Bibliographical guide to uli Lngl^sh Syntax By Frank h. Chase w^/m^mi^-iv' ■ r r ^ i' If JH^ i ly >i p. j^^i fe ": l*^. - t ,.i:^..:=^7B^T^-- ;...'"v^ Ha- ...^ -•# ,j UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT LOS ANGELES »■ A BIBLIOGRAPHICAL (iUIDE TO 3LD ENGLISH SYNTAX i m BY FRANK H. CHASE, ^clakk: SCHULAK un yale univeesity. LEIPZIG. BUCHHANDLUNG GUSTAV FOCK 1896. A BIBLIOGRAPHICAL GUIDE TO OLD ENGLISH SYNTAX BY FRANK H. CHASE, CLARK SCHOLAE IN YALE UNIVERSITY. LEIPZIG. BUCHHANDLUNG GUSTAV FOCK. 1896. • • * • • » • • • . » • • • • . • ' Prelatory Note. ^ During the past year, I had occasion to classify, ^ for my own use, the monographs which have appeared Y^ in the field of Old English Syntax. It has seemed to me that the tables thus prepared may be of use to others than myself, and it is in this hope that o^ I present them here. The bibliography is given as a basis for the classification, rather than for its own sake; it is founded on the list of books printed by Dr. J. E. Wlilfing in his 'Syntax in den Werken Alfreds des Grossen'. I cannot hope that it is exhaustive, though it is more nearly so than any which have ^ preceded it. ^ Yale University, March 20, 1896. c Oz-s /% -^ gr^ I. ])il)liogTai)liy. A. General Treatises. Cook, Albert 8., First Book in Old English, 2nd ed., pp. 88—107. Boston, 1895. Einenkel, E., Syntax, in Paul's Grundriss der ger- maniselicn Pliilologie, vol. I, p]). 907 — 930. Strassburg, 1891. Kellner, L., Historical Outlines of English Syntax. New York, 1892. Koeh, C. F., Historisehe Grammatik der Englischen Spraehe, 2nd ed., vol. II. Cassel, 1878. March, F. A., A Comparative Grammar of the Anglo- Saxon Language, pp. 137—221. New York, 1870. Matzner. E., Englische Grammatik, 3rd ed., vols. II and III. Berlin, 1882—1885. Sweet, H., Anglo-Saxon Header in Prose and Verse, 7tli Ed., pp. LXXX— LXXXIV. Oxford, 1894. B. Monographs and Special Articles. [■^- not devoted exclusively to points of Old Eng- lish Syntax. + to these articles I have not had access, diss. = dissertation.] *Blackburn, F. A., The English Future: its origin and development. L(;ipzig diss. 1892. Bock, K., Die Syntax der Pronomina unci Niimeralia in Konig Alfred's 'Orosius'. Gottingen diss. 1887. *Breitkreuz, 0., Ein Beitrag zur Geschiehte der Pos- sessiv-Pronomina in der engliseheu Spraehe, Er- langen diss. Gottingen, 1882. Callaway, M., The Absolute Participle in Anglo-Saxon. Johns Hopkins diss. Baltimore. 1889. Chase, F. H., The Absolute Participle in the Old Eng- lish 'Apollonius'. Modern Language Notes VIII (1893), cols. 486—489. Conradi, B., Darstellung der Syntax (noun, adjective, numeral, pronoun, adverb) in Cynewulf's Gedicht 'Juliana'. Leipzig diss. Halle, 1886. Flamme, J., Syntax der 'Blickling Homilies'. Bonn diss. 1885. *Flebbe, C, Der elliptische Relativsatz im Englischen. Herrig's Archiv, vol. LX (1878), pp. 85—100. Fleischhauer, W., Ueber d. Gebrauch des Coujunctivs, in Alfred's altenglischer Uebersetzung von Gregor's 'Cura Pastoralis'. Gottingen diss. Erlangen, 1885. Fricke, R., Das altengl. Zahlwort, eine grammatische Untersuchung. Gottingen diss. Erlangen, 1886. Fritzsche, A., Das angelsachsische Gedicht 'Andreas' undCynewulf. Leipzig diss. Anglia, vol.11 (1879), pp. 472—486. Furkert, M., Der syntactische Gebrauch des Verbums in dem angelslichsischen Gedichte vom heiligen 'Guthlac'. Leipzig diss. 1889. Gorrell, J, H. , Indirect Discourse in Anglo-Saxon. Johns Hopkins diss. Publications of the Mod- ern Language Association, vol. X (1895), pp. 342—485. Harrison. .Tiuues A., The Ang-lo-Saxon Perfect Parti- ciple with lidhhan. Modern Language Notes, vol. II (1887), cols. 268—270. Harstrick, A., Untersuchung liber die Prapositionen bei Alfred dem Grossen. Kiel diss. 1890. *Hcunicke, 0.. Der Coujunctiv im Altenglisehen und seine Umsehreibung durch modale Hiilfsverba. Got- tini;-en diss. 1878. Henshaw. A. N., The Syntax of the Indicative and Subjunctive Moods in the Anglo-Saxon Gospels. Leipzig diss. 1894. Hertel, B. , Der syutactische Gebrauch des Verbums in dem angelsachsischen Gedichte 'Crist'. Leipzig diss. 1891. Hofer, 0., Der syntactisehe Gebrauch des Dativs und Instrumentals in den Cjedmon beigelegten Dich- tungen. Leipzig diss. Halle, 1884. Holtbuer, F., Der syntactisehe Gebrauch des Genitivs in 'Andreas', 'Gut^lac', 'Phonix', dem 'Heiligen Kreuz', und 'HoUeufahrt'. Leipzig diss. Halle, 1885 Hoser, J., Die syntactischen Erscheinungen in 'Be Domes Da^ge'. Halle, 1889. *Hotz, G., On the use of the Subjunctive Mood in Anglo-Saxon, and its further history in Old Eng- lish. Zurich diss. 1S82. Hiilhveck, A., Ueber den Gebrauch des Artikels in den Werken Alfreds d. Gross. Berlin diss. Dessau, 1887. Kempf, E., Darstellung der Syntax in der sogenannten Cji'dmon'selien 'Exodus'. Leipzig diss. Halle, 1888. -f-Klingliardt, 11., Dc und die relative Satzverbindung im AngelsJlclisischen. Beitrilge zur deutschen Philologie (Halle, 1880), pp. 193 flf. Kiihlor, K., Dcr s^ntactiRcbe Gcbrnuch des Iniiniti\'s unci Particips im 'lieowulf. MUnster diss. 188(j. *+Kolbing', E., TJntersuclinng-en iil)er den Ansfall des Relativ-Pronomens in den g-ennaniselieu Spraclien. Strassburg-, 1872. Kolbing, E., Auslassung dos Relativ-Pronomens im Ang-elsachsiscben. Englische Studien, vol. II (1879), p. 282. Kress, J., Ueber den Gebraucb des Instrumentalis in der angelsilcbsisehen Poesie. Marburg- diss. 1864. *Kriekau, K., Der Accusativ mit dem Iniinitiv in der Englischen Sprache. Gottingen diss. 1877. Kube, E., Die Wortstellung in der Sachsenehronik (Parker MS.). Jena diss. 1886, Kllhn, P. T., Die Syntax des Verbums in Jillfric's 'Heiligenleben'. Leipzig diss. 1889. Lehmann, A., Der syntaetisehe Gebraueh des Genitivs in Alfred's 'Orosius'. Leipzig dm. 1891. Lenz, P., Der syntaetisehe Gebraueh der Partikel ge- in den Werken Alfred's des Grossen. Heidelberg diss. Darmstadt, 1886. Lichtenheld, A., Das schwache Adjectiv im Angel- sachsisehen. (Beowulf, Andreas, Genesis, Exodus, Daniel, etc.). Haupt's Zeitschrift, vol. XVI (1873), pp. 325—393. *Lohmann, 0., Ueber die Auslassung des englischen Relativ-Pronomens. Anglia, vol. Ill (1880), pp. 115 —150. Liittgens, C, Ueber Bedeutung und Gebraueh der Hilfsverba im frtthen Altenglischen. Sculan und Willan. Kiel diss. Wismar, 1888. 9 8 ^latlior. F. J.. The Conditional Seutonce in Anglo- Saxon. Johns Hopkins diss. Munich, 1893. Mohrbutter. A., Darstcllnng der Syntax in den vier eehten Prodigten des angelsachsisehen Erzbischofs Wnlfstan. Mlinster diss. Liibeck, 1885. i^Iiiller, A.. Der syntactisehe Gebraneh des Verbums in dem angelsilchsischen Gediehte von der 'Judith'. Leipzig diss, 1892. Nader, E., Zur Syntax des 'Beowulf (Nominative and Accusative). Programme der Staats-Ober- Realschule. Brlinn, 1879—1880. Nader, E., Der Genitiv im 'Beowulf. Programm der deutschen Staats-Ober-Realsehule. Briinn, 1882. Nader, E., Dativ und Instrumental im 'Beowulf. Jahresbericht der Wiener Communal-Ober- realschule im ersten Gemeinde-Bezirke. Wien, 1883. Nader, E., Tempus und Modus im 'Beowulf. Anglia, vols. X (1888). pp. 542-563, XI (1889), pp. 444-499^ *Noack, P., Eine Gesehiehte der relativen Pronomina in der englischeu Sprache. Gottingen, 1882. Pearee, J. W., The Regimen of wyr<^e in the ' Histo- ria Ecclesiastica'. Modern Language Notes, vol. VI (1891), cols. 1—4. ^Penning, G. E., A History of the Reflective Pro- nouns in the English Language. Leipzig diss. Bremen. 1875. Philipsen, II., Ueber Wesen und Gebrauch des be- Htimmten Artikels in der Prosa Kiinig Alfreds auf Grund des 'Orosius' und der 'Cura Pastoralis'. Greifswald diss. 1887. Planer, J., Uutersuchungen lilier den syntactischen 9 Gebraut'li dcs Verbums in deni angelsaclisisehen Gedicht vom 'Pliunix'. Leipzig diss, (no date). ProUius, M. , Ueber den syntaetisehen Gebrauch des Conjunetivs in den Cynewulf'sehen Dic-htungen 'Elene', 'Juliana' iiud 'Crist'. Marburg diss. 1888. Reussner, H. A., Untersuchungen ilber die Syntax (verb only) in dem angelsaehsisehen Gedichte vom beiligen 'Andreas'. Leipzig diss. Halle, 1889. Rose, A., Darstellung der Syntax (noun only) in Cyne- wulf's 'Crist'. Leipzig diss. Halle, 1890. Rossger, R., Ueber den syntaetisehen Gebrauch des Genitivs in Cynewulf's 'Elene', 'Crist', und 'Ju- liana'. Leipzig diss. Halle, 1885. Schrader, B., Studien zur ^Ifrie'seheu Syntax. Got- tingen diss. Jena, 1887. Schurmann, J., Darstellung der Syntax in Cynew^ulf s 'Elene'. MUnster diss. Paderborn, 1884. Seyfartb, H., Der syntactische Gebraucli des Verbums in dem Cajdmon beigelegten angelsachsisehen Ge- dicht von der 'Genesis'. Leipzig diss. 1891. Smith, C. A., The Order of Words in Anglo-Saxon Prose. Johns Hopkins diss. Baltimore, 1893. Sohrauer, M., Kleine Beitrage zur altenglischen Gram- matik. Berlin diss. 188G. Spaeth, J. D., Die Syntax des Verbums in dem angel- sachsisehen Gedicht 'Daniel'. Leipzig diss. 1893. Steche, G., Der syntactische Gebrauch der Conjunc- tionen in dem angelsachsisehen Gedichte von der 'Genesis'. Leipzig diss. 1895. Taubert, E. M., Der syntactische Gebrauch der Pra- positionen in dem angelsachsisehen Gedichte vom heiligen 'Andreas'. Leipzig diss. 1894. 2* 10 Tudt. A., Die Wovtstellung- im 'Beowulf. Anglia, vol. XVI (1804), pp. 22()— 260. *Voges.F., Der reflexive Dativ im Eng-lisclien. Auglia, vol. VI (1883), pp. 317—374. Waek.G., Artikel iind Demonstrativ-Pronomen iu ■Andreas" und 'Eleue'. Anglia, vol. XV (1893), pp. 209—220. Wolilfahrt. T.. Die Syntax des Verbums in ^Elfrie's Uebersetzung des Hei)tateueh und des Buches Hiob. Leipzig diss. Mltuchen, 1885. WiiHing. J. E., Darstellung der Syntax in Kouig Al- fred's Uebersetzung von Gregors des Grossen 'Cura Pastoralis'. Erste Halfte. Bonn diss. 1888. Wlilfing. J. E., Altengliscbes injriie (iveorh) = Dignus mit dem Dativ. EngliscUe Studieu. vol. XV (1891), pp. 159—160. Wlilfing, J. E.. Altengliscbes sum mit dem Genitiv einer Gruudzabl. Englische Studieu, vol. XVII (1892). pp. 285—291. Wiilting, J. E., Die Syntax in den Werken Alfred's des Grossen. Erster Teil. (Noun, article, adjective, numeral, pronoun.) Bonn, 1894. II. Bibliographical Tables. Of a few of the shorter articles in the list above, dealing- with single points of syntax, no account is taken in the following tables; all dissertations and the more important articles in the periodicals are included. A. Chronological Survey. 1864 Marburg Kress. 1873 Lichtenheld, 1875 Leipzig Penning. 1877 Gottingen Krickau. 1878 Gottingen Flebbe. Henuicke. 1879 Leipzig Fritzsche. Nader. 1880 Klinghardt. Lohmann. Nader. 1882 Erlangen Zurich Breitkreuz. Hotz. Nader. Noack. 12 1883 Nader. Voges. 1881 Leipzig- Hofer. Milnster Sehilrmann. 1885 Bonn Flamnie. Gottingeii Fleisehliauer. Leipzig Holtbuer. Milnster Mobrbutter. Leipzig lv(»ssger. Leipzig Wolilfabrt. 1886 Leipzig Conradi. Gottingeii Frieke. Milnster Kobler. Jena Kube. Heidelberg Lenz. Berlin Sohrauer. 1887 Gottingen Bock. Berlin lliillvveck. Greifswald rbilipsen. G()ttingen Sehrader. 1888 Leipzig Kempf. Kiel Lilttgens. Nader. ]\[arburg Prollius. Bonn Willfing. 1889 J. H. Callaway. Leipzig Furkert. Iloser. Leipzig Kiibn. 13 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 Leipzig Nader. Reussner. Kiel Harstriek. Leipzig Planer (V no date) Leipzig Rose. Leipzig Hertel. Leipzig Lehmann. Leipzig Seyfarth. Leipzig Blackburn. Leipzig Miiller. J.H. Mather. J.H. Smith. Leipzig Spaeth. Wack. Leipzig Henshaw. Leipzig Taubert. Todt. Wiilfing. J.H. Gorrell. Leipzig Steehe. B. Dissertations, arranged by Universities. This table is designed to show the centres of activity in the field of Old English Syntax. I have given the names of the instructors in Old English, wherever possible, and in some cases have added 14 those of instructor!^ iu other departments, whose iii- fluenee in the preparation of the monographs has been important IJerliii. [Zupit/.a and Tol)h-r.J lliillweck. 1887. Sohrauer. 188G. IJuim. [Furster and Trautniaiin.J Flannne. 1885. Wliliiiig. 1888. Krlam::eii. Breitkreuz. 1882. Gottiiig:eii. Napier. Boek. 1887. Fleisehhauer. 1885. Frieke. 1886. llennieke. 1878. Krickau. 1877. Sehrader. 1887. Oreifswald. Konrath.] rhilipsen. 1887. Heidelberg. Lenz. 1886. Jena. Kube. 1886. Johns Ifopkins. [Bright and Giklersleeve.] Calhiway. 1889. Gorrell. 1895. Mather. 189H. Smith. 1893. 15 Kiel. [Stimniiiic: and Sarraziu.] Harstrick. 1890. Luttgeus. 1888. Leipzig. [AViilker and Sievers.] Blackburn. 1892. Conradi. 18S6. Fritzsehe. 1879. Furkert. 1889. Henshaw. 1894. Hertel. 1891. Hofer. 1884. Holtbuer. 1885. Kempf. 1888. Kiihn. 1889. Lehmanu. 1891. Miiller. 1892. Penning. 1875. Planer. 1890 (?) Reussner. 1889. Rose. 1890. Rossger. 1885. Seyfarth. 1891. Spaeth. 1893. Steehe. 1895. Taubert. 1894. Wohlfahrt. 1885. Marburg. Victor. Kress. 1864. Prollius. 1888. 16 3Iunster. Kiirtinji;. Kohler. 1886, Mohrbutter. 1885, ScbUrmann. 1884, Zurich. Toblcr. Hotz. 1882, C. Classification of Articles and Dissertations according to Syntactical Categories. [* ia poetry. + in prose. + confined to a single text, or group of texts. § general discussion, not confined to particular texts.] 1. Syntax in general. 1886 (1st part only). 1885. 1879 (syntactical remarks). 1889. 1888. 1885. 1887. 1884. 1886 (syntactical notes). 1888 (1st part). 1894 (1st i)art). Special Categories. Nouns. 1884 (dative and instrumental). 1885 (genitive;. *T Conradi + T Flamme *=F Fritzsehe *T Hoser *qp Kempf + T Mobrbutter + T Scbrader *T Scbiirmann § Sobrauer + T Wulling H-T *T Hofer ll(jltbuer 17 •••■§ Kress 1864 (instrumental). § Kriekau 1877 (accusative with infinitive). + =F Lehmauii 1891 (genitive). *+ Nader 1871) 83. *+ Rose 1890. ••'■•+ Rossger 1885 (genitive). § Voges 1883 (reflexive dative). Pronouns. + T Bock 1887. *§ Breitkreuz 1882 (possessive). § Flebbe 1878 (elliptical relative clause). § Klingliardt 1880 {pe and relative sentence), § Lohmann 1880 (ellipsis of relative). § Noack 1882 (relative). § Penning 1875 (reflective). *T Wack 1893 (demonstrative). Articles. + + Hlillweck 1887. *§ Lielitenheld 1873 (weak adjective and art.). + + Philipsen 1887 (definite). *=F Wack 1892. Adjectives. *ft Lichteuheld 1873 (weak). Numerals. + + Bock 1887. § Fricke 1886. Verbs. § Blackburn 1892 (Future). § Callaway 1889 (absolute participle). 18 + T FleiscliliaiRT 1885 (subjunetive). *=F Furkert 1889. ^ Ili'iinicke 1878 (subjunetiveand auxiliaries). + =F Hciisluiw 1894 (indicative and subjimetive). *T Ilertel 18'U. § Hotz 1882 (subjunctive). *T Kulilcr 1886 (infinitive and participle). $ Kric'kau 1877 (accusative and infinitive) + + Kiihn 1889. § I.iittgens 1888 {scuhin and u-ilhm). *+ Miiller 1892. *T Nader 1888—9 (tense and mode). *T Planer 1890 ('?). *T Prollius 1888 (subjunctive). *+ Reussner 1889. *^ Seyfortli 1891. *+ Spaeth 1893. + T Wohlfahrt 1885. Prepositions. + =F Harstrick 1890. *=F Taubert 1894. Conjunctions. *T Steche 1895. (see also Fleisclihauer, Ilotz, and Prollius.) -f ^ Lenz Particles. 1886 {()e-). Sentence-Forms. § Ciorrell 1895 (indirect discourse). § blather 1898 (conditional sentence). 19 Word-Ordor + + Kii])o 1886. +§ Smith 1893. *^ Todt 1894. D. Classification of Articles and Disser- tations on the basis of Texts investigated. 1. General. Blackburn Future. Breitkreuz Possessive pronoun. Callaway Absolute participle. Flebbe Elliptical relative clause. Fric'ke Numeral. Gorrell Indirect discourse. Hennicke Subjunctive and auxiliaries, Hotz Subjunctive. Klinghardt pe and rel. construction. Kress Instrumental. Krickau Accusative Avith infinitive LollUUlUD Ellipsis of relative pronoun Luttgens Scuhin and ivillan. Mather Conditional sentence. Noaek Relative pronoun. Penning Reflective pronouns. Sohrauer Syntactical remarks. Voges Reflexive dative. 2. Special. I. Prose. Alfred. Oros. Bock Pronoun and numeral. C. P. Fleisehhauer Subjunctive. 20 llnrstrit'k Prepositions. Hiillwcck Article. Oro8. Lclunaiin Genitive. Lenz Particle (je-. Oros., C. P. Philipsen Definite article. Oros. Siiiitli Word-order. C. P. Wiihiug(1888) Syntax, part I „ (1894) Syntax, part I ^^:ifric. L.S. Kitlin Verb.' Sebrador Syntax. Hoini lies Sniitli Word-order. Hei)t. c*t Job. Woblfabrt Verb. Bliekling Homilies. Flamme Syntax. C b r n i c 1 e. Kube Word-order. Gospels, llensbaw Indicative and subj unci W u 1 f s t a n. Mobrbutter Syntax. II. Poetry. Andrea s. Fritzscbe Syntactical remarks. Iloltbuer Genitive. Licbtciibeld Weak adjective. It(;usHner Verb. Tanbert Prepositions. Wack Article; and deni. itron. 21 Be Domes D je g e. Hoser Syntax. Beowulf. Kiihler liiiiiiitive and participle. Liclitenlield Weak adjective. Nader (1879-80) Nominative and aecusat. „ (1882) Genitive. ,, (1883) Dative and instrumental. „ (1888-89) Tense and mode. Todt Word-order. Ch rist. Hertel Verb. Prollius Subjunctive. Rose Noun. Rossger Genitive. Daniel. Hofer Dative and instrumental. Lichtenbeld Weak adjective. Spaetb Verb. E 1 e n e. Prollius Subjunctive. Rossger Genitive. Scbiirmann Syntax. Wack Article and dem. pron. Exodus. Hofer Dative and instrumental. Kempf Syntax. Licbtenbeld Weak adjective. 22 Genesis. Hofer Dative aud instrumeutal. Lic'litculield Weak adjective. Seyfarth Verb. Steche Conjunetions. G u t h 1 a c. Furkert Verb. Holtbuer Geuitive. H 1 y R d. Holtbuer Genitive. Harrowing- of Hell. Holtbuer Genitive. Judith. Mtiller Verb. Julian a. Couradi Noun, adj., proii., num. Prollius Subjunctive. Rossger Genitive. P li (ju n i X. Holtbuer Genitive. Planer Verb. Satan (Grein). Hofer Dative and instrumental. Among- the facts set forth in the preceding tal)les, a few are worthy of special comment. The verb has received, it would appear, rather more than its due share of attention. Since 1889, when Reussner constructed the excellent outline for verb-syntax which has been adopted at Leipzig, six other dissertations, presenting the syntax of the verb in as many Old English poems, have been built from his plans. But all these, and many more — among them some very excellent ones, as those of Kuhn, Fleischhauer and Kohler — are only frag- ments, often suggestive, but useful mainly as furnish- ing materials to later and riper investigators; so far as their statements are trustworthy, they save much of the labor of collection. In Table C there are twenty titles under the verb; other dissertations in which the verb is included would bring the number to thirty; — and we are still waiting for a good comprehensive account of Old English verb-syntax. A beginning has been made in the works of Calla- way, Gorrell, Llittgens, and Mather; we may hope that others, following their lead, will give us further sections, equally well done, until the many parts may be combined into the complete handbook which we need. 24 The attention given to the writings of Alfred, to the neglect of other Old English prose works, is explicable mainly on the ground of the author's eminence, and the existence of good editions of the •Cura Pastoralis' and -Qrosius'. Alfred wrote in Early West Saxon, which, thanks to Sweet and Cosijn, has become the standard dialect of Old English from the phonological point of view. But has it a like surpassing value for syntactical re- search"? For the study of mode, yes, because in this early ])eriod the subjunctive forms had not yet been leveled into likeness with those of the in- dicative. lUit for other purposes its superiority is questionable; all the imi)ortant works of Alfred are translations from the Latin, and are vitiated as a basis for syntactical research, by this fact. The work of ^Ifric, on the other hand, is much more largely original than that of Alfred, to which it is about equal in bulk. It represents the language in its maturity — smooth, ])olished, clear, and ele- gant. Here, it seems to me, w'e must look for the standard syntax of the best Old English, as far as that may be illustrated by the works of any one writer. And yet a reference to the tables will show the meagreness of our information in regard to the syntax of yElfrie; and, of the two best dis- sertations, one is based on the least original of the author's works. The Chronicle is another case in point. This work must, by its very nature, be quite independent on Latin sources: it shows the language in its native and often rugged purity as clearly as does the 25 poetry, while it is free from the various peculiarities, due to the exigencies of metre, which impair the value of all poetry for syntactical investigation; the existence of a number of i)arallel texts, of different dates, makes it especially useful for comparative study. Rut we have only one monograph on the Chronicle alone, in addition to its treatment by Liittgens and Fricke, and by the Johns Hopkins men. The German method tends to limit the view to a single text, or at most to the work of a single author. Of tlu; monographs produced in Germany, Dr. WUlfing's is, of course, by far the most im- portant. And for what reason? Mainly because he thoroughly examines a larger number of texts than the other men. Given a careful and intelligent in- vestigator — and Dr. Wulfing fulfils this condition admirably — we may say that the value of the result varies almost exactly as the number of texts studied. But variety of texts is even more impor- tant than their number — typical productions of the different periods must be examined together in order to the formation of any final judgment as to a norm of style. It is safe to say that, with Wiil- fing's equipment, a comparative study of the syntax, or even a limited portion of the syntax, of the Cura^ Pastoralis, the Chroijicle, and the HonuHes of -^Ifric and Wulfstan, with those in the collection at Blickling Hall, would have produced results far more commensurate with the labor involved than those which he presents from his examination of Alfred's complete works. 2G Tlio tahlps show wliat lias been done in this lield. AVhat remains to be done is equally apparent. P)Ut our first need is not the filling of the gaps in these lists. If we are to possess a complete and trustworthy aecount of Old English Syntax within a reasonable time, we must work in a more com- prehensive way. We have now a considerable back- ground — the fruit of twenty years of labor; we j)ossess a number of admirable models for syntax- research, such as Callaway's dissertation on the Absolute Particii)l(', and Blackburn's on the English Future, with its broad foundation in Germanics; with these before him, there is no excuse for a scholar who puts forth a monogra})h of the old style, with its narrow view and partial results. The syntax of no one text, especially a poetical text, can be accepted as a norm of Old English usage. By comparative study alone can we hope to arrive at a proper understanding of any construction or group of constructions. The ideal dissertation in Old English Syntax should, it seems to me, be a comjdete historical i/ account of a single form of expression, or group of such forms; it should cover all the important texts, at least the jirose texts; it should distinguish between «/ early and late usages, when a distinction exists; and sh(iiild jjoint out traces of Latin influence, if they are present. It should give accurate statistics ^ of the pro})ortional frequency of parallel modes of expressing the same idea, and whatever else may seem likely to be of use in the final determination of the norm for a given period. When this is done, 27 we may construct what may be called a 'standard Old English idiom', embracing those speech -forms which are common to the best texts of all periods. Work such as I have outlined may be accepted as definitive, and the portion of the field covered by the investigator may be set apart as occupied. A few isolated spots have been so taken up, and we have a small part of the final complete treatise at hand. But large tracts of rich soil are awaiting claimants who shall cultivate them aright. If the effort of the past fifteen years had been more wisely expended, a large proportion of the work might have been already in our possession. Driick von Elirhardt Karras, Halle a. S UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT LOS ANGELES THE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY This book is DUE on the last date stamped below W NOV 5 - 1958 I A M 7 ^ JAN 2 FFB12 FEB 11 195-^ MAR 11 195" RECO MAIN LOAN OCT/^ AM. JN8l9'lQhl|h2!l 1364 F..rni T, 0- !.'.», 7. 'r?'. Ved DESK P.M. I2I3I4I5I6 Lithomount Gaylof _ Stoc PAT. * ?i r t O 3 '-' G Q S a a Si a is en plea&e: do not remove mill THIS BOOK CARD %0J11VD-J0^ University Research Library f-i H 'J: ni ^ W^k ■^$F^ "'^:^f\\ i.