Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Wallage, Phillip (2013)
Publisher: Linguistic Society of America
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects: Q100
Wallage argues for a model of the Middle English Jespersen Cycle in which each of its diachronic stages are functionally equivalent competitors in the sense proposed by Kroch. However, recent work on the Jespersen Cycle in various Romance languages by Schwenter, Hansen and Hansen & Visconti has argued that the forms in competition during the Jespersen Cycle are not simply diachronic stages, but perform diUerent pragmatic or discourse functions. Hansen and Hansen & Visconti suggest that functional change may therefore underpin the Jespersen Cycle in these languages. Hence this paper explores the interface between pragmatic or functional change, and change in the syntax of sentential negation.\ud \ud Analysis of data from the PPPCME? (Kroch & Taylor) show that ne (stage one) and ne. . . not(stage two) are similarly functionally diUerentiated during the ME Jespersen Cycle: ne. . . not is favoured in propositions that are discourse-old (given, or recoverable from the preceding discourse), whereas ne is favoured in propositions that are discourse-new. Frequency data appear to show the loss of these constraints over time. However, I argue that these frequency data are not conclusive evidence for a shift in the functions of ne or ne. . . not. Indeed, the results of a regression analysis indicate that these discourse constraints remain constant throughout Middle English, in spite of the overall spread of ne. . . not as the Jespersen Cycle progresses. Therefore, I conclude the spread of ne. . . not is independent of these particular discourse constraints on its use, rather than the result of changes in, or loss of, these constraints.
  • No references.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article