Article In:
Journal of Historical Linguistics: Online-First Articles

Auxiliaries in Old Dutch

A diachronic parallel corpus exploration

ORCID logo | University of Gothenburg
ORCID logo | University of Gothenburg
ORCID logo | Dutch Language Institute
This study explores the use of auxiliaries in the oldest text available for Old Dutch, the Wachtendonck Psalter, dating from the 10th century. Our aim is to understand why there are so few different auxiliaries in this text in comparison to other texts in Old Dutch. We tackle this question by taking a historical comparative perspective, using methodological insights and techniques from corpus-based contrastive linguistics and typology. More specifically, we build a diachronic parallel corpus of psalm translations and compare the contexts in which auxiliaries and inflectional alternatives are used in these parallel texts by means of multidimensional scaling. Our historical comparative method results in five proximity maps which allow us to explore and compare the inventory of verb constructions of the Wachtendonck Psalter both retrospectively, with its source text in Latin, and prospectively, with later translations in Dutch. Our analysis examines he role of grammaticalization as well as the specific nature of the text as an interlinear translation as possible motivations for the presence and absence of auxiliaries in the Wachtendonck Psalter.
Keywords: Dutch, Psalms, parallel corpus, multi-dimensional scaling, grammaticalization, translation, auxiliary, verb
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Literature review
  • 3.Corpus
    • 3.1Diachronic parallel corpus
    • 3.2Corpus texts
    • 3.3Corpus compilation
  • 4.Data annotation and visualization
    • 4.1Annotation
    • 4.2Multidimensional scaling
    • 4.3Visualization as proximity maps
    • 4.4Process and tools
  • 5.Results
    • 5.1Synchronic inventory of the Wachtendonck Psalter
    • 5.2Retrospective comparison with the Vulgate Bible
    • 5.3Prospective comparison with the Vorsterman Bible
    • 5.4Prospective comparison with the Louvain Bible
    • 5.5Prospective comparison with the Dutch Professors’ Bible
  • 6.Discussion and conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
References (41)
References
Aijmer, Karin. 2008. Parallel and comparable corpora. Corpus Linguistics. An International Handbook. Volume 1, ed. by Anke Lüdeling & Merja Kytö, 275–292. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Bloemen, Henri. 2015. De katholieke bijbelvertaling in de negentiende en het begin van de twintigste eeuw. De Bijbel in de Lage Landen. Elf eeuwen van vertalen, ed. by Paul Gillaerts, Henri Bloemen, Youri Desplenter, Wim François & August den Hollander, 517–576. Heerenveen: Royal Jongbloed.Google Scholar
Bouma, Gerlof, Evie Coussé, Trude Dijkstra & Nicoline van der Sijs. 2020. The EDGeS Diachronic Bible Corpus. Proceedings of the 12th Language Resources and Evaluation Conference, ed. by Nicoletta Calzolari, Frédéric Béchet, Philippe Blache, Khalid Choukri, Christopher Cieri, Thierry Declerck, Sara Goggi, Hitoshi Isahara, Bente Maegaard, Joseph Mariani, Hélène Mazo, Asuncion Moreno, Jan Odijk & Stelios Piperidis, 5232–5239. European Language Resources Association.Google Scholar
Birkenes, Magnus Breder, Jürg Fleischer & Stephanie Leser-Cronau. 2020. A diachronic and areal typology of agreement in Germanic: A quantitative study based on parallel texts. STUF — Language Typology and Universals 73:2.219–260. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chiarcos, Christian, Maria Sukhareva, Roland Mittmann, Timothy Price, Gaye Detmold & Jan Chobotsky. 2014. New Technologies for Old Germanic. Resources and Research on Parallel Bibles in Older Continental Western Germanic. Proceedings of the 8th Workshop on Language Technology for Cultural Heritage, Social Sciences, and Humanities (LaTeCH), ed. by Kalliopi Zervanou, Cristina Vertan, Antal van den Bosch, & Caroline Sporleder, 22–31. Association for Computational Linguistics. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coussé, Evie. 2020. Complex verb constructions in Old Dutch. Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik 80:3.286–302. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Croft, William & Keith Poole. 2008. Inferring universals from grammatical variation: Multidimensional scaling for typological analysis Theoretical Linguistics 34:1.1–37. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Grauwe, Luc. 1982. De Wachtendonckse Psalmen en Glossen: Een lexikologisch-woord geografische studie met proeve van kritische leestekst en glossaria, II. Gent: Secretariaat van de Koninklijke Academie voor Nederlandse Taal — en Letterkunde.Google Scholar
Desplenter, Youri. 2015a. De Wachtendonckse Psalmen (ca. 900). De Bijbel in de Lage Landen. Elf eeuwen van vertalen, ed. by Paul Gillaerts, Henri Bloemen, Youri Desplenter, Wim François & August den Hollander, 46–57. Heerenveen: Royal Jongbloed.Google Scholar
. 2015b. Het psalter in de Vorstermanbijbel (vanaf 1528): een Middelnederlandse vertaling (ca. 1485). Elf eeuwen van vertalen, ed. by Paul Gillaerts, Henri Bloemen, Youri Desplenter, Wim François & August den Hollander, 191–202. Heerenveen: Royal Jongbloed.Google Scholar
. 2015c. “Inden beghenne was dwoert” — Inleiding. De Bijbel in de Lage Landen. Elf eeuwen van vertalen, ed. by Paul Gillaerts, Henri Bloemen, Youri Desplenter, Wim François & August den Hollander, 32–45. Heerenveen: Royal Jongbloed.Google Scholar
De Vries, Lourens. 2007. Some remarks on the use of Bible translations as parallel texts in linguistic research. STUF — Language Typology and Universals 60:2.148–157. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Enrique-Arias, Andrés. 2013. On the usefulness of using parallel texts in diachronic investigations. Insights from a parallel corpus of Spanish medieval Bible translations. New Methods in Historical Corpora (= Corpus Linguistics and Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Language 3), ed. by Paul Bennett, Martin Durrell, Silke Scheible & Richard J. Whitt, 105–115. Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Fischer, Hanna. 2019. How to get lost. The Präteritumschwund in German dialects. Morphological Variation: Theoretical and empirical perspectives, ed. by Antje Dammel & Oliver Schallert, 197–222. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
François, Wim. 2015. De Leuvense Bijbel (1548) en de Katholieke bijbelvertalingen van de tweede helft van de zestiende eeuw. De Bijbel in de Lage Landen. Elf eeuwen van vertalen, ed. by Paul Gillaerts, Henri Bloemen, Youri Desplenter, Wim François & August den Hollander, 266–303. Heerenveen: Royal Jongbloed.Google Scholar
Gross-Diaz, Theresa. 2012. The Latin psalter. The New Cambridge History of the Bible. Volume 2: From 600 to 1450, ed. by Richard Marsden & E. Ann Matter, 427–445. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gysseling, Maurits. 1980. Corpus van Middelnederlandse teksten (tot en met het jaar 1300). Reeks II: Literaire handschriften. Deel 1, Fragmenten. ‘s-Gravenhage: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Haeseryn, W., K. Romijn, G. Geerts, J. de Rooij & M. C. van den Toorn. 1997. Algemene Nederlandse Spraakkunst. Groningen: Martinus Nijhoff Uitgevers / Deurne: Wolters Plantyn.Google Scholar
Haug, Dag & Marius Jøhndal. 2008. Creating a Parallel Treebank of the Old Indo-European Bible Translations. Proceedings of the LREC 2008 Workshop on Language Technology for Cultural Heritage (LaTeCH 2008), ed. by Caroline Sporleder & Kiril Ribarov, 27–34.Google Scholar
Hasselgård, Hilde. 2020. Corpus-based contrastive studies. Beginnings, developments and directions. Languages in Contrast 20:2.184–208. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kalouli, Aikaterini-Lida, Rebecca Kehlbeck, Rita Sevastjanova, Katharina Kaiser, Georg A. Kaiser & Miriam Butt. 2019. ParHistVis: Visualization of Parallel Multilingual Historical Data. Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Computational Approaches to Historical Language Change ed. by Nina Tahmasebi, Lars Borin, Adam Jatowt & Yang Xu, 109–114. Association for Computational Linguistics. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leipzig Glossing Rules. 2015. The Leipzig Glossing Rules: Conventions for interlinear morpheme-by-morpheme glosses. (Available online on [URL], last accessed on 13 April 2021.)
Levshina, Natalia. 2015. European analytic causatives as a comparative concept: Evidence from a parallel corpus of film subtitles. Folia Linguistica 49:2.487–520. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mair, Patrick, Patrick Groenen & Jan de Leeuw. 2022. More on Multidimensional Scaling and Unfolding in R: smacof Version 2. Journal of Statistical Software 102:10.1–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Panhuis, Dirk. 2006. Latin Grammar. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quak, Arend. 1981. Die altmittel — und altniederfränkischen Psalmen och Glossen. Nach den Handschriften und Erstdrucken neu herausgegeben. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 1983. Zur Übersetzungstechnik in den altniederfränkischen Psalmenfragmenten. Ars et Ingenium. Studien zum Übersetzen. Festgabe für Frans Stoks zum sechzigsten Geburtstag, ed. by Hans Ester, Guillaume van Gemert & Jan van Megen, 99–111. Amsterdam: APA-Holland University Press.Google Scholar
. 1992. Versuch einer Formenlehre des altniederländischen auf der Basis der Wachendonckschen Psalmen. Zur Phonologie und Morphologie des Altniederländischen, ed. by Rolf H. Bremmer & Arend Quak, 81–123. Odense: Odense University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2020. Zur Übersetzungstechnik in den ‘Wachtendonckschen psalmen’. Amsterdamer Beiträge zur älteren Germanistik 80:4.441–461. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quak, Arend & Joop M. van der Horst. 2002. Inleiding Oudnederlands. Leuven: Universitaire Pers Leuven.Google Scholar
Sanders, Willy. 1971. (Expositio) Willerammi Eberspergensis abbatis in canticis canticorum. Die Leidener Handschrift. München: Wilhelm Fink Verlag.Google Scholar
R Core Team. 2020. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. (Available online on [URL].)
Roeder, Torsten. 2017. Mapping the Words. Experimental visualizations of translation structures between Ancient Greek and Classical Arabic. Digital Classics Online 3:2.103–123.Google Scholar
Schoonheim, Tanneke. 2008. Sources of the ‘Old Dutch Dictionary’. Yesterday’s words: Contemporary, Current and Future Lexicography ed. by Marijke Mooijaart & Marijke van der Wal, 266–274. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Van der Horst, Joop M. 2008. Geschiedenis van de Nederlandse syntaxis. Leuven: Leuven University Press.Google Scholar
Van der Klis, Martijn, Bert Le Bruyn & Henriëtte de Swart. 2017. Mapping the PERFECT via Translation Mining. Proceedings of the 15th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: Volume 2, Short Papers, ed. by Mirella Lapata, Phil Blunsom & Alexander Koller, 497–502. Association for Computational Linguistics. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van der Klis, Martijn & Jos Tellings. 2022. Generating semantic maps through multidimensional scaling: linguistic applications and theory. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 18:3.627–665. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van Liere, Frans. 2012. The Latin Bible, c. 900 to the Council of Trent, 1546. The New Cambridge History of the Bible. Volume 2: From 600 to 1450, ed. by Richard Marsden & E. Ann Matter, 93–109. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wells, David. 2004. The Central Franconian Rhyming Bible (“Mittelfränkische Reimbibel”) An Early-Twelfth-Century German Verse Homiliary. A Thematic and Exegetical Commentary. With the Text and a Translation into English. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Wälchli, Bernhard. 2010. Similarity Semantics and Building Probabilistic Semantic Maps from Parallel Texts. Linguistic Discovery 8:1.331–371. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wälchli, Bernhard & Michael Cysouw. 2012. Lexical typology through similarity semantics: Towards a semantic map of motion verbs. Linguistics 50:3.671–710. DOI logoGoogle Scholar