Article published In:
The Northumbrian Old English glosses
Edited by Elly van Gelderen
[NOWELE 72:2] 2019
► pp. 165191
References
Adams, A.
1907The syntax of the temporal clause in Old English prose. Yale Studies in English, 321. New York: Holt.Google Scholar
Barasch, M.
1979A 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
2008Negative contraction and Old English dialects. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 1091. 275–312.Google Scholar
Blakeley, L.
1949Studies in the language of the Lindisfarne Gospels. University of Birmingham. (Doctoral dissertation)Google Scholar
Bolze, C.
2013The 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
2016Multiple 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.
1947–1948A note on the distribution of the variant forms of the Lindisfarne Gospels. English and Germanic Studies 11. 32–52.Google Scholar
Callaway, M.
1931The temporal subjunctive in Old English. Austin: The University of Texas. [URL]
Cole, M.
2015The 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
2016Identifying 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
1972Aldrediana 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) 2016The Old English gloss to the Lindisfarne Gospels: Language, author and context. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Henshaw, A. N.
1894The syntax of the indicative and subjunctive moods in the Anglo-Saxon Gospels. University of Leipzig. (Doctoral dissertation)Google Scholar
Hogg, R. M.
1992Phonology and morphology. In R. M. Hogg (ed.), 67–167.Google Scholar
(ed.) 1992The Cambridge history of the English language. Volume I: The beginnings to 1066. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011A grammar of Old English. Vol. 1: Phonology. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hotz, G.
1882The use of the subjunctive mood in Anglo-Saxon and its further history in Old English. University of Zurich. (Doctoral dissertation)Google Scholar
Ingham, R.
2006On two negative concord dialects in early English. Language Variation and Change 181. 241–266. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ker, N. R.
1943Aldred 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.
2006Aldred’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
1997Verb 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.
1985Old English syntax, 21 vols. Oxford: Clarendon. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moore, S. & A. H. Marckwardt
1969Historical outlines of English sounds and inflections. Ann Arbor, MI: George Wahr.Google Scholar
Quirk, R. & C. L. Wrenn
1957An Old English grammar, 3rd edn. London: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pons-Sanz, S.
2016A 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.
1933Notes 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
1960Some 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
1980The 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.
2008Contact effects of translation: Distinguishing two types of influence in Old English. Language Variation and Change 201. 341–365. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Traugott, E.
1992Syntax. In R. M. Hogg (ed.), 168–286.Google Scholar
Walkden, G.
2016Null 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.
2002Negative contraction, dialect and the AB language: A note on Levin (1958). Journal of Germanic Linguistics 14(4). 357–368. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2019Northumbrian 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.) 1871–87The 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 30 august 2023. 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.