Metathesis in the History of English

  • Jerzy Wójcik The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin, Faculty of Humanities
Keywords: history of English; metathesis; phonology

Abstract

The paper provides an analysis of two types of metathesis involving the liquid r in the history of English. The two kinds of metathesis discussed appear to employ two opposing tendencies – to eliminate a TR cluster and replace it with a RT combination, as in brid  bird and to eliminate a RT cluster creating a TR sequence instead, as in byrht bryht. The most important finding of the paper is that, despite the apparent incompatibility of the opposing tendencies visible in the English r metathesis, the change can be viewed as resulting from the weakening of the licensing potential of nuclear positions in the history of English. This aspect of the analysis allows us to place metathesis among other frequently attested English historical developments whose primary motivation lies in the weakening of nuclei.

References

Bethin, Ch. 1998. Slavic prosody. Language change and phonological theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Blevins, J. and A. Garret. 1998. The origins of consonant-vowel metathesis. Language 74.3: 508-556.

Bloomfield, L. 1933. Language. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

Campbell, A. 1959. Old English grammar. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Chomsky, N. and M. Halle. 1968. The sound pattern of English. New York: Harper & Row.

Cyran, E. 2003. Complexity Scales and Licensing Strength in Phonology. Lublin: Wydawnictwo KUL.

Flemming, E. 1996. Laryngeal metathesis and vowel deletion in Cherokee. UCLA Occasional Papers in Linguistics 16: 23-44.

Hock, H. 1985. Regular metathesis. Linguistics 23: 529-546.

Hogg, R. 1977. Old English r-metathesis and generative phonology. Journal of English Linguistics 13: 165-175.

Hogg, R. 1992. A grammar of Old English. I: phonology. Oxford: Blackwell.

Hume, E. 1998. Metathesis in phonological theory: The case of Leti. Lingua 104: 147-186.

Jones, C. 1989. A history of English phonology. London: Longmann.

Jordan, R. 1974. Handbook of Middle English grammar: phonology. The Hague: Mouton.

Lowenstamm, J. (1996). CV as the only syllable type. In J. Durand and B. Laks (eds.) Current trends in phonology: models and methods. Manchester: Europeans Studies Research Institute.

Luick, K. 1914-40. (repr. 1964). Historische Grammatik der englischen Sprache. Stuttgart/Oxford: Bernhard Tauchnitz/ Basil Blackwell.

Milewski , T. 1932. Rozwój fonetyczny wygłosu prasłowiańskiego. Slavia 11: 1-32.

McCarthy, J. 1995. Extensions of faithfullness: Rotuman revisited. Amherst: University of Massachusetts.

Osthoff, H. and K. Brugman. 1878. Vorwort. Morphologische Untersuchungen 1.iii-xx.

Ringe, D. 2006. From Proto-Indo-European to Proto-Germanic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Scheer, T. 2004. A lateral theory of phonology. What is CVCV, and why should it be? Berlin and New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Stieber, Z. 1979. Zarys gramatyki porównawczej języków słowiańskich. Warszawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.

Ultan, R. 1978. A typological view of metathesis. In Greenberg, J. (ed.) Universals of human language, vol. 2, Phonology. 367-402. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Wełna, J. 2002. Metathetic and non-metathetic form selection in Middle English. Studia Anglica Posnaniensia 38: 501-513.

Published
2019-10-18
Section
Articles