Cover not available
Article published In:
The Northumbrian Old English glosses
Edited by Elly van Gelderen
[NOWELE 72:2] 2019
► pp. 165–191

The subjunctive in the Lindisfarne gloss

A focus on past tense be

| Aarhus University

The use of the subjunctive mood in the Old English gloss to the Lindisfarne Gospels is investigated. All the examples of the Latin third person singular imperfect subjunctive, esset, are examined. There are three aims: to contribute to understanding the use of the subjunctive in the gloss of the Lindisfarne Gospels; to add to the authorship debate; to explore the question of how much Latin influences the glosses. Although, generally, indicative mood is expected in Old English adverbial temporal clauses, this clause type is often found in the subjunctive. The tendency is strongest in the Gospel of Luke. A few doublets of subjunctive and indicative occur, but only in the Gospels of Luke and John.

Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Subjunctive
    • 2.1The forms of the subjunctive
    • 2.2The function of the subjunctive in Old English and Latin
    • 2.3Glosses of Latin subjunctive singular esset
  • 3.Multiple glosses
    • 3.1Multiple glosses of esset
  • 4.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
  • Sources
Published online: 10 December 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/nowele.00026.woo
References
Adams, A.
1907 The syntax of the temporal clause in Old English prose. Yale Studies in English, 321. New York: Holt.Google Scholar
Barasch, M.
1979 A study of the Anglo-Saxon subjunctive in the Lindisfarne Gospels. USF Language Quarterly. 18(1/2). 16–18 and 52.Google Scholar
Bergen, L. van
2008 Negative contraction and Old English dialects. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 1091. 275–312.Google Scholar
Blakeley, L.
1949 Studies in the language of the Lindisfarne Gospels. University of Birmingham. (Doctoral dissertation)Google Scholar
Bolze, C.
2013 The verb ‘to be’ in the West Saxon and the Lindisfarne Gospels. In G. Diewald, L. Kahlas-Tarkka & I. Wischer (eds). Comparative studies in early Germanic languages with a focus on verbal categories, 217–234. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016 Multiple glosses with present tense forms of OE beon ‘to be’ in Aldred’s gloss to the Lindisfarne Gospels. In J. Fernández Cuesta & S. Pons-Sanz (eds), 289–300.Google Scholar
Bosworth-Toller Anglo-Saxon dictionary
Digital Edition. [URL]
Brunner, A.
1947–1948 A note on the distribution of the variant forms of the Lindisfarne Gospels. English and Germanic Studies 11. 32–52.Google Scholar
Callaway, M.
1931 The temporal subjunctive in Old English. Austin: The University of Texas. [URL]
Cole, M.
2015 The Periphrastic subjunctive in the Old English multiple glosses to the Lindisfarne Gospels. In P. Shaw, B. Erman, G. Melchers & P. Sundkvist (eds), From clerks to corpora: Essays on the English language yesterday and today, 71–85. Stockholm: Stockholm University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016 Identifying the author(s) of the Lindisfarne Gloss: Linguistic variation as a diagnostic for determining authorship. In J. Fernández Cuesta & S. Pons-Sanz (eds), 169–188.Google Scholar
Elliott, C. O. & A. S. C. Ross
1972 Aldrediana XXIV: The linguistic peculiarities of the gloss on St. John’s Gospel. English Philological Studies 131. 49–72.Google Scholar
Fernández Cuesta, J. & S. Pons-Sanz
(eds) 2016 The Old English gloss to the Lindisfarne Gospels: Language, author and context. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Henshaw, A. N.
1894 The syntax of the indicative and subjunctive moods in the Anglo-Saxon Gospels. University of Leipzig. (Doctoral dissertation)Google Scholar
Hogg, R. M.
1992 Phonology and morphology. In R. M. Hogg (ed.), 67–167.Google Scholar
(ed.) 1992 The Cambridge history of the English language. Volume I: The beginnings to 1066. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 A grammar of Old English. Vol. 1: Phonology. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hotz, G.
1882 The use of the subjunctive mood in Anglo-Saxon and its further history in Old English. University of Zurich. (Doctoral dissertation)Google Scholar
Ingham, R.
2006 On two negative concord dialects in early English. Language Variation and Change 181. 241–266. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ker, N. R.
1943 Aldred the scribe. Essays and studies by members of the English Association 281. 7–12. Reprinted in A. G. Watson (ed.) 1985 Books, collectors and libraries: Studies in the medieval heritage, 3–8. London: Hambledon.Google Scholar
Kotake, T.
2006 Aldred’s multiple glosses: Is the order significant? In M. Ogura (ed.). Textual and contextual studies in medieval English: Towards the reunion of linguistics and philology, 35–51. Bern: Lang.Google Scholar
Kroch, A. S. & A. Taylor
1997 Verb movement in Old and Middle English dialect variation and language contact. In A. van Kemenade & N. Vincent (eds), Parameters of morphosyntactic change, 297–325. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mitchell, B.
1985 Old English syntax, 21 vols. Oxford: Clarendon. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moore, S. & A. H. Marckwardt
1969 Historical outlines of English sounds and inflections. Ann Arbor, MI: George Wahr.Google Scholar
Quirk, R. & C. L. Wrenn
1957 An Old English grammar, 3rd edn. London: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pons-Sanz, S.
2016 A Study of Aldred’s multiple glosses to the Lindisfarne Gospels. In J. Fernández Cuesta & S. Pons-Sanz (eds), 301–328.Google Scholar
Rodríguez Ledesma, N.
2016  Dauides sunu vs. filii david: The genitive in the gloss to the Lindisfarne Gospels. In J. Fernández Cuesta & S. Pons-Sanz (eds), 213–238.Google Scholar
Ross, A. S. C.
1933 Notes on the method of glossing employed in the Lindisfarne Gospels. Transactions of the Philological Society, 108–119.Google Scholar
Ross, A. S. C., E. G. Stanley & T. J. Brown
1960 Some observations on the gloss and the glossator. In T. D. Kendrick, T. J. Brown, R. L. S. Bruce-Mitford, H. Roosen-Runge, A. S. C. Ross, E. G. Stanley & A. E. A. Werner (eds). Evangeliorum Quattuor Codex Lindisfarnensis, Musei Britannici Codex Nero D.IV. Volume II: Commentariorum libri duo, quorum unus de textu evangeliorum latino et codicis ornatione, alter de glossa anglo-saxonica, 5–33. Olten/Lausanne: Graf.Google Scholar
Ross, A. S. C. & A. Squires
1980 The multiple, altered and alternative glosses of the Lindisfarne and Rushworth Gospels and the Durham Ritual. Notes and Queries 2251. 489–495. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taylor, A.
2008 Contact effects of translation: Distinguishing two types of influence in Old English. Language Variation and Change 201. 341–365. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, E.
1992 Syntax. In R. M. Hogg (ed.), 168–286.Google Scholar
Walkden, G.
2016 Null subjects in the Lindisfarne Gospels as evidence for syntactic variation in Old English. In J. Fernández Cuesta & S. Pons-Sanz (eds), 239–256.Google Scholar
Wood, J. L.
2002 Negative contraction, dialect and the AB language: A note on Levin (1958). Journal of Germanic Linguistics 14(4). 357–368. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019 Northumbrian rounded vowels in the Old English gloss to the Lindisfarne Gospels. In A. M. Nyvad, M. Hejná, A. Højen, A. B. Jespersen & M. H. Sørensen (eds). A sound approach to language matters, 167–183. Aarhus: University of Aarhus Press.Google Scholar

Sources

Skeat, W. W.
(ed.) 1871–87 The Holy Gospels in Anglo-Saxon, Northumbrian, and Old Mercian versions, synoptically arranged, with collations exhibiting all the readings of all the MSS; together with the early Latin version as contained in the Lindisfarne MS, collated with the Latin version in the Rushworth MS. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Available at [URL]
The Lindisfarne Bible
2002 Munich: Faksimile Verlag.Google Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 1 other publications

Fernández-Cuesta, Julia & Nieves Rodríguez-Ledesma
2020. Reduced forms in the nominal morphology of the Lindisfarne Gospel Gloss. A case of accusative/dative syncretism?. Folia Linguistica 54:s41-s1 ► pp. 37 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 8 april 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.