WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:04.284 align:middle line:84% [SQUEAKING] [RUSTLING] [CLICKING] 00:00:04.284 --> 00:00:10.310 align:middle line:90% 00:00:10.310 --> 00:00:11.690 align:middle line:90% ARTHUR BAHR: All righty. 00:00:11.690 --> 00:00:18.716 align:middle line:84% So quite a lot of reading for today and all-- 00:00:18.716 --> 00:00:20.600 align:middle line:90% almost all pretty important. 00:00:20.600 --> 00:00:24.770 align:middle line:84% The good news is that, from after today-- 00:00:24.770 --> 00:00:27.170 align:middle line:84% well, I guess it depends on whether-- 00:00:27.170 --> 00:00:30.050 align:middle line:84% I guess it's up for discussion, whether it's good news or not. 00:00:30.050 --> 00:00:32.689 align:middle line:90% But I think it's good news. 00:00:32.689 --> 00:00:37.490 align:middle line:84% We are moving from Baker to Mitchell and Robinson 00:00:37.490 --> 00:00:38.720 align:middle line:90% for your grammar readings. 00:00:38.720 --> 00:00:43.100 align:middle line:84% And most of what you're reading for Wednesday and Monday 00:00:43.100 --> 00:00:47.870 align:middle line:84% is further detail and reinforcement 00:00:47.870 --> 00:00:50.900 align:middle line:90% of what got introduced in Baker. 00:00:50.900 --> 00:00:53.930 align:middle line:84% So Mitchell and Robinson, the chapter 00:00:53.930 --> 00:00:59.060 align:middle line:84% we're reading for our next two class sessions is-- 00:00:59.060 --> 00:01:01.500 align:middle line:90% I think it's just called Syntax. 00:01:01.500 --> 00:01:07.310 align:middle line:84% So you'll get reinforcement of a lot of the things that got 00:01:07.310 --> 00:01:09.860 align:middle line:90% introduced-- hey, Farnas-- 00:01:09.860 --> 00:01:14.750 align:middle line:84% that got introduced somewhat briefly for today. 00:01:14.750 --> 00:01:18.870 align:middle line:84% But we'll go through chapters 9 through 12 in order, 00:01:18.870 --> 00:01:21.800 align:middle line:84% starting with the extremely brief chapter 00:01:21.800 --> 00:01:26.880 align:middle line:84% 9 about numerals, cardinal and ordinal numbers. 00:01:26.880 --> 00:01:29.270 align:middle line:84% You don't have to worry too much about these, 00:01:29.270 --> 00:01:30.870 align:middle line:90% to be perfectly honest. 00:01:30.870 --> 00:01:33.500 align:middle line:84% The most important thing to remember 00:01:33.500 --> 00:01:36.410 align:middle line:84% is that the numbers one, two, and three-- 00:01:36.410 --> 00:01:39.020 align:middle line:84% that is, the cardinal numbers, one, two, and three-- 00:01:39.020 --> 00:01:42.710 align:middle line:90% all get declined in Old English. 00:01:42.710 --> 00:01:46.450 align:middle line:90% So one, ān, this is on page 95-- 00:01:46.450 --> 00:01:47.870 align:middle line:90% 97, rather. 00:01:47.870 --> 00:01:51.650 align:middle line:84% The cardinal ān is usually declined as a strong noun. 00:01:51.650 --> 00:01:57.500 align:middle line:84% When it is declined as weak, āna, it means alone. 00:01:57.500 --> 00:02:00.800 align:middle line:90% So hē āna læġ, "he lay alone." 00:02:00.800 --> 00:02:04.970 align:middle line:84% If it is ambiguous, the form, whether it's strong or weak, 00:02:04.970 --> 00:02:08.810 align:middle line:84% which, of course, it could be, then you 00:02:08.810 --> 00:02:13.680 align:middle line:84% will need to use context to help you decide. 00:02:13.680 --> 00:02:16.200 align:middle line:84% The cardinal numbers two and three 00:02:16.200 --> 00:02:19.230 align:middle line:84% also have their own peculiar inflectional system, 00:02:19.230 --> 00:02:23.370 align:middle line:90% shown below in table 9.1. 00:02:23.370 --> 00:02:27.000 align:middle line:84% The only real thing to note about this table 00:02:27.000 --> 00:02:30.900 align:middle line:84% is that it's laid out somewhat confusingly. 00:02:30.900 --> 00:02:36.720 align:middle line:84% The genitive and dative forms, Baker's listed the forms just 00:02:36.720 --> 00:02:37.620 align:middle line:90% under the neuter. 00:02:37.620 --> 00:02:41.380 align:middle line:84% But those apply to all the genders. 00:02:41.380 --> 00:02:46.980 align:middle line:84% So in other words, it's twēġa or twēġra in the genitive of two, 00:02:46.980 --> 00:02:53.340 align:middle line:84% whether it's masculine, neuter, or feminine. 00:02:53.340 --> 00:03:01.670 align:middle line:84% Of interest but not particular importance is the top of 98, 00:03:01.670 --> 00:03:04.490 align:middle line:84% namely the fact that starting with 70, 00:03:04.490 --> 00:03:10.370 align:middle line:84% Old English prefixes hund-, which actually means 100, 00:03:10.370 --> 00:03:12.420 align:middle line:90% to the numbers-- 00:03:12.420 --> 00:03:21.500 align:middle line:84% so hundseofontiġ, hundeahtiġ, and so on. 00:03:21.500 --> 00:03:24.980 align:middle line:84% These curious forms seem to reflect a number system 00:03:24.980 --> 00:03:27.530 align:middle line:84% common to all the earliest Germanic languages, in which 00:03:27.530 --> 00:03:29.480 align:middle line:90% counting preceded by 12s. 00:03:29.480 --> 00:03:32.930 align:middle line:84% And 60 was a significant number in much the same way 00:03:32.930 --> 00:03:34.490 align:middle line:90% that 100 is now. 00:03:34.490 --> 00:03:39.680 align:middle line:84% That's of cultural interest, but not 00:03:39.680 --> 00:03:41.870 align:middle line:84% something you're going to need to worry about. 00:03:41.870 --> 00:03:47.405 align:middle line:84% The number of times that you see numbers of this sort 00:03:47.405 --> 00:03:49.790 align:middle line:90% is very, very small. 00:03:49.790 --> 00:03:51.290 align:middle line:90% Any questions about numbers-- 00:03:51.290 --> 00:03:55.470 align:middle line:84% or rather, numerals, as they are properly entitled? 00:03:55.470 --> 00:03:58.550 align:middle line:90% 00:03:58.550 --> 00:04:02.150 align:middle line:84% All right, then let's move on to chapter 10-- 00:04:02.150 --> 00:04:05.060 align:middle line:84% Adverbs, Conjunctions, and Prepositions. 00:04:05.060 --> 00:04:08.150 align:middle line:84% The good news, which Baker trumpets 00:04:08.150 --> 00:04:12.830 align:middle line:84% in his opening sentence, is that these are all indeclinable. 00:04:12.830 --> 00:04:14.840 align:middle line:90% And so that is indeed good news. 00:04:14.840 --> 00:04:17.850 align:middle line:84% I don't know that I would agree that, for that reason, 00:04:17.850 --> 00:04:19.730 align:middle line:90% they are relatively easy. 00:04:19.730 --> 00:04:22.880 align:middle line:84% That is one aspect of them that is easy. 00:04:22.880 --> 00:04:25.050 align:middle line:84% But in fact, other aspects are challenging. 00:04:25.050 --> 00:04:26.750 align:middle line:84% So we'll go through those in order. 00:04:26.750 --> 00:04:29.510 align:middle line:84% One of the things that's challenging about adverbs 00:04:29.510 --> 00:04:32.600 align:middle line:84% is, in fact, the way that it makes-- 00:04:32.600 --> 00:04:36.920 align:middle line:84% that the adverbial form is made, namely by adding an -e. 00:04:36.920 --> 00:04:46.310 align:middle line:90% 00:04:46.310 --> 00:04:50.010 align:middle line:84% So to just make the regular, plain old adverb, 00:04:50.010 --> 00:04:51.500 align:middle line:90% you add an -e to the end. 00:04:51.500 --> 00:04:53.060 align:middle line:90% Why is this challenging? 00:04:53.060 --> 00:04:59.090 align:middle line:84% Because it is yet another thing that the -e ending can be. 00:04:59.090 --> 00:05:02.330 align:middle line:84% So you'll often need to use context in order 00:05:02.330 --> 00:05:08.600 align:middle line:84% to distinguish the adverbial -e ending from an -e ending that's 00:05:08.600 --> 00:05:13.520 align:middle line:90% a form of the adjective. 00:05:13.520 --> 00:05:19.070 align:middle line:84% The -or and the -ost endings are for the comparison 00:05:19.070 --> 00:05:24.800 align:middle line:90% of adjectives on page 101. 00:05:24.800 --> 00:05:36.950 align:middle line:84% So [GARBLED]---- sorry, lēoflīcor and lēoflīcost from lēoflīċe is 00:05:36.950 --> 00:05:41.300 align:middle line:84% the example that they give in 12.2.1. 00:05:41.300 --> 00:05:50.100 align:middle line:84% So this is the regular comparative 00:05:50.100 --> 00:05:51.585 align:middle line:90% and the superlative forms. 00:05:51.585 --> 00:05:55.690 align:middle line:90% 00:05:55.690 --> 00:06:05.440 align:middle line:84% 10.2, switching back the page to page 100, so the most common-- 00:06:05.440 --> 00:06:08.020 align:middle line:84% you get a brief paragraph at the top 00:06:08.020 --> 00:06:11.560 align:middle line:84% of the page on another way in which adverbs can be made, 00:06:11.560 --> 00:06:15.220 align:middle line:84% namely by adding case endings to nouns. 00:06:15.220 --> 00:06:16.840 align:middle line:90% This is rare. 00:06:16.840 --> 00:06:21.280 align:middle line:84% And it's mostly in idiomatic expressions, some of which 00:06:21.280 --> 00:06:22.640 align:middle line:90% we've already seen before. 00:06:22.640 --> 00:06:26.200 align:middle line:84% So dæġes and nihtes, the genitive, 00:06:26.200 --> 00:06:31.060 align:middle line:84% that's a relic of the old genitive of time. 00:06:31.060 --> 00:06:35.710 align:middle line:84% unðances, "unwillingly," literally "without thanks." 00:06:35.710 --> 00:06:41.990 align:middle line:84% And then datives, so nēode, literally "by need"- 00:06:41.990 --> 00:06:45.850 align:middle line:84% so that's a case of where you could actually translate it 00:06:45.850 --> 00:06:48.700 align:middle line:90% as the noun that it is. 00:06:48.700 --> 00:06:51.700 align:middle line:84% And it would have adverbial effect. 00:06:51.700 --> 00:06:58.160 align:middle line:84% hwīlum, literally "at times," that one 00:06:58.160 --> 00:06:59.820 align:middle line:90% is actually very common. 00:06:59.820 --> 00:07:04.460 align:middle line:84% So hwīlum often, in fact, I would say usually 00:07:04.460 --> 00:07:08.000 align:middle line:90% is adverbial rather than-- 00:07:08.000 --> 00:07:11.970 align:middle line:84% functions adverbially even though it's actually a noun. 00:07:11.970 --> 00:07:14.840 align:middle line:84% So be on the lookout for that one. 00:07:14.840 --> 00:07:21.590 align:middle line:84% Common adverbs listed with a star in table 10.1-- 00:07:21.590 --> 00:07:24.680 align:middle line:84% I will draw attention, even though it's not starred, 00:07:24.680 --> 00:07:30.050 align:middle line:84% to þæs in the right-hand column, the lone unstarred word 00:07:30.050 --> 00:07:33.440 align:middle line:84% in the midst of a whole list of starred ones. 00:07:33.440 --> 00:07:38.630 align:middle line:84% Afterwards, þæs, that may strike you as strange because þæs, 00:07:38.630 --> 00:07:42.415 align:middle line:90% of course, is what case of se? 00:07:42.415 --> 00:07:43.290 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] 00:07:43.290 --> 00:07:44.207 align:middle line:90% ARTHUR BAHR: Genitive. 00:07:44.207 --> 00:07:48.630 align:middle line:84% Yes, exactly, genitive, singular, masculine, or neuter. 00:07:48.630 --> 00:07:52.500 align:middle line:84% And yet, here, it seems to mean "afterwards." 00:07:52.500 --> 00:07:55.770 align:middle line:84% If you look up þæs-- and I will do it for you. 00:07:55.770 --> 00:07:58.710 align:middle line:84% If you look up þæs in Baker's glossary, 00:07:58.710 --> 00:08:02.730 align:middle line:84% then you will see that it can mean also-- 00:08:02.730 --> 00:08:06.360 align:middle line:84% so it can mean "afterwards," "accordingly," "therefore," 00:08:06.360 --> 00:08:08.280 align:middle line:90% "to that extent." 00:08:08.280 --> 00:08:10.570 align:middle line:84% Þæs is a tricky word in that respect. 00:08:10.570 --> 00:08:12.120 align:middle line:90% I'm not going to give you-- 00:08:12.120 --> 00:08:17.400 align:middle line:84% on an exam, I'm not going to make þæs behave in such a way. 00:08:17.400 --> 00:08:22.285 align:middle line:84% But you should be on the lookout for it in your translations, 00:08:22.285 --> 00:08:22.785 align:middle line:90% all right? 00:08:22.785 --> 00:08:26.940 align:middle line:90% 00:08:26.940 --> 00:08:33.000 align:middle line:84% One thing to be aware of is that the same word-- 00:08:33.000 --> 00:08:36.240 align:middle line:90% and Baker does say this. 00:08:36.240 --> 00:08:40.679 align:middle line:84% The same word can often function either as an adverb 00:08:40.679 --> 00:08:44.049 align:middle line:84% or as a subordinating conjunction, which 00:08:44.049 --> 00:08:47.030 align:middle line:90% we get to in 10.3. 00:08:47.030 --> 00:08:53.030 align:middle line:84% So the difference between these is 00:08:53.030 --> 00:08:58.760 align:middle line:84% that an adverb, like for þām-- so 00:08:58.760 --> 00:09:01.805 align:middle line:84% let's take the let's take for þām as a good example. 00:09:01.805 --> 00:09:11.830 align:middle line:90% 00:09:11.830 --> 00:09:15.390 align:middle line:84% So as an adverb, it means "therefore"-- so literally, 00:09:15.390 --> 00:09:19.560 align:middle line:90% "for this reason." 00:09:19.560 --> 00:09:22.890 align:middle line:84% But it can also be, if you take a look to, 00:09:22.890 --> 00:09:25.690 align:middle line:90% take a quick look at 10.3-- 00:09:25.690 --> 00:09:30.360 align:middle line:84% so we're going to flip back and forth between page 100 and 102, 00:09:30.360 --> 00:09:36.500 align:middle line:90% tables 10.1 and 10.3. 00:09:36.500 --> 00:09:38.610 align:middle line:90% It can also mean "because"-- 00:09:38.610 --> 00:09:46.210 align:middle line:90% 00:09:46.210 --> 00:09:48.820 align:middle line:84% so subordinating conjunction, adverb. 00:09:48.820 --> 00:10:01.410 align:middle line:90% 00:10:01.410 --> 00:10:05.460 align:middle line:84% All right, so the difference is that this adverb stands alone, 00:10:05.460 --> 00:10:08.130 align:middle line:84% therefore, whereas the subordinating conjunction 00:10:08.130 --> 00:10:10.710 align:middle line:84% introduces a subordinate clause that's 00:10:10.710 --> 00:10:15.720 align:middle line:84% going to need to have its own subject 00:10:15.720 --> 00:10:19.560 align:middle line:84% and verb of the subordinating clause. 00:10:19.560 --> 00:10:26.040 align:middle line:84% Often, I would say, in the prose usually, and in the poetry 00:10:26.040 --> 00:10:30.660 align:middle line:84% sometimes, they will give you a hint-- 00:10:30.660 --> 00:10:33.330 align:middle line:84% the author will give you a hint as to which is which 00:10:33.330 --> 00:10:35.040 align:middle line:90% by adding this-- 00:10:35.040 --> 00:10:39.300 align:middle line:84% by adding this indeclinable þe introducing the clause 00:10:39.300 --> 00:10:42.600 align:middle line:84% version, the subordinating conjunction version 00:10:42.600 --> 00:10:45.230 align:middle line:90% of the word or phrase. 00:10:45.230 --> 00:10:50.820 align:middle line:90% 00:10:50.820 --> 00:10:53.230 align:middle line:84% This is something to be on the lookout for. 00:10:53.230 --> 00:10:56.180 align:middle line:84% But it's also something you shouldn't necessarily always 00:10:56.180 --> 00:10:56.680 align:middle line:90% expect. 00:10:56.680 --> 00:10:59.960 align:middle line:90% 00:10:59.960 --> 00:11:03.935 align:middle line:84% We see this, actually a similar-- 00:11:03.935 --> 00:11:08.310 align:middle line:90% 00:11:08.310 --> 00:11:11.580 align:middle line:84% for those French speakers among you, 00:11:11.580 --> 00:11:14.730 align:middle line:84% it's almost exactly the same formulation 00:11:14.730 --> 00:11:18.930 align:middle line:84% that gives us the French expression for "because," 00:11:18.930 --> 00:11:24.390 align:middle line:84% par ce que, "for the reason that" in medieval French. 00:11:24.390 --> 00:11:29.160 align:middle line:84% But of course, now, it's just become combined 00:11:29.160 --> 00:11:31.020 align:middle line:90% into a single expression. 00:11:31.020 --> 00:11:36.560 align:middle line:90% 00:11:36.560 --> 00:11:41.630 align:middle line:84% Reinforcing this point that the same word or words can 00:11:41.630 --> 00:11:48.710 align:middle line:84% serve either adverbial or conjunctive functions, 00:11:48.710 --> 00:11:51.110 align:middle line:84% modern English is much more comfortable 00:11:51.110 --> 00:11:52.470 align:middle line:90% with this ambiguity. 00:11:52.470 --> 00:11:55.160 align:middle line:84% So at the bottom of page 100, Baker 00:11:55.160 --> 00:11:58.760 align:middle line:84% points out that we use, in modern English, 00:11:58.760 --> 00:12:02.420 align:middle line:84% interrogatives, like where and when, 00:12:02.420 --> 00:12:06.560 align:middle line:84% both to ask questions, like "Where do you live?" 00:12:06.560 --> 00:12:11.900 align:middle line:84% and to introduce adverb clauses, like "I know where you live," 00:12:11.900 --> 00:12:16.880 align:middle line:84% or adjective clauses, "on the street where you live." 00:12:16.880 --> 00:12:18.920 align:middle line:84% The same is rarely true for Old English. 00:12:18.920 --> 00:12:22.520 align:middle line:84% So usually, you're going to get some indication. 00:12:22.520 --> 00:12:27.770 align:middle line:84% And usually, it's this þe or sometimes even 00:12:27.770 --> 00:12:32.030 align:middle line:90% the þām that does that. 00:12:32.030 --> 00:12:39.570 align:middle line:84% So for example, if you take a look at æfter on table 10.1, 00:12:39.570 --> 00:12:45.110 align:middle line:84% there, it's an adverb, which we would probably say "afterwards" 00:12:45.110 --> 00:12:46.860 align:middle line:90% in modern English. 00:12:46.860 --> 00:12:51.000 align:middle line:84% So even in modern English, we do sometimes 00:12:51.000 --> 00:12:54.120 align:middle line:84% make a distinction between the adverbial form of a word 00:12:54.120 --> 00:12:57.870 align:middle line:84% and the conjunctive form of a word. 00:12:57.870 --> 00:13:00.510 align:middle line:84% It sounds a little strange to say, 00:13:00.510 --> 00:13:04.080 align:middle line:90% "After, he went to the store." 00:13:04.080 --> 00:13:06.090 align:middle line:84% We would usually say, "Afterwards, he 00:13:06.090 --> 00:13:06.900 align:middle line:90% went to the store." 00:13:06.900 --> 00:13:09.840 align:middle line:84% "After he went to the store" suggests 00:13:09.840 --> 00:13:13.440 align:middle line:84% that the after is serving as a subordinating conjunction 00:13:13.440 --> 00:13:15.660 align:middle line:90% introducing a whole clause. 00:13:15.660 --> 00:13:20.250 align:middle line:84% In Old English, by contrast, æfter by itself 00:13:20.250 --> 00:13:23.880 align:middle line:84% is going to have the adverbial function comparable 00:13:23.880 --> 00:13:25.530 align:middle line:90% to afterwards. 00:13:25.530 --> 00:13:29.010 align:middle line:84% And if you take a look at 10.2, you 00:13:29.010 --> 00:13:33.630 align:middle line:84% see æfter þām þe, ǣr þām þe, for þām þe. 00:13:33.630 --> 00:13:39.296 align:middle line:90% 00:13:39.296 --> 00:13:44.830 align:middle line:84% Those indicate the subordinating conjunctions "after," "before," 00:13:44.830 --> 00:13:47.170 align:middle line:90% and "because." 00:13:47.170 --> 00:13:50.290 align:middle line:84% But as you can see, it's not uniform 00:13:50.290 --> 00:13:55.480 align:middle line:84% because with ǣr, for example, it can either have the þām þe 00:13:55.480 --> 00:13:57.850 align:middle line:84% or not have the þām þe, depending. 00:13:57.850 --> 00:14:00.020 align:middle line:84% So just be on the lookout for that. 00:14:00.020 --> 00:14:06.460 align:middle line:84% And especially if you see a þām or a þām þe, 00:14:06.460 --> 00:14:10.150 align:middle line:90% look for a clause along with it. 00:14:10.150 --> 00:14:12.990 align:middle line:90% 00:14:12.990 --> 00:14:16.050 align:middle line:84% These starred ones, you don't have to memorize-- well, 00:14:16.050 --> 00:14:17.520 align:middle line:84% many of these are Word Hoard words. 00:14:17.520 --> 00:14:19.990 align:middle line:84% So in that sense, you do have to memorize them. 00:14:19.990 --> 00:14:21.840 align:middle line:90% You don't have to memorize them. 00:14:21.840 --> 00:14:25.170 align:middle line:84% They're not like the preterite present verbs 00:14:25.170 --> 00:14:27.480 align:middle line:84% that I said that you have to memorize. 00:14:27.480 --> 00:14:29.910 align:middle line:84% So these will only show up on the exam 00:14:29.910 --> 00:14:34.425 align:middle line:84% if they've been Word Hoard words to that point in the class. 00:14:34.425 --> 00:14:37.490 align:middle line:90% 00:14:37.490 --> 00:14:43.400 align:middle line:84% Top of page 102, the little box with the exclamation point 00:14:43.400 --> 00:14:46.460 align:middle line:84% says explicitly what I've just been going on about. 00:14:46.460 --> 00:14:49.070 align:middle line:84% The ambiguity of some of these conjunctions 00:14:49.070 --> 00:14:51.530 align:middle line:84% with matching adverbs may optionally 00:14:51.530 --> 00:14:55.910 align:middle line:84% be resolved by adding the particle þe, which marks 00:14:55.910 --> 00:14:59.630 align:middle line:90% the word as a conjunction. 00:14:59.630 --> 00:15:11.600 align:middle line:84% Sometimes, they get doubled to indicate conjunctiveness. 00:15:11.600 --> 00:15:15.650 align:middle line:90% So swā can mean "so" or "as." 00:15:15.650 --> 00:15:22.010 align:middle line:84% But swā swā always means "as," in the sense of-- 00:15:22.010 --> 00:15:23.990 align:middle line:84% in a conjunctive sense-- that is to say, 00:15:23.990 --> 00:15:28.130 align:middle line:84% as introducing an entire dependent clause, 00:15:28.130 --> 00:15:36.850 align:middle line:84% like "as the sun set" versus "as a horse" or whatever, 00:15:36.850 --> 00:15:39.940 align:middle line:84% introducing a clause versus introducing a simile, 00:15:39.940 --> 00:15:41.650 align:middle line:90% all right? 00:15:41.650 --> 00:15:44.170 align:middle line:84% Take a look at the correlative conjunctions down 00:15:44.170 --> 00:15:46.240 align:middle line:90% at the bottom. 00:15:46.240 --> 00:15:48.700 align:middle line:84% Sorry, rather at the middle, middle-ish of page 00:15:48.700 --> 00:15:52.300 align:middle line:90% 102, the end of 10.3. 00:15:52.300 --> 00:15:56.080 align:middle line:84% Correlative conjunctions, like modern English both ... 00:15:56.080 --> 00:15:58.370 align:middle line:90% and, are as follows. 00:15:58.370 --> 00:16:00.820 align:middle line:90% We had ǣġðer ... ġe. 00:16:00.820 --> 00:16:04.390 align:middle line:84% And in fact, I think it was ǣġðer ġe ... 00:16:04.390 --> 00:16:09.490 align:middle line:84% ġe that meant "both ... and" in the passage that Mike 00:16:09.490 --> 00:16:12.190 align:middle line:90% translated a while back. 00:16:12.190 --> 00:16:13.780 align:middle line:90% hwæðer ... 00:16:13.780 --> 00:16:19.600 align:middle line:84% oððe, meaning "whether ... or," "not only ... but also," 00:16:19.600 --> 00:16:20.290 align:middle line:90% "neither ... 00:16:20.290 --> 00:16:23.200 align:middle line:90% nor." 00:16:23.200 --> 00:16:30.700 align:middle line:84% And then þȳ and þȳ, that's an expression, 00:16:30.700 --> 00:16:36.010 align:middle line:84% an adverbial use of the instrumental that is actually 00:16:36.010 --> 00:16:39.760 align:middle line:84% one of the main uses of the increasingly obsolete 00:16:39.760 --> 00:16:43.330 align:middle line:84% instrumental in Old English, to have a þȳ ... 00:16:43.330 --> 00:16:46.240 align:middle line:84% þȳ to mean "the [blank], the [blank]," 00:16:46.240 --> 00:16:51.760 align:middle line:84% as in "The more the merrier" or "The less the better," 00:16:51.760 --> 00:16:54.010 align:middle line:84% something like that, if you're talking about something 00:16:54.010 --> 00:16:54.635 align:middle line:90% you don't like. 00:16:54.635 --> 00:16:57.100 align:middle line:90% 00:16:57.100 --> 00:17:03.570 align:middle line:84% Any questions about these adverbs and conjunctions? 00:17:03.570 --> 00:17:11.910 align:middle line:90% 00:17:11.910 --> 00:17:15.599 align:middle line:84% All right, so correlation, we got a brief introduction to it 00:17:15.599 --> 00:17:18.089 align:middle line:84% with just that list of correlative conjunctions 00:17:18.089 --> 00:17:20.700 align:middle line:90% above 10.4. 00:17:20.700 --> 00:17:23.010 align:middle line:84% Correlation is a construction in which 00:17:23.010 --> 00:17:25.619 align:middle line:84% an adverb at the beginning of an independent clause 00:17:25.619 --> 00:17:30.060 align:middle line:84% recapitulates or anticipates an adverb clause. 00:17:30.060 --> 00:17:32.850 align:middle line:84% This happens a lot in Old English. 00:17:32.850 --> 00:17:35.100 align:middle line:84% It happens a little bit in modern English. 00:17:35.100 --> 00:17:37.150 align:middle line:84% And Baker gives you some examples. 00:17:37.150 --> 00:17:38.970 align:middle line:84% But the examples in modern English 00:17:38.970 --> 00:17:43.980 align:middle line:84% are often either totally optional-- so 00:17:43.980 --> 00:17:48.180 align:middle line:84% for example, the example, "If you were in Philadelphia, 00:17:48.180 --> 00:17:51.180 align:middle line:84% then you must have seen Independence Hall." 00:17:51.180 --> 00:17:53.770 align:middle line:90% That then is totally optional. 00:17:53.770 --> 00:17:56.430 align:middle line:84% We could just as easily and probably would more naturally 00:17:56.430 --> 00:17:58.470 align:middle line:84% say, "If you were in Philadelphia, 00:17:58.470 --> 00:18:02.550 align:middle line:84% you must have seen Independence Hall." 00:18:02.550 --> 00:18:05.910 align:middle line:84% In modern English, neither element 00:18:05.910 --> 00:18:09.060 align:middle line:84% of the coordinate of the coordination-- or sorry, 00:18:09.060 --> 00:18:12.780 align:middle line:84% rather of the correlation, neither element is optional. 00:18:12.780 --> 00:18:14.550 align:middle line:84% So you basically are just going to get 00:18:14.550 --> 00:18:24.550 align:middle line:84% used to seeing both of these, rather than just one. 00:18:24.550 --> 00:18:27.840 align:middle line:84% Sometimes, this causes difficulty 00:18:27.840 --> 00:18:30.850 align:middle line:84% when the conjunction and the adverb have the same form. 00:18:30.850 --> 00:18:34.740 align:middle line:84% So for example, take a look at page 104, top of the page. 00:18:34.740 --> 00:18:37.020 align:middle line:90% These are very common. 00:18:37.020 --> 00:18:39.870 align:middle line:84% And this explains, by the way, way back 00:18:39.870 --> 00:18:44.010 align:middle line:84% when in week 1 of this class, when you were memorizing 00:18:44.010 --> 00:18:48.720 align:middle line:84% meanings of þǣr and þā and so on, 00:18:48.720 --> 00:18:54.060 align:middle line:84% this explains how the same word can mean "when" and "then." 00:18:54.060 --> 00:18:59.670 align:middle line:84% Specifically, þā means "when" in the initial-- 00:18:59.670 --> 00:19:03.840 align:middle line:84% that is to say subordinative, subordinated part 00:19:03.840 --> 00:19:06.720 align:middle line:84% of the clause, and "then" in the main clause. 00:19:06.720 --> 00:19:10.290 align:middle line:84% So "When you go outside, then you 00:19:10.290 --> 00:19:13.980 align:middle line:84% will see the sun," (today at least). 00:19:13.980 --> 00:19:17.650 align:middle line:84% And similarly, þone ... þone, þǣr ... þǣr. 00:19:17.650 --> 00:19:18.150 align:middle line:90% Yeah? 00:19:18.150 --> 00:19:20.730 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: Are there any obvious differences semantically 00:19:20.730 --> 00:19:24.690 align:middle line:84% or syntactically between the use of þā and þone]? 00:19:24.690 --> 00:19:28.890 align:middle line:84% ARTHUR BAHR: I would say þā is just much more common, yeah. 00:19:28.890 --> 00:19:32.340 align:middle line:84% So the more ambiguous word is the more common word, 00:19:32.340 --> 00:19:34.410 align:middle line:90% unfortunately. 00:19:34.410 --> 00:19:36.780 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] over clarity. 00:19:36.780 --> 00:19:39.300 align:middle line:84% ARTHUR BAHR: Yeah, exactly, concision over clarity. 00:19:39.300 --> 00:19:41.745 align:middle line:84% Are there other semantic differences? 00:19:41.745 --> 00:19:44.210 align:middle line:90% þone ... þone. 00:19:44.210 --> 00:19:46.010 align:middle line:90% No, not that I can think of. 00:19:46.010 --> 00:19:46.785 align:middle line:90% Good question. 00:19:46.785 --> 00:19:47.285 align:middle line:90% Others? 00:19:47.285 --> 00:19:52.020 align:middle line:90% 00:19:52.020 --> 00:19:55.710 align:middle line:84% 10.5 on prepositions, the two things 00:19:55.710 --> 00:19:57.150 align:middle line:90% I want to reinforce here-- 00:19:57.150 --> 00:20:01.170 align:middle line:84% one we previewed very slightly last time, namely 00:20:01.170 --> 00:20:03.930 align:middle line:84% the distinction between the dative 00:20:03.930 --> 00:20:07.500 align:middle line:84% and the accusative case with prepositions 00:20:07.500 --> 00:20:09.120 align:middle line:90% that can take either. 00:20:09.120 --> 00:20:14.430 align:middle line:84% Typically-- and this is in the very last part of the chapter 00:20:14.430 --> 00:20:15.750 align:middle line:90% on page 105-- 00:20:15.750 --> 00:20:18.210 align:middle line:84% typically, the dative is associated 00:20:18.210 --> 00:20:22.950 align:middle line:84% with location or stability while the accusative is associated 00:20:22.950 --> 00:20:24.720 align:middle line:90% with movement towards. 00:20:24.720 --> 00:20:27.660 align:middle line:90% This isn't a 100% rule. 00:20:27.660 --> 00:20:30.750 align:middle line:90% But I would say it's 90% to 95%. 00:20:30.750 --> 00:20:33.090 align:middle line:84% The other thing that I want to emphasize about 00:20:33.090 --> 00:20:36.060 align:middle line:84% prepositions we've also seen a number of times. 00:20:36.060 --> 00:20:41.430 align:middle line:84% And that is how many things individual prepositions 00:20:41.430 --> 00:20:44.790 align:middle line:84% can mean, which is to say, many more things 00:20:44.790 --> 00:20:48.690 align:middle line:84% than the cognate preposition in modern English. 00:20:48.690 --> 00:20:56.100 align:middle line:84% So for example, tō can mean "to," "towards," 00:20:56.100 --> 00:21:04.560 align:middle line:84% "at," "for," "before," "in front," "because of," "in place 00:21:04.560 --> 00:21:12.530 align:middle line:84% of," "for the sake of," "mid," "with," "as well as," 00:21:12.530 --> 00:21:15.350 align:middle line:90% "by means of." 00:21:15.350 --> 00:21:17.510 align:middle line:84% The other thing I would draw attention to 00:21:17.510 --> 00:21:20.570 align:middle line:84% is the difference between mid, which 00:21:20.570 --> 00:21:23.090 align:middle line:84% is the typical Old English word for "with," 00:21:23.090 --> 00:21:26.630 align:middle line:84% cognate with German mit, and wið, which 00:21:26.630 --> 00:21:29.870 align:middle line:84% is where we get our preposition with, 00:21:29.870 --> 00:21:34.490 align:middle line:84% but more often in Old English means "against" 00:21:34.490 --> 00:21:39.410 align:middle line:84% or "opposite," sometimes "towards," sometimes 00:21:39.410 --> 00:21:41.370 align:middle line:90% "in exchange for." 00:21:41.370 --> 00:21:46.730 align:middle line:84% So think withstand, withhold, the oppositional sense 00:21:46.730 --> 00:21:50.900 align:middle line:84% of the prefix in those verbs, as opposed to "with you." 00:21:50.900 --> 00:21:53.530 align:middle line:90% 00:21:53.530 --> 00:21:57.390 align:middle line:84% Any questions about prepositions or indeed anything 00:21:57.390 --> 00:21:58.830 align:middle line:90% in chapter 10 so far? 00:21:58.830 --> 00:22:06.100 align:middle line:90% 00:22:06.100 --> 00:22:08.260 align:middle line:90% All right, concord. 00:22:08.260 --> 00:22:12.250 align:middle line:84% So concord, all this really means, chapter 11, 00:22:12.250 --> 00:22:17.470 align:middle line:84% is the agreement in gender, case, and number 00:22:17.470 --> 00:22:21.040 align:middle line:84% between different words that share a reference. 00:22:21.040 --> 00:22:24.700 align:middle line:84% So this basically just means that parts 00:22:24.700 --> 00:22:27.670 align:middle line:84% of the sentence that are grammatically related 00:22:27.670 --> 00:22:31.310 align:middle line:90% have to have the same case. 00:22:31.310 --> 00:22:35.770 align:middle line:84% So the preposition-- sorry, not the preposition, the adjective, 00:22:35.770 --> 00:22:39.280 align:middle line:84% the demonstrative pronoun that go with a given noun 00:22:39.280 --> 00:22:42.940 align:middle line:84% are going to match that noun in gender, case, and number 00:22:42.940 --> 00:22:45.880 align:middle line:84% with the very rare exceptions that we've 00:22:45.880 --> 00:22:53.710 align:middle line:84% discussed, like second person genitives or second person 00:22:53.710 --> 00:22:55.210 align:middle line:90% possessive adjectives. 00:22:55.210 --> 00:22:59.470 align:middle line:84% So "your ring," we talked a little bit about that. 00:22:59.470 --> 00:23:05.880 align:middle line:90% That goes back to chapter 5. 00:23:05.880 --> 00:23:10.810 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: The first and second person [INAUDIBLE].. 00:23:10.810 --> 00:23:12.323 align:middle line:84% ARTHUR BAHR: Yeah, exactly, sorry. 00:23:12.323 --> 00:23:13.990 align:middle line:84% It's the third person that's the-- yeah, 00:23:13.990 --> 00:23:18.280 align:middle line:84% so that exception is covered on the bottom of on page 43, 00:23:18.280 --> 00:23:19.960 align:middle line:90% 5.1.2. 00:23:19.960 --> 00:23:25.550 align:middle line:84% But other than that, that is one of the very few exceptions. 00:23:25.550 --> 00:23:28.780 align:middle line:84% The reason that this is helpful is because-- 00:23:28.780 --> 00:23:31.660 align:middle line:84% especially in the poetry, is that Old English word 00:23:31.660 --> 00:23:34.270 align:middle line:84% order is much more flexible than modern English. 00:23:34.270 --> 00:23:36.410 align:middle line:90% We've seen this before. 00:23:36.410 --> 00:23:41.440 align:middle line:84% So bottom of page 107, Baker gives you 00:23:41.440 --> 00:23:44.470 align:middle line:84% a passage, a short passage from Beowulf, 00:23:44.470 --> 00:23:47.980 align:middle line:90% about the coming of Grendel-- 00:23:47.980 --> 00:23:51.290 align:middle line:84% þæt wæs yldum cūþ þæt hie ne mōste, 00:23:51.290 --> 00:23:53.560 align:middle line:84% þā metod nolde se synscaþa under sceadu bregdan. 00:23:53.560 --> 00:23:57.280 align:middle line:90% 00:23:57.280 --> 00:24:02.020 align:middle line:84% So hie ne mōste, that hie looks initially 00:24:02.020 --> 00:24:06.310 align:middle line:84% like it's the subject of the dependent clause. 00:24:06.310 --> 00:24:07.900 align:middle line:90% It could be. 00:24:07.900 --> 00:24:12.200 align:middle line:84% And yet, we're going to find out that-- so two things should 00:24:12.200 --> 00:24:12.980 align:middle line:90% give us pause. 00:24:12.980 --> 00:24:17.810 align:middle line:84% One is the -e ending of the verb, which has to be singular. 00:24:17.810 --> 00:24:20.600 align:middle line:84% The other thing that's even more unambiguous 00:24:20.600 --> 00:24:25.130 align:middle line:84% is the se in the next line, se synscaþa. 00:24:25.130 --> 00:24:28.610 align:middle line:84% We know that that has to be the subject. 00:24:28.610 --> 00:24:33.780 align:middle line:84% So very often in translating-- in fact, 00:24:33.780 --> 00:24:35.270 align:middle line:90% I think almost always-- 00:24:35.270 --> 00:24:37.310 align:middle line:84% you should be thinking about translating 00:24:37.310 --> 00:24:40.790 align:middle line:84% clause for clause or sentence for sentence 00:24:40.790 --> 00:24:45.470 align:middle line:84% rather than word by word because the words themselves 00:24:45.470 --> 00:24:48.320 align:middle line:84% are going to have a more flexible order than they 00:24:48.320 --> 00:24:51.830 align:middle line:90% do in modern English. 00:24:51.830 --> 00:24:58.130 align:middle line:84% Turning the page to 108, sometimes, 00:24:58.130 --> 00:25:00.740 align:middle line:84% in situations where modern English uses 00:25:00.740 --> 00:25:02.180 align:middle line:90% a pronoun subject-- 00:25:02.180 --> 00:25:04.970 align:middle line:90% so like "he," "they," "she"-- 00:25:04.970 --> 00:25:09.410 align:middle line:84% the Old English finite verb can sometimes express the subject 00:25:09.410 --> 00:25:11.010 align:middle line:90% all by itself. 00:25:11.010 --> 00:25:17.090 align:middle line:84% And then there are three examples there 00:25:17.090 --> 00:25:22.610 align:middle line:84% of that very phenomenon, namely having an unexpressed subject 00:25:22.610 --> 00:25:26.720 align:middle line:84% that's contained within or rather implied within the verb 00:25:26.720 --> 00:25:27.890 align:middle line:90% itself. 00:25:27.890 --> 00:25:34.880 align:middle line:84% This rarely happens, I would say quite rarely happens in prose. 00:25:34.880 --> 00:25:37.580 align:middle line:84% And I will not give you a version 00:25:37.580 --> 00:25:41.030 align:middle line:90% of this on any of the exams. 00:25:41.030 --> 00:25:44.330 align:middle line:84% But especially as we move into the poetry 00:25:44.330 --> 00:25:46.790 align:middle line:84% for our own translations in class, 00:25:46.790 --> 00:25:50.350 align:middle line:84% you'll want to keep an eye out for this possibility. 00:25:50.350 --> 00:25:53.880 align:middle line:90% 00:25:53.880 --> 00:25:55.230 align:middle line:90% Bottom of the page-- 00:25:55.230 --> 00:25:59.340 align:middle line:84% or rather, bottom half of page 108, compound subjects 00:25:59.340 --> 00:26:04.110 align:middle line:84% may be split in Old English, one part divided from the others 00:26:04.110 --> 00:26:07.480 align:middle line:84% by the verb or some other sentence fragment. 00:26:07.480 --> 00:26:12.270 align:middle line:84% So we basically, I think, never do this in modern English. 00:26:12.270 --> 00:26:19.750 align:middle line:84% So a compound subject is like "He and his friends 00:26:19.750 --> 00:26:22.150 align:middle line:90% went to the movies." 00:26:22.150 --> 00:26:27.190 align:middle line:84% We would never say "He went to the movies and his friends," 00:26:27.190 --> 00:26:30.730 align:middle line:84% because without the benefit of case endings, that 00:26:30.730 --> 00:26:33.940 align:middle line:84% makes it sound like we have not a compound subject, but rather 00:26:33.940 --> 00:26:35.560 align:middle line:90% a compound object. 00:26:35.560 --> 00:26:40.480 align:middle line:84% He went, somehow in some sense, to the movies 00:26:40.480 --> 00:26:43.780 align:middle line:90% and also went to his friends. 00:26:43.780 --> 00:26:48.490 align:middle line:84% In Old English, because of the presence of case endings, 00:26:48.490 --> 00:26:52.060 align:middle line:84% however ambiguous they sometimes are, 00:26:52.060 --> 00:26:57.700 align:middle line:84% Old English is prepared to split up a compound subject. 00:26:57.700 --> 00:27:05.810 align:middle line:84% Sometimes, quite dramatically, when it does so-- 00:27:05.810 --> 00:27:08.030 align:middle line:90% and this is worth highlighting. 00:27:08.030 --> 00:27:13.520 align:middle line:84% When this happens-- so the paragraph beginning, 00:27:13.520 --> 00:27:17.120 align:middle line:84% "Compound subjects may be split in Old English," next sentence, 00:27:17.120 --> 00:27:20.030 align:middle line:84% "When this happens, the verb will typically 00:27:20.030 --> 00:27:22.770 align:middle line:84% agree with the first part of the subject." 00:27:22.770 --> 00:27:27.640 align:middle line:84% So in the case that I gave you of "He"-- 00:27:27.640 --> 00:27:36.316 align:middle line:90% 00:27:36.316 --> 00:27:42.330 align:middle line:84% if we separated this such that it were-- 00:27:42.330 --> 00:27:56.510 align:middle line:84% let's see, "He, to the movies, went and his friends," 00:27:56.510 --> 00:28:00.260 align:middle line:90% what would this verb-- 00:28:00.260 --> 00:28:03.350 align:middle line:84% what form would this verb take, singular or plural? 00:28:03.350 --> 00:28:04.330 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] 00:28:04.330 --> 00:28:05.710 align:middle line:90% ARTHUR BAHR: Singular, exactly. 00:28:05.710 --> 00:28:07.600 align:middle line:84% What would the verb be, by the way? 00:28:07.600 --> 00:28:09.700 align:middle line:84% What is the third singular of "went"? 00:28:09.700 --> 00:28:12.620 align:middle line:90% Anyone got it ready to hand? 00:28:12.620 --> 00:28:14.620 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] 00:28:14.620 --> 00:28:17.230 align:middle line:84% ARTHUR BAHR: ēode, very good, excellent. 00:28:17.230 --> 00:28:20.860 align:middle line:84% If, by contrast, we simply reversed them-- 00:28:20.860 --> 00:28:25.680 align:middle line:84% His friends to the movies went and he"-- 00:28:25.680 --> 00:28:27.730 align:middle line:90% then it would be ēodon. 00:28:27.730 --> 00:28:28.230 align:middle line:90% Right? 00:28:28.230 --> 00:28:30.141 align:middle line:90% Good. 00:28:30.141 --> 00:28:31.710 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: It sounds so cursed. 00:28:31.710 --> 00:28:33.000 align:middle line:90% ARTHUR BAHR: It sounds what? 00:28:33.000 --> 00:28:35.160 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: Because we still have case endings 00:28:35.160 --> 00:28:38.940 align:middle line:84% for our pronouns in English, the reverse of this 00:28:38.940 --> 00:28:40.860 align:middle line:90% sounds so much more cursed. 00:28:40.860 --> 00:28:42.630 align:middle line:84% To attempt to say in modern English, 00:28:42.630 --> 00:28:46.170 align:middle line:84% his friends went to the movies and he is just-- 00:28:46.170 --> 00:28:48.995 align:middle line:84% ARTHUR BAHR: Oh, "cursed," you mean in the sense of awkward? 00:28:48.995 --> 00:28:49.620 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: Yeah. 00:28:49.620 --> 00:28:50.453 align:middle line:90% ARTHUR BAHR: Oh, OK. 00:28:50.453 --> 00:28:53.820 align:middle line:84% I thought you meant it literally sounded like a curse. 00:28:53.820 --> 00:28:56.340 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: No, in the casual slang sense. 00:28:56.340 --> 00:28:58.830 align:middle line:84% ARTHUR BAHR: Oh, I'm so glad to learn the casual slang 00:28:58.830 --> 00:28:59.790 align:middle line:90% sense of "cursed." 00:28:59.790 --> 00:29:03.570 align:middle line:84% This is how I learn things, how the youth speak 00:29:03.570 --> 00:29:05.790 align:middle line:90% in today's vernacular. 00:29:05.790 --> 00:29:08.370 align:middle line:90% No, that is interesting. 00:29:08.370 --> 00:29:10.410 align:middle line:90% And you're right, cursed. 00:29:10.410 --> 00:29:14.160 align:middle line:90% All right, good, excellent. 00:29:14.160 --> 00:29:18.030 align:middle line:84% Impersonal verbs-- we've talked a little bit about this 00:29:18.030 --> 00:29:23.610 align:middle line:84% in the context of þenċan, so þenċan 00:29:23.610 --> 00:29:25.740 align:middle line:90% taking an impersonal subject. 00:29:25.740 --> 00:29:28.710 align:middle line:90% So where was that? 00:29:28.710 --> 00:29:32.430 align:middle line:84% It was in, oh, be þām þe hire þūhte, 00:29:32.430 --> 00:29:35.430 align:middle line:84% "according to what it seemed to her," 00:29:35.430 --> 00:29:41.820 align:middle line:84% namely Eve, that fruit of the tree seemed good to eat. 00:29:41.820 --> 00:29:45.060 align:middle line:84% The only thing really to know about this 00:29:45.060 --> 00:29:49.140 align:middle line:84% is that Old English has significantly more impersonal 00:29:49.140 --> 00:29:52.290 align:middle line:90% verbs than modern English. 00:29:52.290 --> 00:29:56.760 align:middle line:84% In fact, many languages have more impersonal verbs 00:29:56.760 --> 00:30:00.240 align:middle line:90% than modern English. 00:30:00.240 --> 00:30:08.650 align:middle line:84% "To dream," "to be hungry," these are some examples-- 00:30:08.650 --> 00:30:12.160 align:middle line:84% "to long for," at the top of page 110. 00:30:12.160 --> 00:30:18.460 align:middle line:84% Bottom line here is just feel free to translate colloquially 00:30:18.460 --> 00:30:23.110 align:middle line:84% into how we would actually express it in modern English 00:30:23.110 --> 00:30:24.550 align:middle line:90% and not be-- 00:30:24.550 --> 00:30:31.600 align:middle line:84% don't be too tethered to a literal translation 00:30:31.600 --> 00:30:33.760 align:middle line:90% of the grammar. 00:30:33.760 --> 00:30:39.750 align:middle line:84% Pronouns and antecedents-- we've already 00:30:39.750 --> 00:30:41.430 align:middle line:84% seen a good example of where you have 00:30:41.430 --> 00:30:45.090 align:middle line:84% to translate a masculine or feminine pronoun as the neuter, 00:30:45.090 --> 00:30:48.150 align:middle line:84% simply because of how modern English uses 00:30:48.150 --> 00:30:51.190 align:middle line:84% grammatical gender, which is to say barely at all. 00:30:51.190 --> 00:30:57.090 align:middle line:84% So remember, in The Miracle of Saint Benedict, se, se stān, 00:30:57.090 --> 00:30:59.610 align:middle line:84% we did a lot of talking about "the stone," that 00:30:59.610 --> 00:31:02.490 align:middle line:90% is, the masculine stone. 00:31:02.490 --> 00:31:08.880 align:middle line:84% So when we subsequently refer to the stone using a pronoun, 00:31:08.880 --> 00:31:12.120 align:middle line:84% we had to use hē, because the stone 00:31:12.120 --> 00:31:14.700 align:middle line:84% itself is masculine grammatically. 00:31:14.700 --> 00:31:17.070 align:middle line:84% But you would go ahead and translate it as it 00:31:17.070 --> 00:31:19.020 align:middle line:84% because we would never talk about a stone 00:31:19.020 --> 00:31:20.543 align:middle line:84% as-- well, I shouldn't say never. 00:31:20.543 --> 00:31:21.960 align:middle line:84% People talk about a lot of things. 00:31:21.960 --> 00:31:24.600 align:middle line:84% We would most typically not talk about a stone 00:31:24.600 --> 00:31:25.950 align:middle line:90% as being masculine. 00:31:25.950 --> 00:31:29.680 align:middle line:90% 00:31:29.680 --> 00:31:34.540 align:middle line:90% And then nouns and modifiers-- 00:31:34.540 --> 00:31:37.300 align:middle line:84% a noun and all its modifiers must agree in 00:31:37.300 --> 00:31:39.920 align:middle line:90% gender, case, and number. 00:31:39.920 --> 00:31:42.700 align:middle line:90% This sounds straightforward. 00:31:42.700 --> 00:31:44.800 align:middle line:84% And indeed, it is straightforward. 00:31:44.800 --> 00:31:47.440 align:middle line:84% But the reason that it's important to remember 00:31:47.440 --> 00:31:50.710 align:middle line:84% is that if you turn the page to the top of 112, 00:31:50.710 --> 00:31:54.400 align:middle line:84% the adjective is frequently separated from its noun, 00:31:54.400 --> 00:32:00.040 align:middle line:84% even in prose, and especially in poetry. 00:32:00.040 --> 00:32:02.890 align:middle line:84% When this happens, the rules of concord 00:32:02.890 --> 00:32:06.430 align:middle line:84% will help you match up the adjective with its noun. 00:32:06.430 --> 00:32:10.570 align:middle line:84% And there's an example here from the Old English poem, "Judith." 00:32:10.570 --> 00:32:16.180 align:middle line:84% It's talking about "the wavy-haired one." 00:32:16.180 --> 00:32:20.920 align:middle line:84% This is when she's about to chop off Holofernes' head. 00:32:20.920 --> 00:32:24.910 align:middle line:84% And well, she cuts his head halfway off. 00:32:24.910 --> 00:32:28.150 align:middle line:84% "Then the wavy-haired one struck the hostile-minded enemy 00:32:28.150 --> 00:32:30.500 align:middle line:84% with a decorated sword so that she 00:32:30.500 --> 00:32:33.150 align:middle line:90% cut through half of his neck." 00:32:33.150 --> 00:32:37.490 align:middle line:84% And if you take a look up to the Old English, Slōh ðā wundenlocc 00:32:37.490 --> 00:32:42.110 align:middle line:84% þone fēondsceaðan fāgum meċe, There's 00:32:42.110 --> 00:32:47.360 align:middle line:84% a good example of a dative of instrumentality. 00:32:47.360 --> 00:32:51.170 align:middle line:84% And it's also a good example, fāgum meċe. 00:32:51.170 --> 00:32:55.880 align:middle line:84% Why is fāgum-- why doesn't fāgum look like meċe, even 00:32:55.880 --> 00:32:57.974 align:middle line:90% though they go together? 00:32:57.974 --> 00:33:00.660 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] 00:33:00.660 --> 00:33:03.600 align:middle line:84% ARTHUR BAHR: Excellent. fāgum is a dative singular 00:33:03.600 --> 00:33:06.030 align:middle line:90% masculine strong adjective. 00:33:06.030 --> 00:33:09.730 align:middle line:90% 00:33:09.730 --> 00:33:11.520 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: Is that the decorated sword? 00:33:11.520 --> 00:33:14.220 align:middle line:84% ARTHUR BAHR: Yes, that's the decorated sword, exactly. 00:33:14.220 --> 00:33:15.960 align:middle line:90% And then heteþoncolne-- 00:33:15.960 --> 00:33:20.370 align:middle line:90% 00:33:20.370 --> 00:33:26.670 align:middle line:84% There, the -þoncolne and the healfne go together and thus 00:33:26.670 --> 00:33:30.060 align:middle line:84% have the same ending, despite being separated 00:33:30.060 --> 00:33:33.710 align:middle line:90% in the sentence. 00:33:33.710 --> 00:33:34.265 align:middle line:90% All right. 00:33:34.265 --> 00:33:37.230 align:middle line:90% 00:33:37.230 --> 00:33:39.630 align:middle line:84% When participles are inflected-- so 00:33:39.630 --> 00:33:42.000 align:middle line:84% take a look at the very bottom of that, 00:33:42.000 --> 00:33:45.930 align:middle line:84% just above 11.5, that last paragraph. 00:33:45.930 --> 00:33:48.450 align:middle line:84% Past and present participles are often 00:33:48.450 --> 00:33:51.420 align:middle line:84% inflected as adjectives even when they 00:33:51.420 --> 00:33:55.500 align:middle line:90% form periphrastic verb forms. 00:33:55.500 --> 00:33:58.710 align:middle line:84% So in other words, basically, all this means 00:33:58.710 --> 00:34:01.830 align:middle line:90% is that participles-- 00:34:01.830 --> 00:34:03.990 align:middle line:84% well, participles often get declined 00:34:03.990 --> 00:34:05.940 align:middle line:84% in Old English in a way that they do not 00:34:05.940 --> 00:34:08.940 align:middle line:90% get declined in modern English. 00:34:08.940 --> 00:34:11.850 align:middle line:84% One thing to note, when they are inflected, 00:34:11.850 --> 00:34:15.780 align:middle line:84% the ending -e is added to the nominative and accusative 00:34:15.780 --> 00:34:20.949 align:middle line:84% plural of all genders and may occasionally be omitted. 00:34:20.949 --> 00:34:27.239 align:middle line:84% So just keep a slightly flexible eye out for participial forms. 00:34:27.239 --> 00:34:30.059 align:middle line:84% But again, not something I'm going to test you on, 00:34:30.059 --> 00:34:33.540 align:middle line:90% on an exam, all right? 00:34:33.540 --> 00:34:37.290 align:middle line:90% And then bad grammar, 11.5-- 00:34:37.290 --> 00:34:41.159 align:middle line:84% all that really means-- all that Baker's really going into 00:34:41.159 --> 00:34:44.969 align:middle line:84% is that sometimes when the sentences get especially 00:34:44.969 --> 00:34:47.880 align:middle line:84% complicated or often the author gets 00:34:47.880 --> 00:34:51.300 align:middle line:84% especially heated or especially excited about something, 00:34:51.300 --> 00:34:53.790 align:middle line:84% they lose track of their case endings. 00:34:53.790 --> 00:34:55.870 align:middle line:90% And that's fine. 00:34:55.870 --> 00:34:57.435 align:middle line:90% Don't worry too much about it. 00:34:57.435 --> 00:35:03.950 align:middle line:90% 00:35:03.950 --> 00:35:04.760 align:middle line:90% All right. 00:35:04.760 --> 00:35:09.990 align:middle line:84% Let's quickly go through chapter 12. 00:35:09.990 --> 00:35:12.470 align:middle line:84% So you're going to get a lot more on word order. 00:35:12.470 --> 00:35:16.310 align:middle line:84% If you thought that the treatment was rather cursory, 00:35:16.310 --> 00:35:17.330 align:middle line:90% it is. 00:35:17.330 --> 00:35:18.980 align:middle line:84% You're going to get more on word order 00:35:18.980 --> 00:35:25.320 align:middle line:84% when we dive into syntax next time for Mitchell and Robinson. 00:35:25.320 --> 00:35:34.470 align:middle line:84% But the quick start is that most often, modern English 00:35:34.470 --> 00:35:36.120 align:middle line:90% has an SVO-- 00:35:36.120 --> 00:35:38.070 align:middle line:84% subject, verb, object-- word order, just 00:35:38.070 --> 00:35:39.780 align:middle line:90% like modern English. 00:35:39.780 --> 00:35:41.380 align:middle line:90% That's handy. 00:35:41.380 --> 00:35:44.490 align:middle line:84% And about 2/3 of the way down page 00:35:44.490 --> 00:35:51.120 align:middle line:84% 116, "If the clause has both a direct and an indirect object 00:35:51.120 --> 00:35:55.500 align:middle line:84% and one of them is a pronoun, the pronoun comes first." 00:35:55.500 --> 00:35:58.410 align:middle line:84% This is just like in modern English. 00:35:58.410 --> 00:36:04.260 align:middle line:84% So here, you may hear that "He gives us the power." 00:36:04.260 --> 00:36:05.970 align:middle line:90% Us is the indirect object. 00:36:05.970 --> 00:36:07.000 align:middle line:90% It's a pronoun. 00:36:07.000 --> 00:36:08.250 align:middle line:90% So it comes first. 00:36:08.250 --> 00:36:10.900 align:middle line:90% Power is the direct object. 00:36:10.900 --> 00:36:14.760 align:middle line:90% And so it comes second. 00:36:14.760 --> 00:36:20.110 align:middle line:84% All right, 12.3, this is where it starts to get trickier. 00:36:20.110 --> 00:36:24.780 align:middle line:84% So verb subject word order is common in independent clauses 00:36:24.780 --> 00:36:30.240 align:middle line:84% introduced by the adverbs þā, þone, þǣr, þanan, þider 00:36:30.240 --> 00:36:34.960 align:middle line:84% and the negative adverb ne and the conjunctions and, ond, 00:36:34.960 --> 00:36:37.300 align:middle line:90% and ac. 00:36:37.300 --> 00:36:40.060 align:middle line:84% We've had a preview of this before. 00:36:40.060 --> 00:36:42.890 align:middle line:90% And I've mentioned it as well. 00:36:42.890 --> 00:36:45.790 align:middle line:84% This is related to the fact that Old English 00:36:45.790 --> 00:36:49.570 align:middle line:84% in independent clauses very much wants-- 00:36:49.570 --> 00:36:52.720 align:middle line:84% has a preference for the conjugated verb 00:36:52.720 --> 00:36:56.060 align:middle line:84% to be the second element of the sentence. 00:36:56.060 --> 00:36:59.110 align:middle line:84% So if that first element is taken by the subject, 00:36:59.110 --> 00:37:00.760 align:middle line:90% all's well and good. 00:37:00.760 --> 00:37:03.640 align:middle line:84% The verb naturally takes the second position. 00:37:03.640 --> 00:37:09.100 align:middle line:84% If, by contrast, it's introduced by an adverb, 00:37:09.100 --> 00:37:12.700 align:middle line:84% then, more often, the verb is going to be second. 00:37:12.700 --> 00:37:14.230 align:middle line:90% And you'll get the subject. 00:37:14.230 --> 00:37:19.060 align:middle line:84% Again, most often the subject will be the third element, 00:37:19.060 --> 00:37:22.060 align:middle line:90% as in the examples below. 00:37:22.060 --> 00:37:27.670 align:middle line:84% Very occasionally, this word order, this VS word order, 00:37:27.670 --> 00:37:30.640 align:middle line:84% also appears in independent clauses not introduced 00:37:30.640 --> 00:37:31.510 align:middle line:90% by an adverb. 00:37:31.510 --> 00:37:37.450 align:middle line:84% So wǣron hie ac swīþe druncene, et cetera, 00:37:37.450 --> 00:37:39.770 align:middle line:90% that's quite unusual. 00:37:39.770 --> 00:37:41.230 align:middle line:90% So it can happen. 00:37:41.230 --> 00:37:48.760 align:middle line:84% But typically, it's going to happen for the other reasons. 00:37:48.760 --> 00:37:51.970 align:middle line:90% 00:37:51.970 --> 00:37:58.180 align:middle line:84% 12.4-- subject, dot, dot, dot, verb-- 00:37:58.180 --> 00:38:03.730 align:middle line:84% this is commonly found in subordinate clauses and clauses 00:38:03.730 --> 00:38:09.310 align:middle line:90% introduced by and, ond, or ac. 00:38:09.310 --> 00:38:12.790 align:middle line:90% This sort of is related to-- 00:38:12.790 --> 00:38:14.590 align:middle line:84% well, I shouldn't say with confidence 00:38:14.590 --> 00:38:15.550 align:middle line:90% that it's related to. 00:38:15.550 --> 00:38:20.770 align:middle line:84% It's parallel to and seems likely related to the fact 00:38:20.770 --> 00:38:29.500 align:middle line:84% that German also tends to put the conjugated verb at the end 00:38:29.500 --> 00:38:32.210 align:middle line:90% of a dependent clause. 00:38:32.210 --> 00:38:33.880 align:middle line:90% So we see examples. 00:38:33.880 --> 00:38:39.130 align:middle line:90% 00:38:39.130 --> 00:38:42.160 align:middle line:90% Yeah, bottom of 119-- 00:38:42.160 --> 00:38:44.170 align:middle line:84% "If you find you're having difficulty 00:38:44.170 --> 00:38:46.720 align:middle line:84% locating the end of a clause and the word order 00:38:46.720 --> 00:38:49.690 align:middle line:84% appears to be subject, dot, dot, dot verb, consider 00:38:49.690 --> 00:38:51.670 align:middle line:84% the possibility that the finite verb marks 00:38:51.670 --> 00:38:52.720 align:middle line:90% the end of the clause." 00:38:52.720 --> 00:38:55.810 align:middle line:84% My memory from my dim, dim memories 00:38:55.810 --> 00:38:57.580 align:middle line:84% of having studied German is that that's 00:38:57.580 --> 00:39:00.845 align:middle line:84% a pretty hard and fast rule in modern German. 00:39:00.845 --> 00:39:02.470 align:middle line:84% AUDIENCE: There's a unifying linguistic 00:39:02.470 --> 00:39:07.210 align:middle line:84% theoretical treatment of why it's subject verb or something 00:39:07.210 --> 00:39:10.923 align:middle line:84% verb in non-subordinate clauses [INAUDIBLE] 00:39:10.923 --> 00:39:12.340 align:middle line:84% the end of the subordinate clause. 00:39:12.340 --> 00:39:14.157 align:middle line:90% If you look up V2 syntax-- 00:39:14.157 --> 00:39:15.115 align:middle line:90% ARTHUR BAHR: V2 syntax? 00:39:15.115 --> 00:39:15.910 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: It makes sense. 00:39:15.910 --> 00:39:17.035 align:middle line:90% ARTHUR BAHR: OK, excellent. 00:39:17.035 --> 00:39:18.490 align:middle line:84% And by the way, this was something 00:39:18.490 --> 00:39:21.940 align:middle line:90% that I wanted to run by folks. 00:39:21.940 --> 00:39:25.960 align:middle line:84% Often, I get asked technical or even sometimes not very 00:39:25.960 --> 00:39:27.820 align:middle line:84% technical linguistic questions that I just 00:39:27.820 --> 00:39:29.560 align:middle line:90% don't know the answer to. 00:39:29.560 --> 00:39:33.610 align:middle line:84% I'm totally-- I would love to come up with some sort 00:39:33.610 --> 00:39:35.830 align:middle line:90% of system of-- 00:39:35.830 --> 00:39:39.680 align:middle line:84% I don't know-- extra credit or something where those of you 00:39:39.680 --> 00:39:42.747 align:middle line:84% who have an interest in these questions that I can't answer-- 00:39:42.747 --> 00:39:44.330 align:middle line:84% I think somebody-- I think it was you, 00:39:44.330 --> 00:39:46.520 align:middle line:84% Alyssa, said I think there's research out there. 00:39:46.520 --> 00:39:48.030 align:middle line:90% We could find the answer. 00:39:48.030 --> 00:39:49.550 align:middle line:84% If you all want to find the answers 00:39:49.550 --> 00:39:51.392 align:middle line:90% to some of these questions-- 00:39:51.392 --> 00:39:52.850 align:middle line:84% I don't remember what the question. 00:39:52.850 --> 00:39:53.570 align:middle line:90% It was-- 00:39:53.570 --> 00:39:55.250 align:middle line:90% AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] 00:39:55.250 --> 00:39:56.630 align:middle line:90% ARTHUR BAHR: Yeah, exactly. 00:39:56.630 --> 00:39:59.720 align:middle line:84% I think it was something you asked, Lambert, about the word 00:39:59.720 --> 00:40:02.360 align:middle line:90% order of negatives. 00:40:02.360 --> 00:40:05.240 align:middle line:84% Yeah, just let me know if anyone wants 00:40:05.240 --> 00:40:08.990 align:middle line:84% to do a deep or even shallow dive on that. 00:40:08.990 --> 00:40:14.960 align:middle line:84% I would love to get a folder of answers 00:40:14.960 --> 00:40:17.750 align:middle line:84% to questions that I get asked so that future students will have 00:40:17.750 --> 00:40:20.000 align:middle line:90% the benefits of your wisdom. 00:40:20.000 --> 00:40:22.445 align:middle line:84% And I promise to give credit where credit is due. 00:40:22.445 --> 00:40:25.860 align:middle line:90% 00:40:25.860 --> 00:40:27.270 align:middle line:90% Where was I going with this? 00:40:27.270 --> 00:40:29.250 align:middle line:90% Oh, right. 00:40:29.250 --> 00:40:34.200 align:middle line:84% It's less of a rule in Modern English-- 00:40:34.200 --> 00:40:36.390 align:middle line:90% or sorry, in Old English. 00:40:36.390 --> 00:40:39.420 align:middle line:90% But it is a marked tendency. 00:40:39.420 --> 00:40:42.210 align:middle line:84% And this is something that I will 00:40:42.210 --> 00:40:48.120 align:middle line:84% expect you to have some comfort level with in the sight 00:40:48.120 --> 00:40:52.080 align:middle line:90% translation on the exam. 00:40:52.080 --> 00:40:54.190 align:middle line:84% But don't worry too much about it just yet. 00:40:54.190 --> 00:40:56.850 align:middle line:84% We're going to get more detail on word order 00:40:56.850 --> 00:41:00.330 align:middle line:84% when we turn to Mitchell and Robinson's treatment of syntax 00:41:00.330 --> 00:41:04.770 align:middle line:90% for Wednesday and next Monday. 00:41:04.770 --> 00:41:08.100 align:middle line:90% All right, bottom of 12-- 00:41:08.100 --> 00:41:11.490 align:middle line:84% sorry, bottom of 119, 12.5, correlation-- 00:41:11.490 --> 00:41:15.090 align:middle line:84% "When a subordinate clause and an independent clause are 00:41:15.090 --> 00:41:20.370 align:middle line:84% correlated and are introduced by an ambiguous conjunction adverb 00:41:20.370 --> 00:41:26.620 align:middle line:84% pair, especially þā ... þā, þone ... þone and þǣr ... þǣr, 00:41:26.620 --> 00:41:29.080 align:middle line:84% you can usually tell the subordinate clause from 00:41:29.080 --> 00:41:31.330 align:middle line:84% the independent clause by looking at the word order. 00:41:31.330 --> 00:41:34.990 align:middle line:84% In this situation, the tendency of the independent clause 00:41:34.990 --> 00:41:38.650 align:middle line:90% is to have the VS word order. 00:41:38.650 --> 00:41:43.090 align:middle line:84% And the subordinate clause is more likely to have SV or S, 00:41:43.090 --> 00:41:45.730 align:middle line:90% dot, dot, dot, V word order." 00:41:45.730 --> 00:41:49.930 align:middle line:84% So there are some good examples in the little boxed section 00:41:49.930 --> 00:41:58.110 align:middle line:84% at the bottom of 120 that you can take a look at. 00:41:58.110 --> 00:42:00.990 align:middle line:84% Unfortunately, this rule does not work in poetry. 00:42:00.990 --> 00:42:03.300 align:middle line:84% In prose, it will work most of the time, 00:42:03.300 --> 00:42:05.520 align:middle line:84% but you cannot count on it absolutely. 00:42:05.520 --> 00:42:09.570 align:middle line:84% So be aware of the tendency, but don't expect 00:42:09.570 --> 00:42:12.540 align:middle line:90% to be a hard and fast rule. 00:42:12.540 --> 00:42:20.010 align:middle line:84% The last part of chapter 12, which is actually fairly-- 00:42:20.010 --> 00:42:22.740 align:middle line:84% well, I guess you all can decide how tricky it is. 00:42:22.740 --> 00:42:28.160 align:middle line:84% But it is quite common is something called anticipation. 00:42:28.160 --> 00:42:31.740 align:middle line:84% So the technical explanation is as follows. 00:42:31.740 --> 00:42:36.630 align:middle line:84% "When a noun clause functions as a subject or an object, 00:42:36.630 --> 00:42:38.430 align:middle line:90% it must follow the verb. 00:42:38.430 --> 00:42:43.350 align:middle line:84% But often a pronoun, usually þæt but sometimes hit, 00:42:43.350 --> 00:42:46.650 align:middle line:84% appears before the verb anticipating 00:42:46.650 --> 00:42:52.020 align:middle line:84% the coming clause," hence the term. 00:42:52.020 --> 00:42:54.990 align:middle line:84% "This pronoun occurs in the position 00:42:54.990 --> 00:42:59.850 align:middle line:84% that a pronoun subject or object would normally take." 00:42:59.850 --> 00:43:04.570 align:middle line:84% So the examples here are helpful. 00:43:04.570 --> 00:43:09.540 align:middle line:84% So ġeheald þū þȳ mīn word, so "hold fast my words 00:43:09.540 --> 00:43:15.210 align:middle line:84% and don't tell them to any other man," ġif þæt should ġelimpe-- 00:43:15.210 --> 00:43:23.940 align:middle line:84% sorry, ġif þæt ġelimpe, So "If that should occur" 00:43:23.940 --> 00:43:25.180 align:middle line:90% or "should happen"-- 00:43:25.180 --> 00:43:28.410 align:middle line:84% notice the use of the subjunctive, ġelimpe, 00:43:28.410 --> 00:43:30.840 align:middle line:90% for the potential. 00:43:30.840 --> 00:43:34.740 align:middle line:84% "If it should happen that you speak with him"-- now, 00:43:34.740 --> 00:43:39.690 align:middle line:84% that's a case where the anticipation actually 00:43:39.690 --> 00:43:41.850 align:middle line:84% translates pretty well into modern English. 00:43:41.850 --> 00:43:44.220 align:middle line:84% We would say-- or at least, we could 00:43:44.220 --> 00:43:47.110 align:middle line:90% say something pretty similar. 00:43:47.110 --> 00:43:54.060 align:middle line:84% The next example is much less readily translated literally. 00:43:54.060 --> 00:43:58.300 align:middle line:90% So Hē Drihten þæt onġeat-- 00:43:58.300 --> 00:44:03.210 align:middle line:84% So "He, the Lord, perceived that." 00:44:03.210 --> 00:44:06.170 align:middle line:84% That's the first independent clause. 00:44:06.170 --> 00:44:09.530 align:middle line:90% [OLD ENGLISH] 00:44:09.530 --> 00:44:13.100 align:middle line:84% So that first italicized þæt is basically 00:44:13.100 --> 00:44:18.320 align:middle line:84% a dummy word that alerts us to the fact, 00:44:18.320 --> 00:44:20.570 align:middle line:84% alerts the reader to the fact that there's 00:44:20.570 --> 00:44:29.750 align:middle line:84% going to be this long dependent clause, which is actually 00:44:29.750 --> 00:44:30.890 align:middle line:90% a noun clause. 00:44:30.890 --> 00:44:34.550 align:middle line:84% It's the object of the verb "saw," the object 00:44:34.550 --> 00:44:36.455 align:middle line:90% of the verb ġeseah, all right? 00:44:36.455 --> 00:44:42.580 align:middle line:90% 00:44:42.580 --> 00:44:45.370 align:middle line:84% This is actually very, very common. 00:44:45.370 --> 00:44:47.710 align:middle line:84% We're going to see examples in the prose 00:44:47.710 --> 00:44:49.220 align:middle line:90% and also in the poetry. 00:44:49.220 --> 00:44:53.440 align:middle line:84% So you'll learn to get comfortable with this by-- 00:44:53.440 --> 00:44:58.360 align:middle line:84% you'll learn by doing, which is the leitmotif of this class. 00:44:58.360 --> 00:45:01.690 align:middle line:84% But in those cases, you do not have 00:45:01.690 --> 00:45:09.500 align:middle line:84% to translate the introductory, dummy þæt, all right? 00:45:09.500 --> 00:45:13.800 align:middle line:90% 00:45:13.800 --> 00:45:17.340 align:middle line:90% And then periphrastic verbs-- 00:45:17.340 --> 00:45:25.830 align:middle line:84% modern English generally keeps the auxiliary and the verbals 00:45:25.830 --> 00:45:27.180 align:middle line:90% together. 00:45:27.180 --> 00:45:31.930 align:middle line:84% Although, we sometimes separate them with an adverbial element. 00:45:31.930 --> 00:45:37.440 align:middle line:90% So "I will come quickly." 00:45:37.440 --> 00:45:41.040 align:middle line:84% We could say, and often do, "I will quickly come." 00:45:41.040 --> 00:45:43.000 align:middle line:84% But that's about the extent of it. 00:45:43.000 --> 00:45:44.850 align:middle line:84% That's about as far as modern English 00:45:44.850 --> 00:45:49.170 align:middle line:84% is willing to tolerate a separation of the auxiliary 00:45:49.170 --> 00:45:49.950 align:middle line:90% and the verbal. 00:45:49.950 --> 00:45:53.130 align:middle line:84% Old English, by contrast-- and you can see some examples 00:45:53.130 --> 00:45:54.510 align:middle line:90% on page 122-- 00:45:54.510 --> 00:45:58.950 align:middle line:84% is perfectly happy to have quite a distance between the two 00:45:58.950 --> 00:46:02.640 align:middle line:90% parts of the verb. 00:46:02.640 --> 00:46:05.890 align:middle line:90% Just keep an eye out for that. 00:46:05.890 --> 00:46:10.560 align:middle line:84% So you have examples of all three of the word orders 00:46:10.560 --> 00:46:13.980 align:middle line:84% that we've discussed-- subject verb, verb subject, 00:46:13.980 --> 00:46:15.750 align:middle line:84% and subject, dot, dot, dot, verb. 00:46:15.750 --> 00:46:22.630 align:middle line:90% 00:46:22.630 --> 00:46:27.530 align:middle line:84% But other than that, that's about it 00:46:27.530 --> 00:46:29.210 align:middle line:90% for word order for today. 00:46:29.210 --> 00:46:33.240 align:middle line:84% But like I said, we're going to get more for Wednesday. 00:46:33.240 --> 00:46:36.020 align:middle line:90% Any questions on any of this? 00:46:36.020 --> 00:46:44.600 align:middle line:90% 00:46:44.600 --> 00:46:46.450 align:middle line:90% All righty. 00:46:46.450 --> 00:46:49.000 align:middle line:90%