develops in Middle English, it is expected that there is an increase of ingressive auxiliaries encoding overlap between events

• Shift from clausal > textual = intersubjectification

13Hypothesis

INTRODUCTIONHYPOTHESIS

METHODOLOGYANALYSIS AND RESULTS

ONLY THE BEGINNING

14

Corpus

• LEON 0.3 corpus (Petré 2011)• Newly developed all-genre corpus covering OE-1640• More representative in terms of genre & dialect• 400,000 words per period• For this case study: biginnen in

– 1151-1250– 1421-1500– 1571-1640

15Methodology

Case study ∙ biginnen

• Given its later development the most relevant verb• Analysis of all instances that occur in past time narrative

– Past tense: the majority– Historical present: from late Middle English onwards(7) Sodainely from the pearch snatcht the hawke, and hauing

wrung off her neck, begins to besiedge that good morsell, but with so good a courage, that the feathers had almost choakt him. (1608)

– Miscellaneous forms(8) My Lords, I was beginning to speak, but you interrupted me.

(1590)

16Methodology

INTRODUCTIONHYPOTHESIS

METHODOLOGY

ANALYSIS AND RESULTSONLY THE BEGINNING

17

Ingressivity of biginnen

• Already in Middle English biginnen– Is systematically ingressive– Prefers segmentable infinitives (onset – nucleus – coda)

• Biginnen’s ingressive aspect is used in two ways• Clausal level

– Emphasizes duration (not open-endedness)– No overlap

• Textual level– Situation is on-going when next event occurs/interrupts– With overlap

18Analysis and results

Biginnen without overlap

• Part of a bounded (set of) clause(s)• Expresses a foregrounded event• Involves the protagonist(s) • Advances the storyline • No overlap with subsequent events

(9) He bigon to deluen; dic swiðe muchele. Þer-uppe stenene wal; þe wes strong ouer-al. ane burh he arerde; muchele & mare.

‘He began/undertook to dig a very great ditch. Above it a stone wall, that was strong everywhere, and a castle he raised, great and high.’ (a1275(c1205). Lay. Brut (Clg A.9): 7100)

19Analysis and results

• Co-ordination with perfective clause• Typical of early Middle English

(10) He bigon to hewene hardliche swiðe. and þa postes for-heou alle; þa heolden up þa halle. ‘He began to hew very hard and hew down all the pilars that supported the hall.’ (a1275(c1205). Lay. Brut (Clg A.9))

Co-ordination

20Analysis and results

Biginnen with overlap

• Typically belong to secondary foreground• Only some characteristics of foreground

– Protagonist OR– Advancing of storyline

• Overlap with subsequent events(11) Þer was a preste þat trowid he was a passand gude

synger, not-with-stondyng he was not so. So on a day þer was a gentyl-womman þat satt behynd hym & hard hym syng, & sho began to wepe; and he, trowyng þat sho wepid for swettnes of his voyse, began to syng lowder þan he did tofor; & ay þe hyer sho hard hym syng, þe faster wepud sho. (c1450. Alph.Tales: CXX)

21Analysis and results

Overlap vs. no overlap pmw

22Analysis and results

No overlap Ambiguous Overlap0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

1151-1250 (n = 92) 1421-1500 (n = 75) 1571-1640 (n = 65)

INTRODUCTIONHYPOTHESIS

METHODOLOGYANALYSIS AND RESULTS

ONLY THE BEGINNING

23

Conclusions

• First results are promising– Increase in overlap points to increase of unbounded construal– General shift from aspectual function at clausal l

• Caveats– More data are needed to determine significance– Best genre to examine shift is oral narration (story-telling)– Early Middle English I still close to oral narration (Arnovick 2006)– How to find similar material for later periods?

24Only the beginning

The bigger picture

• Breakdown of bounded system– Loss of þa ‘then’ (as grammatical foreground/topic time marker)– Loss of verb-second– Loss of less well-known constructions (e.g. then it happened

that …)

• Grammaticalization of unbounded construal– Changes in the progressive already in Middle English

25Only the beginning

ReferencesArnovick, L. 2006. Written Reliquaries: The resonance of orality in medieval English texts. Benjamins.Brinton, L. 1988. The development of English aspectual systems. Cambridge UP. Brinton, L. 1996. Pragmatic markers in English: Grammaticalization and discourse functions. Mouton.Carroll, M. et al. 2004. The language and thought debate. In T. Pechmann & C. Habel (eds.),

Multidisciplinary approaches to language production, 183-218. Mouton. Carroll, M., S. Natale & M. Starren. 2008. Acquisition du marquage du progressif par des apprenants

germanophones de l'italien et néerlandophones du francais. AILE (Acquisition et interaction en langue étrangère) 26. 31-50.

Flecken, M. 2010. Event conceptualization in language production of early bilinguals. LOT 256. Hopper, P. 1979. Aspect and foregrounding in discourse. In T. Givón. Discourse and syntax, 213-241. New

York AP.Kemenade, A. van, et al. 2008. From bounded to unbounded events. www.ru.nl/aspx/download.aspx?

File=contents/pages/309843/aioplaats2008sep23.doc. Kemenade, A. & M. Westergaard. 2012. Syntax and information structure: Verb-second variation in

Middle English. In A. Meurman-Solin et al. (eds.), Information Structure and Syntactic Change in the History of English. Oxford UP

Los, B. 2000. Onginnan/beginnan in Ælfric with bare and to-infinitive. In O. Fischer et al. (eds.), Pathways of change. Grammaticalization in English, 251-274. Benjamins.

Petré, Peter. 2011. LEON 0.3 (https://perswww.kuleuven.be/~u0050685/).

26References

Thanks!

Peter Petre, University of [email protected]

http://wwwling.arts.kuleuven.be/fll

Link to presentation: http://tiny.cc/p529ew ORhttps://perswww.kuleuven.be/~u0050685/Petre_2012_ICAME33.pdf