Cover not available
Article published In:
NOWELE
Vol. 76:2 (2023) ► pp.153–202

End-weight at its most dynamic

Prosodic prominence as a factor promoting morphophonological marking

ORCID logo | University of Bamberg
| University of Paderborn
This contribution supports and extends the principle of end-weight, first formulated by Quirk et al. (1972) to describe the tendency of heavy constituents to appear late in a sentence. Developing this principle further, we argue that it favours the addition of (functionally non-neutral) morphological markers to sentence-final constituents, which are typically characterized by prosodic prominence. The markers we study are undergoing diachronic establishment or loss and are thus temporarily variable. They represent rather diverse categories in different West Germanic languages and varieties (English, Northern Low German, Frisian) and have been gathered from different periods. Examples include inflectional endings of nouns, adjectives, finite verbs and infinitives, pro-form uses of possessives and the adjective other, prepositional choices, the a-prefix and periphrastic doon ‘do’. We suggest that end-weight is scalar, with absolute sentence-final position producing the strongest effects.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Previous research
  • 3.Database
  • 4.Case studies
    • 4.1Long and short versions of prepositions in early Middle English
    • 4.2Loss of the dative inflection in infinitives in Middle English
    • 4.3Spread of the -s-suffix in possessive pro-forms in Middle English
    • 4.4Establishment of plural -s in the pro-form other in Early Modern English
    • 4.5Loss of a-prefixing in -ing-forms since Early Modern English
  • 5.Further parallel cases
    • 5.1Data-based close parallels in Northern Low German and Saterland Frisian
      • 5.1.1Short and long forms of adverbs in Northern Low German
      • 5.1.2Inflected infinitives in Northern Low German
      • 5.1.3Short and long forms of prepositions in Northern Low German
      • 5.1.4The contrast between inflected and uninflected past tense forms in Saterland Frisian
    • 5.2Shorter treatments of additional parallels in West Frisian and Northern Low German
      • 5.2.1Superlatives with or without final schwa in West Frisian
      • 5.2.2An incoming emphasizer in West Frisian
      • 5.2.3The alternation between short and long feminine nouns in Low German
      • 5.2.4The ongoing extension in Low German of oblique -n-forms in nominative environments
      • 5.2.5The adverb ganz ‘very/quite’ copying the ending -en of adjectives in Low German
      • 5.2.6 Doon-support in Low German
  • 6.Discussion
  • 7.Summary and outlook
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 12 December 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/nowele.00078.sch
References (81)
References
Primary sources
BNC. The British National Corpus. 1995. Version 1.0. BNC Consortium/Oxford University Computing Services.Google Scholar
ECF. Eighteenth-century fiction. 1996. Electronic Book Technologies Inc./Chadwyck-Healey. Cambridge. [10,300,000 words]Google Scholar
EEPF. Early English prose fiction. 1997. Electronic Book Technologies Inc./Chadwyck-Healey. Cambridge. In association with the Salzburg Centre for Research on the English Novel SCREEN. [9,900,000 words]Google Scholar
EPD. English prose drama. 1996/1997. Electronic Book Technologies Inc./Chadwyck-Healey. Cambridge. [27,000,000 words]Google Scholar
Fort, M. C. 1980. Saterfriesisches Wörterbuch: Mit einer grammatischen Übersicht. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
1985. Saterfriesisches Volksleben. Rhauderfehn: Ostendorp.Google Scholar
2015. Saterfriesisches Wörterbuch: Mit einer phonologischen und grammatischen Übersicht. Hamburg: Buske.Google Scholar
HC. The Helsinki corpus of English texts. 1991. Compiled by M. Kytö, M. Rissanen, M. Kilpiö, L. Kahlas-Tarkka, S. Nevanlinna, I. Taavitsainen, T. Nevalainen, and H. Raumolin-Brunberg. Helsinki: Department of English, University of Helsinki.Google Scholar
Holsten, Ch. (Holschen, K.). 1962. De gesunne Karkenslaap un annere Smüüstergeschichten. Bremen: Klammer & Bergfried.Google Scholar
). 1963. Mit den groten Brummvagel in Unkel Sam sien Land. Bremen: Klammer & Bergfried.Google Scholar
). 1970. Hochtietsgrusen: Plattdüütsche Geschichten to’n Smüüstern un Högen. 2nd edn. Leer: Schuster.Google Scholar
). 1970. Holschen snittjert. 4th edn. Leer: Schuster.Google Scholar
Los Angeles Times. 1992. On CD-ROM. Knight Ridder Information Inc.Google Scholar
. 1999. Courtesy of the Los Angeles Times Editorial Library.Google Scholar
Mohr, W. 1987. Lach mit mi: Vertellns un Riemels von Lüüd achtern Elwdiek. 3rd edn. Freiburg/Elbe: dbw-Verlags GmbH.Google Scholar
NCF. Nineteenth-century fiction. 1999/2000. Electronic Book Technologies Inc./Chadwyck-Healey. Cambridge. [39,700,000 words]Google Scholar
OED 2. The Oxford English Dictionary (2nd edn) on CD-ROM. 1992. (Version 1.10). Edited by J. A. Simpson and E. S. C. Weiner. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
PPCME2. The Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Middle English, 2nd edn. 2000. A. Kroch, A. Taylor & B. Santorini. Department of Linguistics, University of Pennsylvania. [URL]
The Guardian. 1994. Including The Observer on CD-ROM.Google Scholar
The Times. 1997. Including The Sunday Times Compact Disc Edition.Google Scholar
Secondary sources
Allen, C. 1980. Movement and deletion in Old English. Linguistic Inquiry 111. 261–323.Google Scholar
Behaghel, O. 1909–10. Beziehungen zwischen Umfang und Reihenfolge von Satzgliedern. Indogermanistische Forschungen 251. 110–142.Google Scholar
Bock, H. 1931. Studien zum präpositionalen Infinitiv und Akkusativ mit dem to-Infinitiv. Anglia 551. 114–249.Google Scholar
Bolinger, D. 1971. The phrasal verb in English. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bollmann, H. 1942. Mundarten auf der Stader Geest. Oldenburg: Stalling.Google Scholar
Borowsky, T. J. 1986. Topics in the lexical phonology of English. Doctoral dissertation. University of Massachusetts Amherst.
Bunning, H. 1934/35. Studien zur Geschichte der Bremischen Mundart. Niederdeutsches Jahrbuch 60/611. 63–147.Google Scholar
Ciszek, E. 2002. ME -lich(e)/-ly . Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 381. 105–129.Google Scholar
Cruttenden, A. (ed.), 2008. Gimson’s pronunciation of English. 7th edn. London: Hodder.Google Scholar
Denison, D. 1993. English historical syntax: Verbal constructions. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Eitelmann, M. 2016. Support for end-weight as a determinant of linguistic variation and change. English Language and Linguistics 20(3). 395–420. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fisiak, J. 1968. A short grammar of Middle English. Part I: Graphemics, phonemics and morphemics. Warszawa: PWN – Polish Scientific Publishers/London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fleischer, J. 2002. Preposition stranding in German dialects. In S. Barbiers, L. Cornips & S. van der Kleij (eds.), Syntactic microvariation: Online proceedings – Workshop on syntactic microvariation, 30–31 August 2000, 116–151. Meertens Instituut, Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Görlach, M. 1991. Introduction to Early Modern English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Greenberg, J. H. 1966. Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In J. H. Greenberg (ed.), Universals of Language. 2nd edn, 73–113. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hawkins, J. A. 2007. Processing typology and why psychologists need to know about it. New Ideas in Psychology 25(2). 87–107. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hirotani, M., L. Frazier & K. Rayner. 2006. Punctuation and intonation effects on clause and sentence wrap-up: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language 54(3). 425–443. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Keseling, G. 1968. Periphrastische Verbformen im Niederdeutschen. Niederdeutsches Jahrbuch 811. 139–152.Google Scholar
1970. Erwägungen zu einer überregionalen Syntax der niederdeutschen Mundarten. In D. Hofmann & W. Sanders (eds.), Gedenkschrift für William Foerste, 354–365. Köln/Wien: Böhlau.Google Scholar
Lass, R. 1992. Phonology and morphology. In N. Blake (ed.), The Cambridge history of the English language. Volume II: 1066–1476, 23–155. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech, G. 1983. Principles of pragmatics. London: Longman.Google Scholar
2006. A glossary of English grammar. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014. Growth and decline: How grammar has been changing in recent English. In N. Lavidas, Th. Alexiou & A. M. Sougari (eds.), Major trends in theoretical and applied linguistics 1: Selected papers from the 20th ISTAL, 47–65. London: Versita. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech, G. & N. Smith. 2009. Change and constancy in linguistic change: How grammatical usage in written English evolved in the period 1931–1991. In A. Renouf & A. Kehoe (eds.), Corpus linguistics: Refinements and reassessments, 173–200. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindquist, H. 2000. Livelier or more lively? Syntactic and contextual factors influencing the comparison of disyllabic adjectives. In J. M. Kirk (ed.), Corpora galore: Analyses and techniques in describing English: Papers from the 19th International conference on English language research on computerized corpora (ICAME 1998), 125–132. Amsterdam: Rodopi. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Minkova, D. 1991. The history of final vowels in English: The sound of muting ( TiEL 4). Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mondorf, B. 2009. More support for more-support. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mustanoja, T. F. 1960. A Middle English syntax. Part I. Parts of speech. Helsinki: Société Néophilologique.Google Scholar
Nespor, M. & I. Vogel. 1986. Prosodic phonology. Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
. 2007. Prosodic phonology: With a new foreword. 2nd edn. [1st edn 1986.] Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
OED Online. Oxford University Press. [URL]
Quirk, R., S. Greenbaum, G. Leech & J. Svartvik. 1972. A grammar of contemporary English. London: Longman.Google Scholar
. 1985. A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.Google Scholar
Rohdenburg, G. 1986. Phonologisch und morphologisch bedingte Variation in der Verbalsyntax des Nordniederdeutschen. Niederdeutsches Jahrbuch 1091. 86–117.Google Scholar
1989a. Zur Verdrängung des Nominativs durch den Obliquus im Nordniederdeutschen unter besonderer Berücksichtigung prosodischer Faktoren. Kopenhagener Beiträge zur Germanistischen Linguistik 251. 83–143.Google Scholar
1989b. Prosodische Einflüsse in der Morphologie: Zur Variation von Kurz- und Langformen bei Feminina im Nordniedersächsischen. In N. Reiter (ed.), Akten des 23. Linguistischen Kolloquiums, Berlin 1988, 59–71. Tübingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
2004. Grammatische Parallelen zwischen niederdeutschen Mundarten und Nichtstandardvarietäten im Englischen aus typologischer Sicht. Niederdeutsches Jahrbuch 1271. 85–122.Google Scholar
2020. The complexity principle at work with rival prepositions. English Language and Linguistics 241. 769–800. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saltveit, L. 1979. Der prädikative Akkusativ im Niederdeutschen. In W. Kramer, U. Scheuermann & D. Stellmacher (eds.), Gedenkschrift für Heinrich Wesche, 219–225. Neumünster: Wachholz.Google Scholar
Sanders, H. 1915. Der syntaktische Gebrauch des Infinitivs im Frühmittelenglischen. Heidelberg: Winter.Google Scholar
Schlüter, J. 2005. Rhythmic grammar: The influence of rhythm on grammatical variation and change in English. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009. Weak segments and syllable structure in Middle English. In D. Minkova (ed.), Phonological weakness in English: From Old to Present-Day English, 199–236. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2015. Rhythmic influence on grammar: Scope and limitations. In R. Vogel & R. van de Vijver (eds.), Rhythm in cognition and grammar: A Germanic perspective, 179–205. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schlüter, J. & G. Rohdenburg. 2017. Prosodic salience as a determinant of morphological marking. Paper presented at ICAME 38, University of Prague, 24–28 May 2017.
Selkirk, E. O. 1984. Phonology and syntax: The relation between sound and structure. Cambridge, MA/London, UK: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Seppänen, A. 1997. The genitive and the category of case in the history of English. In R. Hickey & S. Puppel (eds.), Language history and linguistic modelling: A festschrift for Jacek Fisiak on his 60th birthday. Volume I: Language history, 193–214. Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Slofstra, B. & E. Hoekstra. 2022. Sprachlehre des Saterfriesischen. Leeuwarden: Fryske Akademy. [URL]
Tamminga, D. A. 1963. Op’e taelhelling: Losse trochsneden fan Frysk taellibben. Bolsward (Boalsert): Osinga.Google Scholar
Trudgill, P. 1978. Introduction: Sociolinguistics and sociolinguistics. In Trudgill, P. (ed.), Sociolinguistic patterns in British English, 1–18. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
Vennemann, Th. 1974. Topics, subjects and word order: From SXV to SVX via TVX. In J. M. Anderson, & Ch. Jones (eds.), Historical linguistics. Volume I1, 339–376. Amsterdam: North Holland.Google Scholar
1976. Categorial grammar and the order of meaningful elements. In A. Juilland (ed.), Linguistic studies offered to Joseph Greenberg on the occasion of his sixtieth birthday, 615–634. Saratoga, CA: Anma Libri.Google Scholar
1977. Konstituenz und Dependenz in einigen neueren Grammatiktheorien. Sprachwissenschaft 21. 259–301.Google Scholar
Versloot, A. Forthcoming. Old English gerund in -enne or -anne: A case of chronology inversion? NOWELE 77(1).
Visser, F. Th. 1973. An historical syntax of the English language. Part three, second half: Syntactical units with two and with more verbs. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar
Wasow, Th. 1997a. End-weight from the speaker’s perspective. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 26(3). 347–361. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1997b. Remarks on grammatical weight. Language Variation and Change 9(1). 81–105. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weber, Th. 2017. Die TUN-Periphrase im Niederdeutschen: Funktionale und formale Aspekte. Tübingen: Stauffenburg.Google Scholar
Wells, J. C. 1990. Syllabification and allophony. In S. Ramsaran (ed.), Studies in the pronunciation of English: A commemorative volume in honour of A. C. Gimson, 76–86. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wolfram, W. 1976. Toward a description of a-prefixing in Appalachian English. American Speech 511. 45–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
1980. A-prefixing in Appalachian English. In W. Labov (ed.), Locating language in time and space, 107–142. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar