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 (37)
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 (1)

Cited by one other publication

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 10 july 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.