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



Old English uses personal pronouns, demonstratives, and limited null subject for reference to previously mentioned nouns. It uses personal pronouns reflexively and pronouns modified by ‘self’ identical in form with an intensive. This use of a pronoun modified by has been attributed to British Celtic influence. Other changes in the pronominal system have been attributed to Scandinavian influence, e.g. the introduction of the third person plural pronoun This paper looks at the use of the specially marked reflexives in the glosses to the Lindisfarne Gospels, a northern text where both British Celtic and Scandinavian influence may be relevant. It provides lists of all of the -marked forms and shows, for instance, that Matthew and Mark have reflexives based on an accusative/dative pronoun followed by and they don’t have this form as an intensifier. British Celtic of this period has an intensifier but has no special reflexives and has lost case endings, so the Lindisfarne language is unlike British Celtic. Luke and John have intensives and reflexives, with ‘self’ modifying case-marked pronouns, again unlike British Celtic. In addition to contributing to the debate on external origins, the paper adds to the authorship debate by comparing the use of reflexives in the different gospels.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Berndt, R.
    1956Form und Funktion des Verbums im nördlichen Spätaltenglischen. Halle: Niemeyer.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Boer, R. C.
    1920Oudnoorsch Handboek. Haarlem: Willink.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bremmer, R. H.
    2009An introduction to Old Frisian. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/z.147
    https://doi.org/10.1075/z.147 [Google Scholar]
  4. Brook, G. & R. Leslie
    (eds.) 1963Layamon: Brut. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Brookes, S.
    2016 The shape of things to come? Variation and intervention in Aldred’s gloss to the Lindisfarne Gospels. InJ. Fernández Cuesta & S. Pons-Sanz (eds.), The Old English gloss to the Lindisfarne Gospels: Language, author and context, 103–150. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9783110449105‑010
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110449105-010 [Google Scholar]
  6. Campbell, A.
    1959Old English grammar. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. 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]
  8. 2018 Where did THEY come from? A native origin for THEY, THEIR, THEM. Diachronica35(2). 165–209. 10.1075/dia.16026.col
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dia.16026.col [Google Scholar]
  9. DOE
    DOE. Dictionary of Old English (DOE)texts. www.doe.utoronto.ca
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Faarlund, J.
    2004The syntax of Old Norse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Facsimile
    Facsimile 2002The Lindisfarne Bible. Munich: Faksimile Verlag.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Filppula, M., J. Klemola & H. Paulasto
    2008English and Celtic in contact. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203895009
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203895009 [Google Scholar]
  13. van Gelderen, E.
    2000A history of English reflexive pronouns. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/la.39
    https://doi.org/10.1075/la.39 [Google Scholar]
  14. 2019 Introduction [this issue]. 10.4324/9781315180335‑1
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315180335-1 [Google Scholar]
  15. Hogg, R. M.
    2004 North Northumbrian and South Northumbrian: A geographical statement?InM. Dossena & R. Lass (eds.), Methods and data in English historical dialectology, 241–255. Frankfurt: Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Irslinger, B.
    2014 Intensifiers and reflexives in SAE, Insular Celtic and English. Indogermanische Forschungen119. 159–206. 10.1515/if‑2014‑0010
    https://doi.org/10.1515/if-2014-0010 [Google Scholar]
  17. 2018 Reflexive marking in English and Welsh: The “contact hypothesis” revisited. ICEHL 30 presentation.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Janssen, H.
    1957Historische Grammatica van het Latijn II. Den Haag: Servire.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Klemola, J.
    2013 English as a contact language in the British Isles. InD. Schreier & M. Hundt (eds.), English as a contact language, 75–87. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. König, E. & L. Vezzosi
    2004 The role of predicate meaning in the development of reflexivity. InW. Bisang (eds.), What makes grammaticalization?213–244. Berlin: De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Lange, C.
    2006Reflexivity and intensification in English. Frankfurt: Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Lea, E. M.
    1894 The language of the Northumbrian gloss to the Gospel of St. Mark, Anglia16. 62–206.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Miller, G. D.
    2012External influences on English: From its beginnings to the Renaissance. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199654260.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199654260.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  24. Moore, S. & A. H. Marckwardt
    1951Historical outlines of English sounds and inflections. Ann Arbor, MI: Wahr.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Ogura, M.
    1989Verbs with the reflexive pronoun and constructions with ‘self’ in Old and Early Middle English. Cambridge: Brewer.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Parry, J.
    1937Brut y Brenhinedd. Cambridge: The Medieval Academy of America.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Pons-Sanz, S.
    2013The lexical effects of Anglo-Scandinavian linguistic contact on Old English. Turnhout: Brepols. 10.1484/M.SEM‑EB.5.106260
    https://doi.org/10.1484/M.SEM-EB.5.106260 [Google Scholar]
  28. Poppe, E.
    2009 Standard Average European and the Celticity of English intensifiers and reflexives: Some considerations and implications. English Language and Linguistics13. 251–266. 10.1017/S1360674309003013
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674309003013 [Google Scholar]
  29. Quak, A.
    1992 Formenlehre des Altniederländischen. InR. Bremmer & A. Quak (eds), Zur Phonologie und Morphologie des Altniederländischen, 81–123. Odense: Odense University Press. 10.1075/nss.7.04qua
    https://doi.org/10.1075/nss.7.04qua [Google Scholar]
  30. Schrijver, P.
    2011 Old British. InE. Ternes (ed.), Brythonic Celtic – Britannisches Keltisch: From Medieval British to Modern Breton, 1–84. Bremen: Hempen.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Skeat, W. W.
    (ed.) 1871–87The Gospel according to St. Matthew, St. Mark, St. Luke and St. John. Reprint: Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Thurneysen, R.
    1946A grammar of Old Irish. Dublin: Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Tristram, H. L. C.
    1999 How Celtic is Standard English? The Annual Celtic Lecture, St.Petersburg: Russian Academy of Sciences.
  34. Vennemann, T.
    2013 Concerning myself. InR. Mailhammer (ed.), Lexical and structural etymology: Beyond word histories, 121–146. Berlin: De Gruyter. 10.1515/9781614510581.121
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9781614510581.121 [Google Scholar]
  35. Vezzosi, L.
    2005 The development of himself in Middle English: A ‘Celtic’ Hypothesis. InN. Ritt & H. Schendl (eds.), Rethinking Middle English: Linguistic and literary approaches, 228–43. Frankfurt: Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Visser, F.
    1963An historical syntax of the English grammar, VolI. Leiden: Brill.
    [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