Volume 72, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0108-8416
  • E-ISSN: 2212-9715
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



This article examines the verbal morphology of the Old English interlinear gloss to the Durham Collectar, attributed by almost universal consensus to Aldred of Chester-le-Street, whose earlier gloss to the Lindisfarne Gospels has recently been the object of scholarly attention (Cole 2014Fernández Cuesta & Pons-Sanz 2016Gameson et al. 2017). This article analyses - variation in the present indicative and imperative forms in relation to their syntactic context, in particular subject type and subject-verb adjacency, in order to assess whether the Northern Subject Rule detected by Cole (2014) in Lindisfarne was also operative in Aldred’s later gloss. By means of a quantitative analysis, we find that the first constraint does not significantly affect -/- variation in the gloss and that there is insufficient context for the second. Additionally, it is argued that adjacency is a problematic variable in this text-type. We also demonstrate that there is a higher percentage of second person singular - and - in the Collectar than in Lindisfarne and discuss the possible influence of standard West Saxon on the later gloss.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Bailey, G., N. Maynor & P. Cukor-Avila
    1989 Variation in subject verb concord in Early Modern English. Language, Variation and Change1(3). 285–300.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Barth, D. & V. Kapatsinki
    2011 Evaluating logistic mixed-effects models of corpus data. InD. Speelman, K. Heylen & D. Geeraerts (eds.), Mixed effects regression models in linguistics, 99–116. Heidelberg: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Benskin, M.
    2011 Present indicative plural concord in Brittonic and Early English. Transactions of the Philological Society109. 158–185. 10.1111/j.1467‑968X.2011.01279.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-968X.2011.01279.x [Google Scholar]
  4. Berndt, R.
    1956Form und Funktion des Verbums im nördlichen Spätaltenglischen. Halle: Niemeyer.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Blakeley, L.
    1949–1950 The Lindisfarne s/ð problem. Studia Neophilologica22. 15–47. 10.1080/00393274908587038
    https://doi.org/10.1080/00393274908587038 [Google Scholar]
  6. Blom, A. H.
    2017Glossing the Psalms: The emergence of the written vernaculars in Western Europe from the seventh to the twelfth centuries. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110501865
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110501865 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bonner, G.
    1989 St Cuthbert at Chester-le-Street. InG. Bonner, D. Rollason & C. Stancliffe (eds.), 387–395.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Bonner, G., D. Rollason & C. Stancliffe
    (eds.) 1989St Cuthbert, his cult and his community to AD 1200. Woodbridge: Boydell.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Brookes, S.
    2016 The shape of things to come? Variation and intervention in Aldred’s gloss to the Lindisfarne Gospels. In: J. Fernández Cuesta & S. Pons-Sanz, (eds.), 103–152.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Brown, T. J.
    (ed.) 1969The Durham Ritual: A southern English collectar of the tenth century with Northumbrian additions, Durham Cathedral Library A.IV.19. Early English Manuscripts in Facsimile 16. Copenhagen: Rosenkilde & Bagger.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Brunner, A.
    1947–1948 A note on the distribution of the variant forms of the Lindisfarne Gospels. English and Germanic Studies1. 32–52.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Campbell, A.
    1959Old English grammar. Oxford: Clarendon.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Cavill, P.
    2016 Maxims in Aldred’s Marginalia to the Lindisfarne Gospels. InJ. Fernández Cuesta & S. Pons-Sanz, (eds.), 79–102.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Cole, M.
    2014Old Northumbrian verbal morphosyntax and the (Northern) Subject Rule. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/nss.25
    https://doi.org/10.1075/nss.25 [Google Scholar]
  15. Corrêa, A.
    1992The Durham Collectar. London: Published for the Henry Bradshaw Society by the Boydell Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Feizmohammadpour, A.
    2013 Optional subject-verb agreement in Persian. University of Florida. (Doctoral dissertation)
  17. Fernández Cuesta, J.
    2011 The Northern Subject Rule in first-person-singular contexts in Early Modern English. Folia Linguistica Historica32. 89–114.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. 2014 The voice of the dead: Analyzing sociolinguistic variation in Early Modern English wills and testaments. Journal of English Linguistics42(4). 330–358. 10.1177/0075424214549561
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0075424214549561 [Google Scholar]
  19. Fernández Cuesta, J. & N. Rodríguez Ledesma
    2016 A case of accusative/dative syncretism in the language of the Lindisfarne Gospels gloss?Paper presented at theInternational Conference of English Historical Linguistics, Essen, 22–26 Aug, 2016.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Fernández Cuesta, J. & S. Pons-Sanz
    (eds.) 2016The Old English glosses to the Lindisfarne Gospels: Language, author and context. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110449105
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110449105 [Google Scholar]
  21. Fernández Cuesta, J. & C. Langmuir
    . In prep.Not in the right mood: the subjunctive in the Old Northumbrian gloss to the Durham Collectar.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Fernández Cuesta, J. & N. Rodríguez Ledesma
    . Forthcoming. A case of accusative/dative syncretism in the language of the Lindisfarne Gospels gloss and the Durham Collectar.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Gameson, R.
    2013From Holy Island to Durham: The contexts and meanings of the Lindisfarne Gospels. London: Third Millennium.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. 2017The Lindisfarne Gospels: New perspectives (Library of the Written Word, vol. 57/The Manuscript World, vol. 9). Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004337848
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004337848 [Google Scholar]
  25. Görlach, M.
    1990 Middle English: A creole?InM. Görlach (ed.), Studies in the History of the English Language, 65–78. Heidelberg: Winter.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Gretsch, M.
    1999The intellectual foundations of the English Benedictine Reform. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511483295
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511483295 [Google Scholar]
  27. 2000 The Junius Psalter gloss: Its historical and cultural context. Anglo-Saxon England29. 85–121.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Higham, N. J. & M. J. Ryan
    2013The Anglo-Saxon world. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Hogg, R. M. & R. D. Fulk
    2011A grammar of Old English. Volume II: Morphology. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Holmqvist, E.
    1922On the history of the English present inflections, particularly th and -s. Heidelberg: Winter.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Hunter-Blair, P.
    1966An introduction to Anglo-Saxon England. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Jolly, K. L.
    2012The community of St. Cuthbert in the late tenth century: The Chester-le-Street additions to Durham Cathedral Library A.IV.19. Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. 2016 The process of glossing and glossing as process: Scholarship and education in Durham, Cathedral Library, MS A.iv.19. InJ. Fernández Cuesta & S. Pons-Sanz (eds.), 361–376.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Kastovsky, D. & G. Bauer
    (eds.) 1988Luick revisited. Tübingen: Narr.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Kendrick, T. D.
    (eds.) 1960Evangeliorum Quattuor Codex Lindisfarnensis, Musei Britannici Codex Nero D.IV. Volume II: Commentariorum libri duo, quorum unus de texto evangeliorum Latino et codicis ornatione, alter de glossa Anglo-Saxonica. Olten/Lausanne: Graf.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Ker, N. R.
    1942 Aldred the scribe. Essays and Studies by members of the English Association28. 7–12.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Klemola, J.
    2000 The origins of the Northern Subject Rule: A case of early contact?InH. L. C. Tristram (ed.), The Celtic Englishes II, 329–346. Heidelberg: Winter.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Kroch, A., A. Taylor & D. Ringe
    2000 The Middle English verb-second constraint: A case study in language contact and language change. InS. Herring, P. van Reenen & L. Schøsler (eds.), Textual parameters in older languages, 353–391. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Larsson, K.
    2005 The development of Swedish from the mid-16th century to 1800. InO. Bandle (ed.), The Nordic languages: An international handbook of the history of the North Germanic languages, Vol.2, 1270–1281. Berlin: De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Lass, R., M. Laing, R. Alcorn & K. Williamson
    2013– A corpus of narrative etymologies from Proto-Old English to Early Middle English and accompanying corpus of changes. Version 1.1 [www.lel.ed.ac.uk/ihd/CoNE/CoNE.html]. Edinburgh: © The University of Edinburgh.
  41. Lemke, A.
    2015The Old English translation of Bede’s Historia Ecclesiastica Gentis Anglorum in its historical and cultural context. Göttingen: Universitätsverlag Göttingen. 10.17875/gup2015‑787
    https://doi.org/10.17875/gup2015-787 [Google Scholar]
  42. Lindelöf, U.
    1890Die Sprache des Rituals von Durham. Ein Beitrag zur altenglischen Grammatik. Helsingfors: Frenckell & Son.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. (ed.) 1927Rituale Ecclesiae Dunelmensis. The Durham Collectar. A new and revised edition of the Latin text with the interlinear Anglo-Saxon version, Surtees Society 140, Durham/London: Andrews⁄ Quaritch.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. McColl Millar, R.
    2016The interaction of closely related linguistic varieties and the history of English. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. 10.3366/edinburgh/9781474409087.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/9781474409087.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  45. McWhorter, J.
    2016 Is radical analyticity normal? Implications of Niger-Congo and Southeast Asia for typology and diachronic theory. InE. van Gelderen (ed.), Cyclical change continued, 49–92. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/la.227.03mcw
    https://doi.org/10.1075/la.227.03mcw [Google Scholar]
  46. Metzger, B. M.
    1997The earliest versions of the New Testament: Their origins, transmission and limitations. Oxford: Clarendon.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Miller, G.
    2002 The origin and diffusion of English 3sg -s. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia38. 352–61.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Poussa, P.
    1982 The evolution of Early Standard English: The creolization hypothesis. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia14. 60–87.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Roberts, J.
    2016 Aldred: Glossator and book historian. InJ. Fernández Cuesta & S. Pons-Sanz (eds.), 37–60.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Robinson, F. C.
    1973 Syntactical glosses in Latin manuscripts of Anglo-Saxon provenance. Speculum48(3). 443–475. 10.2307/2854443
    https://doi.org/10.2307/2854443 [Google Scholar]
  51. Rodríguez Ledesma, N.
    2013 The Northern Subject Rule in first-person singular contexts in Older Scots. Folia Linguistica Historica34. 149–172. 10.1515/flih.2013.006
    https://doi.org/10.1515/flih.2013.006 [Google Scholar]
  52. Ross, A. S. C.
    1960 Standard paradigms. InKendrick (eds.), Book II, 37–42.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. 1968 Aldrediana XVII: Ritual supplement. English Philological Studies11. 1–43.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. 1968 On some forms of the anomalous and contracted verbs in the Anglo-Saxon glosses to the Lindisfarne Gospels and the Durham Ritual. Transactions of the Philological Society, 69–105.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. 1970 Conservatism in the Anglo-Saxon gloss to the Durham Ritual. Notes and Queries215. 363–366. 10.1093/nq/17‑10‑363b
    https://doi.org/10.1093/nq/17-10-363b [Google Scholar]
  56. 1971 Aldrediana XXIII: Notes on the accidence of the Durham Ritual. Leeds Studies in English5. 53–67.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. 1978 A point of comparison between Aldred’s two glosses. Notes and Queries223. 197–199.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Ross, A. S. C., E. G. Stanley & T. J. Brown
    1960 Some observations on the gloss and the glossator. InKendrick (eds.), Book II, 3–33.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Rusche, P. G.
    2016 The Lindisfarne Gospel glosses and the Benedictine Reform. Was Aldred trained in the Southumbrian glossing tradition?InJ. Fernández Cuesta & S. Pons-Sanz (eds.), 61–78.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Shields, K.
    1992A history of Indo-European verb morphology. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.88
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.88 [Google Scholar]
  61. Skeat, W. W.
    (ed.) 1871–1887The Holy Gospels in Anglo-Saxon, Northumbrian, and Old Mercian Versions. 4vols.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press [Mark (1871), Luke (1874), John (1878), Matthew (1887)].
    [Google Scholar]
  62. (ed.) 1878The Gospel according to Saint John in Anglo-Saxon and Northumbrian versions synoptically arranged. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Spellman, D.
    2011 Logistic regression: A confirmatory technique for comparisons in corpus linguistics. InD. Glynn & J. A. Robinson (eds.), Corpus methods for semantics. Quantitative studies in polysemy and synonymy, 487–533. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Stanley, E. G.
    1988 Karl Luick’s “Man schrieb wie man sprach” and English historical phonology. InD. Kastovsky & G. Bauer. (eds.), 311–334.
  65. Stein, D.
    1986 Old English Northumbrian verb inflection revisited. InD. Kastovsky & A. Szwedek, (eds.), Linguistics across historical and geographical boundaries; in honour of Jacek Fisiak on the occasion of his fiftieth birthday. Volume I: Linguistic theory and historical linguistics, 637–650. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110856132.637
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110856132.637 [Google Scholar]
  66. Stevenson, J.
    1840Rituale Ecclesiae Dunelmensis. Surtees Society 10. London.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Theijssen, D.
    2009 Variable selection in logistic regression: The British English dative alternation. InT. Icard & R. Muskens (eds.), Interfaces: Explorations in logic, language and computation, 87–101. Berlin: Springer.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Thomason, S. G. & T. Kaufman
    1988Language contact, creolization, and genetic linguistics. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Timofeeva, O.
    2010 Anglo-Latin bilingualism before 1066: Prospects and limitations. InAlaric Hall, O. Timofeeva, Á. Kiricsi & B. Fox (eds.), Interfaces between language and culture in Medieval England. A Festschrift for Matti Kilpiö, 1–36. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/ej.9789004180116.i‑340.5
    https://doi.org/10.1163/ej.9789004180116.i-340.5 [Google Scholar]
  70. Townend, M.
    2002Language and history in Viking-Age England: Linguistic relations between speakers of Old Norse and Old English. Turnhout: Brepols. 10.1484/M.SEM‑EB.5.106296
    https://doi.org/10.1484/M.SEM-EB.5.106296 [Google Scholar]
  71. Tristram, H. L. C.
    2004 Diglossia in Anglo-Saxon England, or what was spoken Old English like?Studia Anglica Posnaniensia40. 87–110.
    [Google Scholar]
  72. Trudgill, P.
    1986Dialects in contact. Oxford: Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  73. 2011Sociolinguistic typology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  74. Van Bergen, L.
    2008 Negative constructions and OE dialects: Evidence from glosses and prose. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen109. 275–312.
    [Google Scholar]
  75. Vennemann, T.
    2001 Atlantis Semitica: Structural contact features in Celtic and English. InL. J. Brinton (ed.), Historical Linguistics 1999, 351–369. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/cilt.215.24ven
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.215.24ven [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error